|
'Sup new thread? Please could we add Yahtzee's Zero Punctuation to the OP? http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation Also here is an excellent weekly podcast about games, called Crate & Crowbar, which is 5 British games journalists (trigger warning) and developers talking about games, cons, news events and so on. There is a good forum on the site also. I thought about starting a separate thread but decided maybe I should just occasionally mention it itt when it seems relevant to discussions here. They are funny and articulate and I recommend giving them a listen. http://crateandcrowbar.com/
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2015 10:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 18:20 |
|
|
Tracula posted:Jay Bauman has gone full David Lynch with these vlogs he's started doing. Talking of David Lynch, as Infamous Sphere has discovered, there is now a David Lynch thread on the CineD board. You can find it here: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3695062
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
Yaws posted:Spoony is a drat fine storyteller Spoony was a drat fine storyteller. The very early stories about his bard character and the toilet pizza etc are great fun. But now the default setting is anger not wry enjoyment and that's just not very much fun to watch. I rewatch the early Counter Monkeys but I won't watch these later ones again.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2015 10:47
|
|
|
Mods! NWS tag for gratuitous display of dicks and tits please. Content: About alignment in RPGs (Spoony's video), I think alignment is a necessary tool to force poor RPG players to inhabit their character. It's really difficult for a DM to haul aside players and say "but your character wouldn't do/say that" every time the player acts out of character. If you can point to a rule, that deflects conflict (marginally). But of course applying rules rigidly can be a way of being dickish towards players indirectly. I agree with Spoony's position that players having chaotic neutral and chaotic evil alignments is bad news. It is really a way for players to basically reduce engagement with the story/world of the game because it allows them to act as loose cannon and avoiding any binding commitments to NPGs etc. Spoony makes some good points in the video but does it an antagonistic way.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2015 10:46
|
|
|
Thought I should put in a good word for Oliver Harper, a British critic who reviews action/sci-fi/fantasy/comedy films, mainly Hollywood and mainstream cinema. He posts videos about 15-25min summarising the plot, playing clips and stills. He does a lot of research, talks about DVD/laserdisc/BD releases, discusses soundtrack releases (and sometimes related video games) and talks about promotion/studio issues. So if you ever wondered what film X was like then you could do worse than check on this guy's list to see if he's reviewed it. He is pretty low on schtick and in all his regular reviews he never appears on camera. He is very responsive to YouTube comments and friendly in general. No hint of internet douchery. He also does film commentaries you can synch while playing your own copy. I haven't used any of those so I can't comment on them. As far as I know, he only posts stuff on YouTube. His page is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=user?ollyh82 E: Search on YouTube for "Oliver Harper" or "ollyh82" Josef K. Sourdust fucked around with this message at 00:35 on Feb 8, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
Omnicrom posted:That makes me sad. Plinkett's review is one of the best dissections of The Phantom Menace I've ever seen, and that's in spite of the dreary tedium of Plinkett's character. Frankly Plinkett's character is also why it is the only Red Letter Media video I've ever watched. I was under the impression Plinkett was more widespread and that immediately convinced me not to look at them any further. Yeah, agreed. Like others here I would really like to rewatch the RLM SW prequel reviews with the skits edited out. I'm sure they must be out there somewhere. Hbomberguy, no we haven't forgotten your previous derail over the SW prequels. The second part of the Spoony movie review was...ok...I guess. The less time he spends on camera the better I like his pieces.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2015 21:00
|
|
|
Lichtenstein posted:The RLM derail might be boring and lovely, but it feels good to see 40+ new posts in this thread, none of which are about gamergate. On the mornings when I bring up the RGD board and see that there no new posts in this thread since I checked the thread the day before, I think "Nothing happened on the internet yesterday? Phew! Good job, guys. See you another day." I like this thread but I enjoy it when there's nothing new for me to think about. Content: RLM chat is not a "derail" because it is internet criticism being discussed on the internet critic thread. Because it's largely old RLM stuff being discussed it more a "detour" than a "derail".
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2015 12:18
|
|
|
boom boom boom posted:What's the layout of the redlettermedia building? Are you planning an assassination raid? You're making me nervous. Plinkett was bad but not fatwa bad.....
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2015 17:27
|
|
|
boom boom boom posted:And Plinkett isn't bad, Plinkett's great! The analysis is pretty incisive and thought provoking, agreed. However, the basement rapist skits.... boom boom boom posted:Better than Fifty Shades of Gray and Breaking the Waves and all the other poo poo kids nowadays are into.  Don't you tell me, sonny, I'll tell you!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2015 12:38
|
|
|
If y'all fancy some reasoned non-GBS discussion we got some good threads over in the Book Barn. Just saying. We're serving coffee now.   
Josef K. Sourdust fucked around with this message at 22:11 on Feb 24, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
KayTee posted:tl;dr I think Spoony's better suited to being an angry ranty man than a fawning fan boy.  I do think that it is possible to do fun, positive, informative videos about good/great/competent movies but it is hard to make them funny. Personally, I don't need humour to make me watch such a video (for example, I previously mentioned Oliver Harper as a fun reviewer who is essentially informative, his channel here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=user?ollyh82 ). But I think Spoony's schtick is humour or anger for reviews. For Counter Monkey he can add enthusiasm and pleasure, which is what makes the best of those videos (and the Reb Brown reviews) the high points of his post-meltdown output.Remember that he admitted in his interview with Doug Walker that the Ultima series was a real exception for him in that it was genuinely enthusiastic and analytic but was essentially a set-up for the final review so he could vent his hatred and anger against the final Ultima game. I found that last video unwatchable and it is really depressing that he only did those fun, cool informative videos at the start just so he could deliver a  slamdown on a game that was pretty poorly thought out and disappointing. tl;dr: Internet rage  the most profitable kind of rage.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
I can't speak about individuals per se but what tends to happen is that internet critics start as creative people really engaged with movies, games, TV etc and who want to share their ideas and enthusiasm. As they get more attention and more praise - and at the same time getting tired of the treadmill of producing content every week/two weeks/etc (certainly when part of Channel Awesome, The Escapist, etc. where content was expected regularly) - they want to do something more. They want to show that they can produce creative work. You see this with Paul Morley, Neil Tennant and Morrissey in music, where they started as critics and writers then move into producing their own music. Criticism is often a gateway into the profession they are criticising. Lots of them made movie shorts when they were students (lots of them did media studies) and they want to escape the grind of producing reviews. It comes out in characters, skits, b-arcs etc. The problem is that it is difficult to translate the skills for good short reviews into longer works of fiction. A lot of people who are not critics and have the same aspirations fail - I don't think it's a problem peculiar to internet critics. In these days of crowd-funding, critics actually have a better chance than most because they at least have an audience whereas Joe Schmoe from Nebraska Film School has no audience at all. But the problem critics have is that their fans expect something skit/character related, with lots of in-jokes, and some guest appearances of X and Y. That's not going to make a decent, original, standalone film that will be of interest in 10 or 15 years' time. But maybe just a 90-min video with familiar characters and in-jokes for fans are what these critics want to make. You see a lot of critics straining to turn their reviews into art. They want to make something complex and satisfying, something that shows off their skills (however great or small those skills actually are). What a lot of them don't realise is that a really great review can be nearly as satisfying as art - it be as drat hard to make too. Sorry if that sounds patronising. Often what their greatest skill is is making us laugh with observations, insight, information, wit and enthusiasm combined with sharp editing and concision. That requires great skill and also the willingness to remove your ego. That doesn't mean removing your personal opinion but it means being willing to sacrifice really personal bugbears and party-piece turns to make a compact and fast-moving piece of criticism that works for viewers and also gives a fair representation of the subject discussed. (I've never been more irritated than a piece by an intelligent reviewer who I like even if I don't agree with her on everything. She misrepresented what she reviewed for the sake of running gags. It's good to have a slant on something but if you are misrepresenting it, you need to go back and redo your jokes or leave it to one side until you can do it right.) So sometimes the things that critics get praised for - being really knowledgable, having strong opinions, being really creative - actually get in the way of them making good reviews. It is the same as novelists cramming all of their research into their books. They really couldn't leave out that fascinating piece of trivia they dug up in an archive. I know it's hard - especially if you aren't the first person to review a subject and feel like you have to give a slant to it - but if you can put aside your ego you can turn in a great performance. Don't listen to fans who think you're a great comedian or actor - these people are - like much of the population - completely clueless. They don't know anything about acting or comedy - just look at the stupid comments they put after videos. No, enrich your reviews with comedy and acting like seasoning - a pinch here and there. Example: long-time readers will remember this, so apologies. Go look at Spoony's review of The Thing (2008?) (the PC game). It is 20 min. It is punchy, witty, intelligent, drily delivered, informative about the game and really fast (and fast moving). No screen time for Spoony. No acting, no skits, no memes, no callbacks, no b-arc, no personal anguish, no back story. That's one of the best pieces of criticism of pop culture I've seen. It tells me about the game, why it's rubbish, why it's a travesty of the movie, why it's tedious and frustrating and he makes all that funny. Spoony will never be that good again, I'm afraid, because now stuff has back story, it's personal, he's going to show you how much he cares and deeply he can hate. And I don't care because they are not good reviews. The reviewer serves the review and thereby serves us all. Apologies. tl; dr: Josef K Sourdust is avoiding his work and loitering on the internet. Josef K. Sourdust fucked around with this message at 00:26 on Feb 27, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 00:20
|
|
|
On this very subject, the thread PYF Example of Ludonarrative Dissonance can be found here: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3686060
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 17:17
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Jack Thompson campaigned against rap music. So, not all bad then?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
Please don't post screenshots from my PC. Thanks in advance.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2015 11:51
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:Does she wear an astronaut diaper, or is her pee filtered and recycled into the suit's cooling system? Jeez, why should Anita's clothing come into this discussion? 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2015 09:31
|
|
|
harryhenry posted:... a favorite of mine: Oliver Harper's Retrospectives & Reviews ... Seconded.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2015 22:48
|
|
|
Infamous Sphere posted:My Grandpa is English, and he insists that New Zealand marmite (which is what we get in Australia) isn't good enough. He's always trying to get people to import British marmite for him - can't do it himself because he doesn't have the internet. Of course, with the glass jars, the shipping is absurd. Jeez. Marmite shouldn't be runny - unless it is hot. Good news for your grandpa - Marmite comes in plastic squeeze bottles.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2015 22:35
|
|
|
Sephiroth_IRA posted:Eh people usually have very rational reasons for being who they are so when I pick on or criticize someone I usually try not to be mean about it. Like it's OK to laugh at someone when they fall in the mud but you should still lend them a hand at the same time you know? ...unless that person wallows in their mud puddle and insists that really it is very nice in this puddle and you should try it out but that you should never ever try the other mud puddles because they are inferior and that this puddle is objectively superior  to any other puddle out there and that if you suggest maybe that once in a while getting out of the mud puddle (even if for the sake of variety and perspective) might be a good idea the person will respond with "how dare you challenge my sense of selfhood, you otherizing fiend and bigot! And if you suggest I even need help you are implying my puddle of choice is not a valid environment and....and....and....".geek_culture.txt
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2015 06:41
|
|
|
The last Spoony review was a movie review in Feb. The last game review was August. Both were forgettable. He might make it a whole year between game reviews - that's if he ever does another. Who is supporting his Patreon? Wrestling fans? He's essentially stopped making any non-vlog content at this point. Patreon has effectively ended any incentive he has to make content because donations are not linked to anything content-related, just merchandise, personalised items and streams of RPGs.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2015 15:33
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:...from about 2007-2010 he was probably the best of the reviewers when it came to writing jokes and comedic timing in his videos. Absolutely. The best of those review are the best video reviews I've seen. Snappy, insightful, short, informative, witty, acerbic without being bitter or genuinely angry. It's been years since then... 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
Tracula posted:I remember Spoony saying that his entire Ultima retrospective was all just a build up to the 9th game basically which is pretty disappointing all things considered. Yeah. That's what happens when reviewers get personal. Personal gets in the way of funny. Or maybe not. Remember his Microcosm review, where he said that he spent $60 on a crappy FMV game and felt he'd really been rooked? Difference was he made that review funny, however personal he took it. And Mazes & Monsters was a pretty funny review too. Ultima 9 is the terminator, the point where Spoony passed from light to dark, from funny to bitter, from good to turgid poop.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
You realise all this Jurassic World chat is basically a set-up for Hbomberguy to turn up and tell you that you are all objectively wrong? You know what you've done, don't you? Are you happy yet?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2015 09:43
|
|
|
Annointed posted:His arguments with everyone did spice things up when the stream of reviews were but at trickle. But they were bad arguments and the only reason it generated a lot of posts was because he was misrepresenting opponents, refusing to refer to facts and generally trolling and thereby provoking posters into pointing out these points. So... The Vosgian Beast posted:He was the best poster on the thread, and possibly SA. ...something like that. E: And verily the radioactive half-life of his idiocy has seeded this ground with salt, even unto this day.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2015 18:15
|
|
|
Yahtzee makes his points, gives some info about the game and manages to get in and out in under 7 min. Not only that, he does it every week regular as clockwork. He manages to get a few laughs from me every video. You may not agree with all his opinions but he is a consummate pro and he puts many other critics to shame in terms of consistency and professionalism. There are other critics whom I have more time for who could learn a lot from him.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2015 13:48
|
|
|
Puppy Time posted:I thought it was white and gold Well played! 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2015 10:44
|
|
|
Tracula posted:Not to be obsessive or whatever but anyone wanna take bets on what year Spoony's next real actual proper review is gonna come out? I reckon he's going for the anniversary of his last video game review - August 2014. Spoony's Patreon is down to $3,500. He seems to be losing $200 per month as donors realise that however warmly they feel about videos he did over 5 years ago he is never willingly going to turn out new reviews if he can get Patreon money. Miss Wallace posted:Thanks! And I definitely want to do The Langoliers (lord help me). Please do! It is a really dumb story, creaky, illogical and glacial in pace but it has memorable characters, some character story arcs and some great cheesy effects. BTW, Nick's accent is really strange. It wanders a bit but I was under the impression that actor is actually English which is why I was confused. Miss Wallace posted:I really don't think The Langoliers qualified as atmospheric or creepy at any point. Literally Steven Pinchot is trying to eat the camera in every scene and there's a "spooky" speech about how the langoliers sound like crispy cereal in milk. The flash of Toomey seeing characters as monsters is mildly creepy but yes, that's as far as it goes.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2015 23:27
|
|
|
OctoberCountry posted:They're just being true to the source material. Sad but true. There is a whole thread peopled by King fans in The Book Barn where we act as a support group for posters disappointed by the whole last thirds of every book published since the 1970s/since King dried out/since King's car accident* (delete as applicable).
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2015 08:42
|
|
|
Lindsay's Dune video was lazy and inaccurate. (I saw it so I remember.) Fans - most of whom admit that the film is very flawed and most of whom couldn't be classed as "fanboys" - rightfully complained that she had misrepresented the narrative complications of the film for cheap laughs. She doesn't do sci-fi much (or at all) and she went for a low-hanging fruit ("Dune! Hurr hurr! What a dumb movie!"), which took her out of her area of specialism - not necessarily a problem. It wasn't a case of bullying or nerd sperging but of a producer getting caught out misrepresenting subject material. (And no, you don't need to have read the book to understand the film, though it helps.) I am sure there were idiots who handled the matter badly but their objections were well founded. I watched Lindsay's videos and like them on the whole but that was a genuinely bad review. It wasn't that I disagreed with her slant - this is a mess, it is kind of absurd, Dune is not a great movie - in fact I agree (to a lesser degree) with it. But she overstated this for laughs and misrepresented the film. That is unforgiveable and really out of character for a reviewer I have a lot of respect for.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2015 09:01
|
|
|
The making of cruddy homemade "movies" is the bane of internet reviewers...
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2015 06:34
|
|
|
Asuron posted:I doubt it effects anything they actually want to do. ...b-but I like watching internet critic reviewers for their reviews on the internet.  I don't want Brad's embroidery patterns or Alison's home-brew guide or Kyle's ornithology diary or Doug's parenting tips or Noah's recipe column or Yahtzee's sci-fi novel or Mike's movie. I know, mean old me.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2015 12:10
|
|
|
ACES CURE PLANES posted:It's like people don't E: Don't think I am dissing RLM, Brad, Simon R. and others who start out as low/no-budget filmmakers. I wish them well but I don't want to see their films. I'm only interested in their criticism and commentaries. That's my personal slant. Some people like to consume everything a producer does it's just I'm not one of them and I get a bit grumpy when there is less content I like. To be fair, RLM have a great work ethic and consistent output so I don't begrudge them doing other stuff because they are really solid when they do produce the criticism/commentaries. \/ \/ \/ Fair point and I would feel restricted if I could work in only one way. Josef K. Sourdust fucked around with this message at 15:50 on Aug 10, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2015 15:39
|
|
|
...and the only reason we know about the films of RLM/Brad/James etc. is we were on some chat board somewhere and someone posted a link to a funny review video they did. We followed the link and watched their other videos and found out their back story. I want to know one person here who first saw The Grabowskis or Brad's exploitation films or AVGN movie and then discovered they were critics. My point is that these critics only have even modest audiences for their films is the popularity they got from reviewing. I know fans can be petulant whiny manchildren and demand more of the same forever - but they can also act as echochambers demanding skits become standalone videos and saying creators are born actors. They can pressure a creator to stay the same but also to move into other areas. Both staying and moving can be bad in terms of outcome. Personally, I like certain critics because they do a good job and I want to see more of that content. It is just my own situation but I know I will watch and re-watch Best of the Worst but I will never watch an RLM film.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2015 17:15
|
|
|
Can we cut down on the anime chat in the internet critic thread? I mean, I can understand minor derails when critic X or Y releases a video about anime but this is getting ridculous. If you want to chat about anime reviews in detail then start start your own thread in ADTRW or even a different thread in RGD. Read the OP: "If you need to discuss a specific work in-depth, take it to a separate thread. You can, of course, discuss a work a reviewer is reviewing, but let's not have 3 page hijacks on a single movie." I know there is also a rule in the OP on not posting about posting but RGD modding is fairly light - and rightly so - so sometimes it takes a poster itt to refer to Jsor's OP. I don't think it's backseat modding to suggest posters at least try to follow Jsor's reasonable and clear OP.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2015 10:02
|
|
|
I apologise. For "anime" please read "children's cartoons made in USA/Japan/S. Korea".
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2015 10:31
|
|
|
Has anyone done a decent critique of that movie After Last Season? There is one reaction video and one unwatchable review. I watched Spoony's riff as it went live. It was up for less than 12 hours before slapped with a take down notice. I just wondered if any more or less established critics had reviewed it online.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2015 23:45
|
|
|
DARKSEID DICK PICS posted:I could write ya one, but there's no way I'm making a half-hour project of the thing. Shame. I read a pretty decent but short blog post on it but I would like someone smarter than me to tell me what went wrong with After Last Season - apart from the obvious things. There is a 20min video review but it had about 469 hits and when I attempted to view it I realised why. It is even more unwatchable than the film itself. I skipped about and couldn't watch more than a total of 30 secs of that video. I know we make fun of dumb internet reviewers (and celebrate smart ones) but holy moly there are some stinkers out there that never even cross our radars.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2015 12:32
|
|
|
Yeah, the main thing I remember was him singing show tunes over clunky graphics. It's a weird rear end movie. I couldn't believe what I was watching. I can't believe a "big name" critic hasn't done a review of it. I'd love to watch DDP's analysis.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
Mr. Fowl posted:The documentary that Mike and Jay mentioned during the Everest Half in the Bag is pretty good. I get why they said it would make a good movie. This is from a few days back but if anyone is interested to chat about polar exploration or Antarctic travel, then there is a thread on it in the Book Barn: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3655083
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2015 13:42
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 18:20 |
|
|
poparena posted:Speaking of, we are now up to TWO months without Spoony releasing any content, scripted or otherwise, still makes three times that of a retail employee. I wandered into his site for a bi-monthly visit and saw he hasn't even posted a summary video of his recent convention. I can't believe anyone invited him to a convention. Correction: that anyone would pay for him to come to a convention. February since his last film review. August 2014 since his last game review.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2015 00:02
|
|