The bit about Shrek was great; it's a good cautionary tale for people trying to subvert concepts; aesthetically subverting things in a clever way does not equate to changing the concept.
That was certainly a segment that made me stop and think, but I'm not sure that he's actually correct.
I think there's a point of so many subverted tropes (and I've hit his personally) where seeing the original form makes the viewer step back and say, "Wait, that's it? She just waits to be rescued, and then she gets rescued?"
He seems to be saying that rather than updating old narratives, <target audience> should be constructing entirely new narratives - which I don't think works from a purely human nature standpoint; we reject or ignore new stories and ideas that can't explain themselves in terms of old ones.