It is kind of cool because the code is way too organized to just be random data.
The only thing that makes this credible is the large amount of x86 jump-like 'opcodes' in the video (7a-7f). What makes it less likely is the memory addresses: the pointers in that piece of disassembly reference edi + > 0x75000000 and - > 0x50000000. This is not entirely impossible, but is highly unusual. If you look at the top instruction, AAD, this is entirely out of place:
The AAD instruction is only useful when it precedes a DIV instruction that divides (binary division) the adjusted value in the AX register by an unpacked BCD value.
http://x86.renejeschke.de/html/file_module_x86_id_2.html
So my impression is that you simply have a very forgiving disassembler that will try to make sense of anything you feed it. If you're still unconvinced, give us the file so we can look at it.