|
lmao just mirror your stuff on vidme like SFDebris does for his Star Trek reviews
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2017 03:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 15:32 |
|
|
lornekates posted:I Hate Everything has a new video on a movie I didn't even know existed, The Gummy Bear Movie (2012). Can't wait to watch... ...Oh! This is about those green bears. Not the actual Gummy Bears.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2017 03:35
|
|
|
lornekates posted:I Hate Everything has a new video on a movie I didn't even know existed, The Gummy Bear Movie (2012). Can't wait to watch... I only got to the part where they introduced the other nonsense supporting characters. Hope it's back up soon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2017 03:48
|
|
|
watho posted:Im really glad he's making videos on non-internet-drama people, this was super interesting i find his videos on internet people to also be pretty interesting, though i do prefer his videos on other stuff. actually my favorite so far might've been his neopets video because xxxtreme nostalgia happened when i watched it. also all this new copyright bullshit makes me wish leonard french could become attorney for the entire internet. our copyright laws suck poo poo through a straw and are ridiculosuly obsolete for a digital world.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2017 06:56
|
|
|
YggiDee posted:It took me an embarrassingly long time to realize that Peter Molyneux and Stephan Molyneux were different people, so I didn't get why people hated the guy who invented Fable so much. This is surprisingly, and depressingly, common. No one deserves to be mistaken for a monster like Stefan Molyneux. And Fable was fun.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2017 08:12
|
|
|
financially racist posted:our copyright laws suck poo poo through a straw and are ridiculosuly obsolete for a digital world. Problem is that it doesn't matter one wit how good the laws are, YouTube will still be taking down content because it's their platform and they make the rules. The only time copyright laws apply is when somebody actually takes them to court. And that's simply not feasible for any but the largest companies, so hey guess who gets to write the rules on how to play in YouTube's ballpit?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2017 10:17
|
|
financially racist posted:i find his videos on internet people to also be pretty interesting, though i do prefer his videos on other stuff. I can get behind that, I'm just extremely tired of videos about CWC, DSP, and the like. I haven't watched his video on neopets so I should probably do that.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2017 11:02
|
|
|
SatansBestBuddy posted:
This is honestly something everybody should always keep in mind when talking about fair use. Way to often people talk as if YouTube is somehow legally bound by that principle, or as if fair use is something the you get to define yourself.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2017 11:52
|
|
|
You ever notice that Lego Town has lots of police stations, but no courthouses? That’s a sign.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2017 14:02
|
|
|
watho posted:I can get behind that, I'm just extremely tired of videos about CWC, DSP, and the like. I haven't watched his video on neopets so I should probably do that. I've been avoiding his vids on well known personalities like DSP for the same reason. You should check out his video on the Collier brothers, a pair I only knee about from a joke on Fraiser. Also the video about a self published book about a woman whose a pilot among thirty other things
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2017 15:55
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aau545r6OXE
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
financially racist posted:i find his videos on internet people to also be pretty interesting, though i do prefer his videos on other stuff. I wanna send this guy a roll of moneys and Ken Penders' photo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
Intrinsic Field Marshal posted:lmao just mirror your stuff on vidme like SFDebris does for his Star Trek reviews Good news, he did! https://vid.me/UyD6f Edit: just watched it, it was just baffling and the they're still making those music videos! 
Baka-nin fucked around with this message at 23:17 on Aug 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
I'll have to say--when I read "Gummy Bear Movie", this was neither the first nor the second thing that came to mind. I never liked these videos. They always either irritated or unsettled me, even when I was in what amounted to the target age group for them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 03:40
|
|
|
Oh, boy, Lindsay's GotG2 video is finally out for patrons, with the next Whole Plate coming up tomorrow! It's Christmas in August! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 04:50
|
|
|
I'm watching her GOTG2 video, and it is so far pretty great. This is just a genuinely good movie, and I'm liking her analysis.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 05:42
|
|
|
Say Cheese and Die! - The Goosebumps Monthly
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 06:09
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:I'm watching her GOTG2 video, and it is so far pretty great. This is just a genuinely good movie, and I'm liking her analysis. Same. I felt the Gamorah and Nebula plot really stole the show in gotg2. Ego and parent stuff is heavy. Jjust curious, totally hypotherical, anyone ever have a parent tell you they have more important things in their life than you?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 06:23
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:I'm watching her GOTG2 video, and it is so far pretty great. This is just a genuinely good movie, and I'm liking her analysis. I really loved that movie, and I even got choked up in the theater. It was surprisingly solid. MariusLecter posted:Just curious, totally hypotherical, anyone ever have a parent tell you they have more important things in their life than you? Yes, repeatedly. We don't talk anymore.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 06:28
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:I'm watching her GOTG2 video, and it is so far pretty great. This is just a genuinely good movie, and I'm liking her analysis. So I check this thing and it's called "The Complex Feels of Guardians of the Galaxy 2". it's accurate in how it sums up the intellectual level of the video's content. The basic point is that Lindsay Ellis cried at a sci-fi movie and this is a sign of approval. It rather highlights how shallow her critical abilities are, or at least how much she dumbs them down for an uncritical audience. For example, when briefly summarising she opinions on GotG1, she finds it okay but were bothered by the sexist jokes, but did not notice the basic absurdity of someone making a feel-good movie about a bunch of mercenary vigilantes killing a religious extremist. It's an interesting thing about the series, and the whole MCU franchise really. There's this impression that fans and critics talk emphasise the internal lives of the characters to distract from what they're actually doing. Star-Lord is introduced as an adult casually killing people in order to make money, but no one even registers this because they were overwhelmed by him losing his mother as a child. Yeah, Star-Lord is a terrible person, but isn't his past just so tragic? BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 10:43 on Aug 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 08:51
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Star-Lord is introduced as an adult casually killing people in order to make money, but no one even registers this because they were overwhelmed by him losing his mother as a child. Yeah, Star-Lord is a terrible person, but isn't his past just so tragic? There are people who don't realise Star Lord is a man-child and a terrible person? We're supposed to be amused and charmed by him, because it's a Comedy and he's Chris Pratt, but he's pretty textually a giant dick (though we understand why, given his backstory). Not to say there aren't people who might disagree that he's a terrible person, but I think they're missing textual intent there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 10:55
|
|
|
He's not a terrible person.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 10:55
|
|
|
Daphnaie posted:There are people who don't realise Star Lord is a man-child and a terrible person? We're supposed to be amused and charmed by him, because it's a Comedy and he's Chris Pratt, but he's pretty textually a giant dick (though we understand why, given his backstory). Well yeah, that's my point. The Guardians are never actually heroic (killing things for the sake of societal security is not in itself heroic), but their rich internal lives invites adulation and performative sympathy from audiences. The same applies to characters like Tony Stark, who is straight-up evil but was inexplicably not killed by a proletarian vigilante in his second movie. CelticPredator posted:He's not a terrible person. In the beginning of GotG1, Star-Lord is looting an ancient ruin to claim a valuable artifact. He's surprised by three heavily armed people who take away the artifact. Star-Lord doesn't know who Ronan is at this point or what he does to prisoners. All he knows is that they want the artifact, they recognize that he's an outlaw, they answer to someone called Ronan, and that they are going to interrogate him. Operating on this level of knowledge, he casually kills two of them and tries to kill the third, so that he can make off with the artifact and sell it. That this is justified underlines how out of whack the moral universe of the movies is. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 11:16 on Aug 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 11:12
|
|
|
Daphnaie posted:There are people who don't realise Star Lord is a man-child and a terrible person? We're supposed to be amused and charmed by him, because it's a Comedy and he's Chris Pratt, but he's pretty textually a giant dick (though we understand why, given his backstory). Well I don't think anyone is 100% a dick.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 11:23
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:In the beginning of GotG1, Star-Lord is looting an ancient ruin to claim a valuable artifact. He's surprised by three heavily armed people who take away the artifact. Star-Lord doesn't know who Ronan is at this point or what he does to prisoners. All he knows is that they want the artifact, they recognize that he's an outlaw, they answer to someone called Ronan, and that they are going to interrogate him. When you're the only handful of people on a planet, they're not the equivalent of federal or military officers, and they say they want to do bad things to you, odds are they are not nice people and you are not walking away afterwards when they're done. Also; BravestOfTheLamps posted:Judging literature only based on it's prose is upper class snobbery. I know many examples If this, like BravestOfTheLamps posted:Well yeah, that's my point. The Guardians are never actually heroic (killing things for the sake of societal security is not in itself heroic), but their rich internal lives invites adulation and performative sympathy from audiences. The same applies to characters like Tony Stark, who is straight-up evil but was inexplicably not killed by a proletarian vigilante in his second movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 11:28
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:Well I don't think anyone is 100% a dick. Of course, and he definitely has sympathetic qualities (esp. his backstory, which is crucially given to us first before we meet adult Peter). But he's a pretty flawed person, and definitely not always a nice one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 11:29
|
|
|
Neddy Seagoon posted:When you're the only handful of people on a planet, they're not the equivalent of federal or military officers, and they say they want to do bad things to you, odds are they are not nice people and you are not walking away afterwards when they're done. Remember that no one forced Star-Lord to be there. He went in for the sake of money, and revealed that he was willing to kill to protect himself and his prize, without any hint of remorse. Also remember that he explicitly betrayed people so that he could get there first and take all the money for himself. Neddy Seagoon posted:Also; I know you're still trying to do the gotcha thing for some reason, but that's neither upper-class snobbery nor is it judging literature based on its prose. That the character of Vanko from Iron Man 2 is a proletarian vigilante is just a basic description of his character. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 11:53 on Aug 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 11:41
|
|
|
Lindsay's video was really good Now I am the drunken weeping EDIT: lol how dare people relate to movies on a personal and emotional level instead of what they do or don't say about communism Augus fucked around with this message at 11:56 on Aug 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 11:50
|
|
|
Augus posted:EDIT: lol how dare people relate to movies on a personal and emotional level It is rather unprofessional, so yes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 12:02
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:It is rather unprofessional, so yes. human beings have emotions and that is good
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 12:06
|
|
|
BZZT WHRR I AM CRITIBOT TWO-FIVE-ZERO-ZERO PUNY UNENLIGHTENED HU-MANS ARE WEAK AND DEFECTIVE THIS MODEL IS NOT SWAYED BY FOOLISH HUMAN SENTIMENT THIS MODEL IS PURE RATIONAL AND UNTAINTED THE PERFECT MACHINE CREATED ONLY TO TALK ABOUT MOVIES KNEEL BEFORE YOUR CRITICISM OVERLORD HU-MANS THE FORM TEXT AND SUBTEXT OF A WORK ARE MEANINGLESS IN THE FACE OF MY ADVANCED FILM SCANNING ALGORITHMS I HAVE NEVER POSTED ANYTHING THAT COULD BE MISTAKEN FOR SNOBBERY_ Augus fucked around with this message at 12:23 on Aug 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 12:20
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:human beings have emotions and that is good Animals have emotion. The ability to feel does not make you intelligent. Augus posted:BZZT WHRR lol I think you are overreacting to the demand that critics act professionally. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 12:31 on Aug 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 12:29
|
|
|
When will you fuckers learn not to interact with BoTL
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 12:36
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:lol Oh, I see, it's about ethics in film criticism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 12:37
|
|
|
watho posted:When will you fuckers learn not to interact with BoTL When the stars fall from the sky on you and I.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 12:38
|
|
|
watho posted:When will you fuckers learn not to interact with BoTL
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 12:40
|
|
|
This was gonna be a reply to BotL. It isn't now, because I was going to express my frustration and I cannot submit a professional critique if I allow my animalistic emotions to get in the way. Speaking of animalistic emotions: Nick Nocurne is putting together something pretty epic it seems, and because of some unforeseen cute black squeaky bitey circumstances he is late so he has put up a video asking for folk's opinion on how to proceed. Looks like the decision made is pretty decisive: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vILnfTwvMpQ Link to "What should I do?" poll: http://www.strawpoll.me/13827724
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 12:42
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Animals have emotion. The ability to feel does not make you intelligent. Intelligence has no inherent value in the discussion of art, while a dictionary will tell you that art is intended to be appreciated for its emotional power (Oxford for example) Of course, I'd love to see you argue that dictionary definitions are symptomatic of power-imbalances as the culturally dominant group attempts to enforce their perception of the world on minority groups through language...while simultaneously basing your entire argument on what ways someone shouldn't relate to or evaluate art in your opinion E: this is also a refutation of the idea that judging art by its emotional impact on the consumer can be unprofessional; it is literally the intended way of appreciating art and as professional a thing an art critic can do
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 12:42
|
|
|
Insurrectionist posted:Intelligence has no inherent value in the discussion of art, while a dictionary will tell you that art is intended to be appreciated for its emotional power (Oxford for example) ""Tolstoy demands that the artist should not only succeed in expressing emotion, but also in transmitting it... I would say that the function of art is not to transmit feeling so that others may experience the same feeling. That is only the function of the crudest forms of art - 'programme music,' melodrama, sentimental fiction and the like. The real function of art is to express emotion and to transmit understanding. That is what the Greeks so perfectly realized and that is what; I think, Aristotle meant when he said that the purpose of drama is to purge our emotions. We come to the work of art already charged with emotional complexes; we find in the genuine work of art, not an excitation of these emotions, but peace, repose, equanimity. Nothing is more absurd than the spectacle of an ardent young snob trying to cultivate an emotion before a great work of art... It is true that the work of art arouses in us certain physical reactions: we are conscious of rhythm, harmony, unity, and these physical properties work upon our nerves. But they do not agitate them as much as they soothe them, and if we must, psychologically speaking, call the resultant state of mind an emotion, it is an emotion totally different in kind from the emotion experienced and expressed by the artist in creating the work of art. It is better described as a state of wonder or admiration, or more coldly but more exactly as a state of recognition. Our homage to an artist is our homage to a man who by his special gifts has solved our emotional problems for us." - Herbert Read, The Meaning of Art BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 13:15 on Aug 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 12:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 15:32 |
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Animals have emotion. The ability to feel does not make you intelligent. You are arguing against a point I did not make. Intelligence is not the ur-virtue. Empathy and kindness are valuable, too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 13:05
|
|