What’s your best childhood cartoon that you still enjoy watching?

Honestly, I’ve wanted to write this opinion piece for a long time because it’s about something that bothers me. I think there are two main reasons why everything that sounds childish is looked down upon and treated badly. The first is what we’ve learned in school about being an adult. Everything made for kids has been a minor product for a long time. There has been a clear, no-half-measures definition of maturity for decades, both in Spain and elsewhere. By the way, this is yet another beautiful but destructive piece of Roman culture. This idea says you are a child if you like Disney movies or video games, which don’t have to include Mortal Kombat. At least until recently, most people agreed with that, and many still do.

As a result, teenagers and adults reject anything that sounds childish because they think it will hurt their ability to function in society. It is called “puritanism” and “compensatory thinking.” You assess individuals based on what they eat, not how they act. In this way, a big part of the population hates anything that doesn’t seem to be for children or young people or has a funny way of presenting.

We still have proof that many assumptions exist about who reads and buys shonen and superhero comics, plays nonviolent video games, or watches cartoons or children’s channels. Even people who buy all these things have these beliefs, whether they like it or not. Because of this link, the second path of the problem is made. This open disdain has always been a part of what we could call the “geek collective” or “die-hard gamers.” Several people who first came to public attention in the 1970s were made fun of for decades because they liked comic books, video games, fantasy or science fiction books, or cult shows. Even though this group of super-consumers was an important part of the entertainment industry, they were laughed at or made fun of because they bought merchandise based on the franchises they watched in addition to the main products.

Because of this rejection, a responsive stance developed. The so-called geeks, also called nerds and whatever else you want to call them, lived in their little world with their own rules, preferences, and doctrines. The events unfolding in the rest of the globe were completely unknown. When we add that the average geek wasn’t a social genius, we get a character whose personality is driven by nostalgia and the idea of how the world should be based on how the action works. Many people left this “refuge” and went abroad, leaving their belongings behind and accepting that it was rude to buy and look at “stuff for children.”

In the 1980s and 1990s, many publishers and producers discovered their brands weren’t as good as before and needed to offer new benefits, attract a new audience, or age the product. In comic books, for example, the characters were meant to grow and change at the same rate as those who read them. Thus, a paradigm was created to elevate notions like superheroes while keeping some readers interested in “kids’ stuff.” It’s utilised for Lord of the Rings, Conan, and other sword-and-sorcery stories.. It is also used for franchises like Star Wars, which have a very responsive audience.

This policy led to some of the best graphic novels of the 1980s and other products with much better “adult” points of view. Reading superhero comics on the transport is still considered emotional stupidity. People tend to avoid this label without even realizing it. We found a model that shows how someone who likes “geeky” things often or sometimes ends up disagreeing with everything that isn’t mature and, therefore, socially valued. It could be because the person has been told repeatedly since childhood or because he sees it in his environment. Because of this, pressure builds up not only on the people these products are made for, like kids but also on people who use them in a healthy or non-Greek tragic way. Interestingly, this situation makes me think of a movie that the analogy doesn’t even mention.

Chitty Chitty Bang Bang’s antagonist

In the 1968 musical film Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, Dick Van Dyke and Sally Ann Howes played Mary Poppins’s hung-over friends who worked at night. The classic children’s movie is based on Ian Fleming’s book, which he wrote in between James Bond’s adventures. As is often the case, the novel wasn’t much like Chitty Bang Bang. But these details don’t matter because I want to talk to you about the movie’s fictional bad guy, Baron Bomburst. So, let’s get started.