idek if I agree with this video anymore after watching season 3 and I hate that show but relic of it's time I suppose xx

Sam Levinson seems to have the same “i feel different and ostracized despite being in privilege” disease that Tim Burton has

Based on a show in Israel, and with a style that was just straight up stolen from a photographer and she was given no credit whatsoever.

Girl, please tell me why all of his content that involves underaged girls features molestation by men in his age bracket or just outside of it, as well as what most would consider softcore porn that simulates underaged sex, yet now that the characters are of legal age/not teens in HS there aren't even sex scenes. Just his thing for boobs. No it's not about the pushback bc he lives for the pushback; no way he would care about that when he has a dog licking shit dripping down a girl's leg in the first part of the first episode of this season. And no the boobs and underaged sex are 'not equal opportunity nudity bc he showed 50 dicks in one episode or w/e. He clearly did that for shock, to say he did. If it was equal opportunity he would've just shown dicks portrayed in a SEXUAL WAY in SEXUAL SHOTS like he does with women attracted to men--who he supposedly sees himself in.

As someone else said, there seems to be some rationalization of liking this show when you were of the age where it really hit you. As you said, it was about there being media about gen Z. Media that spoke to your generation/made y'all feel seen. But now that you're a grown adult, is that really enough? I think not. And I think if you reflect in another ten years--when you're of the age he was when he wrote Euphoria--you'll see he just read some articles about Gen Z and made it with a $target $audience in mind.

When the main character in The Idol does her heel turn, it’s said that she steals other peoples’ stories and uses their pain for personal gain & clout. When I’m feeling uncharitable about Levinson, I think of that line as a bit of telling on himself

man who is supposedly self aware of his own misogyny steals women’s artistic vision and aesthetics, refuses to work with writers who could provide a broader perspective to form cohesive narratives but then has his cast fix his sloppy character writing without having them in the writing room or giving them official writing credits, and writes shows and movies that overly sexualize adolescence and young women’s life experiences but wait you guys i don’t think he’s a misogynist 😐

Everything you love about Sam Levinson's projects was stolen from Petra Collins

i really appreciate the closed captions you implement into your videos :)

17:45 unfortunately even men interested in exposing the toxicity of men and patriarchy has not been a sign of complete safety. We saw this unfold with Louis ck, Neil gaiman, and many others. It’s not to say that unpacking that is a secret ‘tell’ or anything, as we also have creators like David lynch and Zach cregger, but I don’t think someone being self aware about misogyny and able to explore that in fiction exempts them from it

i understand your whole point it's very interesting but i have a problem with one part of it, and the title - cause it is definitely also objectification.

I appreciate that you’re trying to be contrarian and say something profound here and yes there is truth in that the sexualisation isn’t only because of misogyny and serves a greater purpose in the narrative, but to say that means there’s no misogyny or that Levinsion doesn’t perpetuate misogyny is equally as reductive and silly than saying he only does these things to be misogynistic. Sometimes things really are as they seem even if there are nuances, two things can be true at once.

......I feel like it could totally be both, lol. I get that he's projecting and indeed sees some humanity in a lot of characters that don't normally get humanized, but he absolutely has objectified a lot of characters too, like Cassie, McKay, Maddie, etc

I’ll engage with the bit where you said Levinson isn't a misogynist because he's "angry at misogyny" and puts cruel men on screen to demonize them.

I think depicting cruelty is not critiquing it. There has to be some ballsiness within the script actually trying to dissect it just a tad. Like I’ll take an eensy bit at this point.

When the camera lingers on a teenage girl's body (I get they are grown women, they are simulating sex whilst playing teens in the first 2 seasons.) in a vulnerable position, and the show offers no narrative counterweight except "look how sad this is," that's not really critique. Levinson gets to have his nudity and eat it too: "I'm not sexualizing her, I'm showing how the world sexualizes her." But he's the one holding the camera. He wrote the scene. He chose the shot. At a certain point, the frame is the statement.

People get allergic to the word "exploitation" and try to rebrand it as commentary. Fine. Then show me the commentary. Where's the subtext? Where's the thesis encoded in the script or visuals? It's not there. It's just providing more spank bank material for the very thing he's supposedly being cynical about.

I get people are trying to reconcile liking the show with recognizing the problems that become more apparent as the brain fully cooks and retrospect is now available.

People want to frame Levinson as a misunderstood genius rather than a flawed, privileged filmmaker who benefits from the system you claim to critique. I think we are stumbling into  intellectualizing his failures into virtues because admitting he's just okay at his job would force a  re-evaluation of taste.

The show is entertaining. The visuals are stunning. Zendaya is great. None of that makes Sam Levinson a deep thinker.

it really does boil down to spectacle. Fluff, shock and people being entertained by that and the eye candy.

It can be entertaining for people. Like how sloppy reality tv is entertaining. Being mad at characters saying ridiculous things or doing ridiculous things. There’s a audience for that.

10:16 idk, I love Jules being in the show  and hunter Schafer but I think this is way more positive than her actual depiction. The best character work and depth given to the character was Jules special which was written by Schafer and works so much better than the rest of the show imo

Fetish content in every other scene i turned that mess off

First of all you dug really deep in this analysis it was very enlightening, brought up so many points that I hadn't considered and gave so much context to Sam as a director. However, my main gripe with Sam and Euphoria is that his nuances in characterization and commentary on societal ills is lost and buried so deeply beneath story arcs and plot that make no sense and by obscenely graphic violence, nudity and sex. If the show was well written and wasn't plagued by these things I think there could be a much more oppurtunity for an analytical conversation with the things that you mentioned in this video because they would be more accesssible to the viewer. I am not the most intellectual viewer of film/television but I feel like the oppurtunity for me to analyze this show properly was lost.

maybe i’m too woke but grown adults playing teenagers in such a sexual light is enough for me to not watch the show

i have to go to my senior film seminar in an hour where i will be surrounded by sam levinsons and it’s too late to drop out so pray for me </3

I agree I think he relies a lot on spectacle, he puts these hard topics in his work but doesn’t put any real thought or commentary towards them. I think that’s why season 3 doesn’t work with the time jump, it exposed that nothing he did in season 1 and 2 had any deeper meaning. I find it hard to understand what he’s getting at or what euphoria is even about anymore.

that's a much better and deeper analysis than sam levinson deserves, to conclude that sam levinson doesn't deserve a deeper analysis 😅 you're spot on