Redux and Flow are somehow branded as alternatives to MVC, when they are precisely MVC (store=model, dispatcher/reducer=controller, etc). It seems that Facebook (and many others) implemented MVC very poorly and pretended to abandon it instead of admitting they just did it better on the next attempt.
If anything, the success of redux simply reinforces the fact that MVC is a very useful pattern for UI applications. But, it bothers me that newer developers might be persuaded by the anti-MVC branding.
A key design feature of Flux is that many unrelated (or related) stores can respond an event, and that there is a defined lifecycle for handling events. I don't believe those really map to MVC.
What I found interesting was that the original developer(s) of react.js seems a lot more up-front about this:
https://omny.fm/shows/future-of-coding/1-1-how-reactjs-was-c...
Of course, the whole idea of, in-theory, re-creating the UI at every refresh cycle is not part of MVC, so that is new and interesting. Considering all the work that has to be done to undo that abstraction (as it doesn't really match reality), I am not sure how useful it actually is.
https://blog.metaobject.com/2018/12/uis-are-not-pure-functio...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redux_(JavaScript_library)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/React_(JavaScript_library)
Perhaps you're talking about the Flux architecture? Not the same thing. Care to share the video you mentioned?