[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir ]

/tv/ - Television and Movies

No girls allowed
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
Archive
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
dicesidesmodifier

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


/bane/ /film/ /strek/ /sw/ /wooo/ Combined Rules Bunker

File: 05dc5809ff53d44⋯.jpg (64.82 KB, 900x900, 1:1, unnamed.jpg)

 No.2115641[Last 50 Posts]

I'm not sure if discussing e-celebs is allowed here but I wanted to ask you guys some questions concerning Mauler and the objective/subjective critical analysis.

Is he right in that films/art is objective?

If that's true, why is it objective and what does he mean by "measurable criteria"? He never explains what that is.

Is an opinion a fact? Or is an opinion informed by a fact?

And many more I wanted to touch on but I just want to ask this for the time being.

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115644

>>2115641

Interesting concept, I would say look into Jenny Nicholson. She is far more interesting.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115648

I think there is an objective and scientific side to art but it's still quite subjective as to how good it is.

The problem is that the subjective meme is often use to brush off criticism and to promote laziness.

On the topic of Mauler, the biggest problem with this cunt is that he surrounds himself with retarded furries that will keep on parroting what he says without ever contradicting him.

I'm afraid he will eventually just become one of those smug retards he originally fought.

I liked his last SW video though. It's quite impressive actually that Jew Jew fucked it all up this bad.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115652

>>2115648

There is an objective side to art, but the issue is when someone then uses it to say that there's good and bad qualities to it. Because then it immediately, by definition, becomes subjective opinion.

If I were to say:

Star Wars is inconsistent

I'm not wrong, I can even be more specific:

Rey using healing is inconsistent with the lore

However, even though me and everyone else will think that's fucking retarded, it's technically not objectively a bad thing. We can give an argument for why it's a bad thing but it's not objective anymore. It's a well-reasoned opinion but it's not an objective opinion that is completely unbiased and not based on personal criteria. Because there is no set in stone criteria that everyone has to follow when discussing or giving their opinion on art. Even though we can say it's bad story telling, that doesn't mean it's an objective fact due to the fact that it might not actually bother people who don't care for an inconsistency such as that. Therefore, their immersion and sanctification, like what Mauler likes to use to measure objectivity (which is retarded) is not broken. Could we call them morons and idiots for thinking that, sure, but they're not objectively wrong for thinking it because objectivity is not a criteria in itself to judge quality or the opinions of others.

I also believe that subjectivity doesn't automatically stifle conversation, it can be used like that as you said, anon, but two people can still have a conversation for why they think something works or doesn't work for them while being subjective.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115653

>>2115652

>sanctification

Not sure how I got this wrong but I meant satisfactions.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115661

I would say within certain frameworks. You can paint an objectively poor landscape, but not an objectively poor painting.

I would also say when you sign up to make a sequel to a franchise like Star Wars you are wordlessly signing a contract to adhere to the framework to what has come before. You can bend rules but not break them.

The rules of Star Wars would be things like; it has to be set in space, it must feature a conflict or war, you must stick to established mechanics on how things like technology and magic function, the narrative has to continue logically from where we left off, a returning character must be recognisably the same character, and you can't just turn Princess Leia into a dog or something.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115663

Is Gahoole an e-celeb?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115673

>>2115644

Jenny Nicholson is a Disney shill.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115677

>>2115641

i'll give you the industry secret for judging if a movie is good or not. prepare yourself. you sit down and watch it. if you like it, its good and if you don't then it sucks. analyzing films the way you are is soulless and gay. stop being a faggot and just watch the fucking thing.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115680

I would say that art can be objectively good but not in a way that can be examined scientifically like Mauler and others like him try to do. There's a dimension of art that can be analyzed in that way, such as how competently the technical aspects of it are handled, but there is also an emotional, if not downright spiritual, dimension to art that you cannot analyze and reverse engineer as though it were a machine. It is something that can be understood but not articulated, or even expressed, through any other way except through art. I would argue that it is this dimension that justifies the existence of art because it creates something that cannot be produced through empirical means.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115681

>>2115641

IMO, art is subjective, technique can be "measured" more objectively.

e.g.: There can be some wonky drawings that you can like

So analyzing visuals would have more limited reach, unless it's really shitty.

A more sure metric to check a movie would be the story: does things make sense? As far as human can be irrational. What would be the story rules? (concerning physics, time, energy) and if the story suddenly change those rules because the writer can write for shit.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115682

>>2115680

The problem is that Mauler and his furry crew talk about art like atheists talk about god.

It wouldn't surprise me if they tipped their fedoras at christians on their spare time.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115684

I'd agree with him on that if you're reviewing something it pays to actually look at its flaws and strengths in a qualitative way instead of, for example going "I like it and it's great because it's Star Wars" like a lot of people seem to be doing with the Mandalorian despite it being pretty mediocre or "If you squint at it sideways, go have a cold shower, read the Qu'ran upside down and then wipe your arse with sandpaper you'll realise that it's a far-fetched metaphor or allegory or whatever for whatever". It seems to me like he's someone who saw too many clickbait reviews where the content of the video is pretty much "Yeah it's a movie and there's people in it and they do like, stuff and then the movie ends like woah okay like subscribe", disliked that and decided to do something better which is completely okay but at the same time it feels like a bit of an ego to it.

I get where he's coming from, because Hollywood has gotten to the point where almost everything but writing and acting and action scenes but I'm apparently alone in thinking that is going to be of absurdly high quality due to the shittons of money thrown at it, but at the same time he puts so much effort into tearing apart movies that simply do not warrant said effort, and it feels like a grand, kind of petty response to people who blindly go "I like it", especially in one of his "critiques" on the sequel movies where the intro is one long rant about other youtubers. Don't get me wrong the guy is entertaining and he makes good points but at the same time I wish he'd direct that effort instead that things he likes, just talk about anything that isn't that overproduced turd of a trilogy. He could direct his efforts towards something much more interesting, in my opinion.

>>2115682

The problem is very evident in their podcast, where you have like one side of people, the Maulers who are part there to have a decent discussion and part there to have some fun, like that swordsman and that scot and the guy that puts on that posh british accent or any of the aussies on the showit's a pretty entertaining podcast to listen to while playing vidya, hell I'd say one of the furries is half this sometimes, and then you have the other half of the podcast, mostly the furries who are there to like make themselves out as smart and superior to whatever they dislike or are butthurt towards, like every other brit or that one chick who cannot go a sentence without going to some far fetched connection to a psychology course as to some inane twitter shit or the obnoxious nigger.

And then there's E;R who's too busy spilling spaghetti to even speak apparently.

I agree it's probably going to end up having him be a self absorbed faggot if he keeps hanging with that group.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115687

>>2115680

How can it be explained scientifically if you don't mind me asking? Mauler has said "measurable criteria" but he never explains what that means.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115695

Why is this thread filled with >muh feelings faggots? If you're going to make that kind of argument you could at least phrase it in a way that doesn't make you sound like a teenage girl.

>The purpose of entertainment is to entertain

>Therefore the only reasonable metric to measure a piece of entertainment by is how entertaining it is

>The degree to which a person is entertained is at least partly if not enirely subjective

>Therefore the answer to whether or not a movie is good or bad cannot be fully objective

I have now provided a better argument than nearly everone in the thread I skimmed it

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115696

>>2115687

I'm sure he has in several of his 10 hour long streams

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115697

why does his face have a chastity belt

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115704

File: c0789875d0e0fd7⋯.png (1.05 MB, 793x804, 793:804, efapcringe.PNG)

Mauler and his friends don't know anything about film, they're a bunch of smug redditors who managed to convince themselves they are experts on cinema. This is a list of their recommended films.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115705

File: 4d1f0310c54b1dc⋯.png (68.81 KB, 777x755, 777:755, 1573042018661.png)

>>2115697

So he doesn't get throatfucked by niggers.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115707

File: 122307d4c72aee4⋯.webm (2.73 MB, 1280x720, 16:9, (you).webm)

>>2115704

>capeshit, john wick, aliens, and mission impossible

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115713

>>2115696

Tried watching through one of them and it was just him and his furfag friends mumbling about unrelated shit to what they're talking about.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115714

>>2115641

He's just another shitty YouTube essayist who makes autistically long videos about shit that doesn't matter.

It's such a waste of time. It takes around 550 hours to become a B2 in languages like French or German, that's really not that long. If you put all that time you spent into watching these essays into studying you could learn a fucking language in just a couple of months.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115715

>>2115714

Why would you ever want to learn frog or nordicuck languages like those?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115716

File: 509edb7f18abc1d⋯.png (103.28 KB, 255x176, 255:176, peterson.png)

>>2115715

>German is Nordic

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115719

Mauler right purely on the basis that objectivity is the ruling form of critique. Everything has objective rules for quality, for movies the way he's critiquing them is more akin to writing, so it boils down to story coherence, character motivations, dialogue, and plot structure. Then he can also add in things like CGI, camera angles, music, and editing but he's obviously not a filmographer and never talks about those things unless it's so bad even reddit points it out. He's genuinely not a movie critic, because he's only ever talks about half of what constitutes a movie.

You can have an opinion that's based on something objective, because you can like an objectively bad thing and say it's actually good. And thus I've described every ancient and modern form of philosophy.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115722

>>2115716

All cumskin speak sounds the same to me.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115728

>>2115641

I've always compare liking bad movies with someone picking dog shit off the street and eating, maybe that person really enjoys it, i can't tell him to not enjoy it, enjoyment is subjective, what is objective and what i will tell him is that what he is eating is literal dog shit. The hard part is determining if that piece of art is indeed dog shit.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115729

>>2115719

>He's genuinely not a movie critic, because he's only ever talks about half of what constitutes a movie.

I think that's the case in general, or at least i don't know of many movie critics that go at length about that, i wish to see more though.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115730

>>2115729

I agree, but considering the type of movies he reviews(overproduced action movies) it's almost a given that the movies will have above average if not great looking shots, high quality CGI(or at least relatively because a lot of CGI looks like ass to me) and the music will not be rhythmic farts(Although it's hard to say considering how many movies rely on licensed music, often of the garbage top whatever pop variety) so the things anyone can take a shot at are the writing, plot and acting.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115735

Mauler is a faggot who makes 2 hour videos rambling while never saying anything of substance.

He's just as pretentious as Breadtubers, he never explains what he means by "objective", he just says his opinions are objective and anybody who disagrees has subjective opinions. He's literally saying that his opinions are factually correct and others are not, what a fuckwit.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115737

any e-celeb that uses some kind of avatar that is sincere in anyway deserves nothing but mockery

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115738

>>2115730

But all of that will be generic as fuck, which for me is already bad.

>>2115735

But most of what he says is objective, he points out plot holes and inconsistencies, if you annoyed when he mocks them then you're the faggot.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115739

>>2115738

>But most of what he says is objective, he points out plot holes and inconsistencies, if you annoyed when he mocks them then you're the faggot.

Then he should say that he is objectively right about noticing plot holes and inconsistencies in movies, not that he is objectively right about judging the quality of a film. And what a coincidence that it just so happens that movies that annoyed the centre-right (Captain Marvel, The Last Jedi) are all poorly written and movies that appealed to them (Joker, Alita etc.) are masterpieces with no faults.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115740

>>2115739

I think TLJ annoyed far more people than just people on the right-wing. A lot of lefties didn't like it because of the gaybaiting and reducing the only black lead to a pointless side character.

It's also generally thought of as a stupid film, it extends beyond politics

Now please bait me harder, daddy~

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115741

>>2115738

>But all of that will be generic as fuck, which for me is already bad.

Fair enough. I'd much rather have him talk about things he's at the very least knowledgeable of instead of having him talk about something he cannot articulate as well though. I would like to see someone putting in that much effort into analyzing shot composition and action scenes and whatnot, Every Frame a Painting I guess used to do that, and that one swordsman they have on the podcast does that for the Star Wars lightsaber duels but otherwise I can't think of anyone and I have too much autism to watch those "X profession watch scenes related to X" videos.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115743

>>2115684

E;R is on some of the podcasts?

I don't think he'd fit in such a format indeed.

>I agree it's probably going to end up having him be a self absorbed faggot if he keeps hanging with that group.

Let's enjoy it while it lasts. At least his solo 10 hour long videos are beyond reproach.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115745

>>2115743

He is and his only input is pretty much going

"uuuuuuuuuh yeah" or "uuuuuuuh no" every like 15 minutes until they bring on a Korra video in which he groans like he's being given a particularly aggressive handjob.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115746

>>2115738

Not really. While yes there are objective things to film, it doesn't necessarily mean something is objectively bad. We can say things are bad with rules or criteria but never does he make that clear. >>2115730

>>2115719

Has a good point about it but an opinion stops being objective once you start to comment on the quality of it. Because even though there are objectively things in a film that could be arguably good or bad, the fact is "satisfaction",

"immersion", "entertainment" are nearly immeasurable because it's entirely subjective.

Could plot holes, inconsistencies, incoherence, one dimensional characters bad? Sure, we can definitely argue for it. We can point them out and argue that they're bad for the film but rather or not that affect's someone's enjoy is up to them because even though it might have these issues, it might not matter or bother people who's idea of satisfaction, immersion and entertainment are entirely different.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115748

>>2115741

The reason why Mauler doesn't do that is because he doesn't actually know that much about movies. That's the reason why he sticks so hard to writing and not cinematography, shot composition, lighting, choreography, etc.

In his words, that's subjective and aesthetic that doesn't need to be analyzed but that's only because he's a moron and fraud who doesn't understand why that's important to a film. Considering film is a visual medium.

Also, Mauler's views on writing is also retarded. All he does is check to see if the rule are consistent with itself but never does he talk about if the script is actually tight since he never brings up film theory or even basic narrative structures that first year English students learn. He's such a disingenuous faggot.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115755

>>2115748

>All he does is check to see if the rule are consistent with itself but never does he talk about if the script is actually tight since he never brings up film theory or even basic narrative structures that first year English students learn.

I'm not sure I follow. It seems to me that if the writing rules are consistent then a script will most likely be tight since it doesn't bring out any asspulls or contradictions as resolutions to plot points, but I'm no film student so could you elaborate a bit more?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115760

>>2115743

Yeah but he says nothing for the entire episode. It's not his thing, he's too shy.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115763

>>2115755

A tight script doesn't mean it's consistent with its rules. Because rules are not for script writing but are usually for world building. To assume that rules are inconsistent so therefore the script is bad is ignoring a lot of media that breaks the rules to establish genres and franchises and came out better for it.

For example, the Zombies in Return of the Living Dead breaks the rules of the Zombie genre that Zombies can be killed with a shot to the head, aren't intelligent, and must be recently deceased. It breaks that rule and yet the film's storytelling is not only intact but elevated. It actually makes the story far more interesting and suspenseful because it broke the rules in a great way, and the film is now part of the mythology of zombies for doing that.

So therefore rules not being consistent does not equal a bad script and vice versa consistency with rules doesn't mean a tight script.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115764

>>2115760

It's a shame too because it kinda breaks the persona he's going for in his videos. He doesn't seem interested in talking about any of the shit Mauler brings up either.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115801

>>2115763

That's not what I meant by consistency. In your example an inconsistency that breaks the world's rules(not the genre) would be solving a major conflict by seemingly having an invisible switch flipped momentarily causing zombies to suddenly lose intelligence and speed. In Knives Out an inconsistentcy is in introducing you to the maid vomiting whenever she tells a lie, involuntarily, violently and immediately and then the rest of the movie that rule is broken by having her somehow hold it until convenient or have her spit out a tiny bit of vomit in a cup.

Funnily enough while writing this I realised Cap Marvel is somewhat consistent(in the loosest sense) in that whenever she's on the verge of defeat she closes and then opens her eyes somehow giving her more power and its an utterly shit way of writing.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115805

>>2115801

Writing rules are not necessarily a measure of quality. The issue is down to two things:

>How severe is the inconsistency

>Does it enhance or takes away from the story despite regardless inconsistent.

My example of the Zombies in Return of the Living Dead is to highlight how an inconsistency in pre-established rules is not necessarily a deal breaker (in the film they thought that the rules in the original Night of the Living Dead movie still applied in the "real" world) but that depends on how the story's told and what that consistency means to the story.

Sure, it could be shitty. It could be good. It depends how you use it because writing isn't clear cut at all. That's the problem with trying to measure it objectively that even things like inconsistency does not necessarily mean bad.

Rules are meant to be broken and followed, it can keep a story together or encourage creativity. It's not as simple as we believe it to be.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115810

>>2115764

Isn't E;Rs persona an art nerd weeb guy who makes in-depth funny/edgy videos? I really wouldn't expect him to be the center of attention in an open forum discussion.

>>2115641

>Is he right in that films/art is objective?

About 90% of a film is objective. Remember it's an industrial product. If you want to see what fairly subjective art looks like then go listen to some bandcamp stuff or look at paintings.

>measurable criteria

How well does X achieve Y objective. That's measurable criteria for criticism and it's objective because you don't put a value judgement on whether you like Y objective. The only real pitfall is if you don't pick up on the objective.

In comparison subjective criticism is those headlines like "movie sucks because there are not enough niggers and lesbians in it".

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115824

>>2115739

>And what a coincidence that it just so happens that movies that annoyed the centre-right (Captain Marvel, The Last Jedi) are all poorly written and movies that appealed to them (Joker, Alita etc.) are masterpieces with no faults.

It's not a coincidence when you realize most blockbusters in the last few years are both poorly written and pandering to leftists

>>2115741

>I would like to see someone putting in that much effort into analyzing shot composition and action scenes and whatnot

Me too, YMS mentions that kind of thing but it doesn't go beyond calling it good or ban in general.

>>2115805

Your example is retarded because that rule was a rule of the genre not the film, if anything it's a trope, but breaking tropes and rules are vastly different.

>>2115746

>it doesn't necessarily mean something is objectively bad

Bad is a shorthand way of saying it fails at what it tried to do, liking it or not is the subjective part.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115838

>>2115824

>Your example is retarded because that rule was a rule of the genre not the film, if anything it's a trope, but breaking tropes and rules are vastly different.

No because my example was supposed to be a semi-sequel to the original Night of the Living Dead film where the events of that original film happened but where altered but the characters don't realize that until the outbreak actually happens. So they and the audience assumed that the rules still applied, only to have it shatter. That's why I picked it. Though granted, I could pick a better example so I'll come back to this eventually.

>Bad is a shorthand way of saying it fails at what it tried to do, liking it or not is the subjective part.

Problem there is with art or writing, there's no real criteria to which you can measure it. That's the trickery part.

>>2115810

Says "How well does X achieve Y objective." The key word there is "how well" because the standards of which something is done well in art is not measurable because there's no real criteria that isn't partly or entirely subjective and it's not consistent for other people because their tastes are almost always going to be universally different. You can do that to other professions, for example is a football player objectively bad? We can measure that by how many goals he gets, how well he performs, and etc because there are actual well-defined rules to the sport that you can analyse. Art is different, however, especially films where there's so much going on of varying importance.

That said, I do think there are ways to craft art that could be objective like does it follow the rules of a typical narrative structure? What is the intent and how well was the execution? Film theory is the best and most powerful tool to actually analyze film that way but film criticism is almost always going to be subjective.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115840

>>2115801

>>2115824

>In Knives Out an inconsistentcy is in introducing you to the maid vomiting whenever she tells a lie, involuntarily, violently and immediately and then the rest of the movie that rule is broken by having her somehow hold it until convenient or have her spit out a tiny bit of vomit in a cup.

Except if she just vomited everywhere in the third act then there's no longer any tension or pay-off and the scene would end completely differently.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115841

>>2115840

Sure, but then maybe don't introduce such a fucking retarded rule for a murder mystery in the first place or do not introduce it in a way where even the thought of lying makes her vomit her guts out right there but only in that scene and in no other, especially when she's theoretically under more stress when she's being questioned in a car, after having had a police chase.

And the scene was pretty fucking stupid too. If the Chris Evans character was apparently smart enough to plan all of this out then he should have also been smart enough to just tell her that all the detective's talk was bullshit and once he's cleared he'll fuck her life up, not go "muwahaha I did it all but apparently attempted murder is not an actual crime in this universe so I'm getting away with it nya nya".

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115846

>>2115838

Thinking art is subjective is subjective. Leave art criticism to us objective fags eh. You can spend your time sticking your head up your ass.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115848

>>2115841

>If the Chris Evans character was apparently smart enough to plan all of this out then he should have also been smart enough to just tell her that all the detective's talk was bullshit and once he's cleared he'll fuck her life up, not go "muwahaha I did it all but apparently attempted murder is not an actual crime in this universe so I'm getting away with it nya nya".

But that would be a completely different ending to the film and it wouldn't even be consistent with Ransom's character throughout the film (a cocky asshole). You not liking how a plot unfolds doesn't mean the film is poorly written.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115851

>>2115848

>But that would be a completely different ending to the film

Anon this isn't an excuse, it could still have the same ending but it could have been done smarter. It's like if for example

<In The Last Jedi's intro, why did the dreadnought target the planet and not the ships ferrying people off the planet?

<In The Predator, why is it that in the final fight the /fit/predator that could kill another smaller predator in one punch and fucked everything up in its path decides to ineffectively pick up and throw whatshisname

If the answer is "there wouldn't be a movie/an ending otherwise" then that's just bullshit.

> it wouldn't even be consistent with Ransom's character throughout the film (a cocky asshole)

But this isn't the case. All you see of Ransom is a sneaky fucker who gave his family a giant middle finger during the will reading, convinced Marta that he was kind of a changed man(He still wanted his share of the inheritance after all) and orchestrated a decent plan to kill someone and implicate another. He sold out Marta the second they got caught during the car chase which shows he's willing to save his ass at any cost. So now you have Leblanc making these seemingly wild conjectures where even the police liaisons aren't really buying the story and see it as far-fetched shit, and he decides to do a bond villain "I did it what are you going to do about it" like he's going to get off scot free DESPITE ADMITTING TO PLOTTING AND ACTING TO MURDER HIS GRANDFATHER AS WELL AS ATTEMPTING TO(in his mind since he isn't aware the housekeeper is dead) MURDER THE HOUSEKEEPER.

Oh which reminds me, when did Ransom have the time to go meet with the housekeeper, drug her with morphine(which the movie previously establishes you've got 10 minutes to get the counteracting drug before you're dead), go home, meet with Marta, then drive to the forensics lab and then go in a car chase? When was the meeting with the housekeep? This is genuine question because it opens up two conflicting issues.

>Option a: The meeting was during the time specified in the email which was 9:50 or 10 or something, the dialog at the end the detective says Ransom forwards or sends the email to Marta under a fake account. In that case, when did Ransom have the time to do the exchange?

>The time specified was much earlier and Ransom's fake mail had a later time to give him time to do the stuff. Meaning the housekeep was overdosed for more than 10 minutes and still was conscious when the antidote was administered(Correct me if I'm wrong but the movie states earlier that your mental and physical capabilities would be fucked by the 5th or 7th minute)

>not liking how a plot unfolds

It's not that, it's that the movie seemingly by the third act decided Marta was its waifu and it had to do everything possible to justify her actions and sanctify her and have her be the victor in the end.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115852

>>2115846

>It's subjective because I said so

Yeah nah, mate. That doesn't work like that. Leave art criticism to fags who know how art works. You can spend your time sticking your head up your arse.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115869

>>2115852

>it's not subjective

wew matey, how is your intro to art class? pretty shit eh? how's year 12? get to a bachelors level then talk faggot

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115883

>>2115763

This is the most retarded thing I've ever read.

A movie only has to be consistent to its universe, not to some meta definition of what it's part of.

No one ever claimed that you have to be consistent to the genre you're part of.

Plus, a genre is used for classification or movies, not to tell you how to write them (even if it helps).

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115897

>>2115869

Education is subjective since like uhm people will have different brains and such and like.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115908

>>2115869

The only thing objective about what you said was that you're a faggot, mate. Stop trying to derail the thread.

>Appealing to authority on an anonymous imageboard

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115909

>>2115897

I guess a Bachelor's in Gender Studies is objectively good education?

What a false equivalency.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115910

>>2115909

A retard like me would say Gender Studies is objectively bad. But obviously I'm wrong. Education like everything else is just subjective since something something jewish intellectuals.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115911

>>2115910

No one's brought up Jewish intellectuals, something doesn't need to be subjective or objective because of "this reason", "that reason". To conflation being subjective to being Jewish is a retarded disingenuous tactic to associate the two with no real connection. Subjective and objective are just words with meanings to them, but I guess I can't expect a retard like you to tell otherwise.

Either way education is a different story from art since that is a measurable by just asking if they got their diploma and if they did then objectively they passed their courses.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115912

>>2115869

>Wow, do you even have a bachelor's degree?

>Types like a nigger.

Do you?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115913

>>2115911

>subjective and objective are just words with meanings to them

Go ahead then. Educate me.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115914

>>2115913

Objective means "not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased"

Subjective means "existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective)"

That's all. There's nothing deeper besides one is based on trying to be unbiased and factual the other on personal feelings and interpretation.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115919

>>2115914

I'm not surprised your definitions are ass.

>unbiased, prejudice

These are subjective opinions you realize? The idea that objective statements must be true is wrong, it's a fundamental misunderstanding of the word and the concept.

Objective is of or pertaining to an object. That's it.

"Joker is the name of the movie" "Joker is a good movie" "Joker has a shitty score" objective

"Joker is my favorite movie" "I was upset by Joker" "Joker made me happy" subjective

I have a feeling this is going to result in some reeeeing.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115920

>>2115919

>I'm not surprised your definitions are ass.

Those definitions came from the fucking dictionary, retard:

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/objective

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/subjective

The absolute state of Maulerniggers.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115921

>>2115920

>dictionary.com

brainlet

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115922

File: 071d87154e43b01⋯.jpg (55.16 KB, 625x560, 125:112, da2de6be3e89f759be28048f01….jpg)

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115925

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115926

>>2115922

>intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book.

>being the object of perception or thought; belonging to the object of thought rather than to the thinking subject (opposed to subjective).

lmao can't even read his own links what a joke

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115930

>>2115926

>Continues baiting

>Cherry picking different definitions of the same word from the same source

Knew you were going to do that, nigger. Stop derailing the thread.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115931

>>2115919

>Joker is a good movie

>Joker has a shitty score

These aren't objective statements. Objective statements would be something like: "Joker was nominated for 11 Oscars" or "Joker was scored by Hildur Guðnadóttir". Something that no reasonable person would contest regardless of feelings or opinions. You can pull wordplay bullshit if you want but it doesn't change the fact that the reddit furries are wrong.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115933

>>2115931

>>2115930

>muh definitions

>b-but not t-those

>your derailing the thread, w-wordplay reeee

who could see this coming

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115935

File: 8fe3032cc949cfd⋯.png (64.4 KB, 847x538, 847:538, img_34i3234.png)

>>2115933

I could, I knew you as a faggot would go "Nope, let me pick a definition convenient for me."

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115940

>>2115935

>it's your fault the words say what they say

schizochan strikes again

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115941

>>2115931

What would you say is the dividing line between objective and subjective?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115949

>>2115941

Objective = Incontrovertible Fact

"Parasite is directed by Bong Joon Ho"

"The Irishman is 210 minutes long"

"Randy Newman wrote the music for Marriage Story"

Subjective = Opinion / Feeling

"Bong Joon Ho's direction of Parasite was great"

"The Irishman is too long of a film"

"The music in Marriage Story made me feel sad"

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115961

File: 0f08ca85112e200⋯.png (467.36 KB, 900x517, 900:517, liquid autism.png)

I can't believe YouTube essayists actually have fanboys on this site lmao

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115966

>>2115961

He's one of the few who actually talks about television and movies despite barely knowing anything about it, and that already surpasses /tv/ by far, no wonder there are lurkers who think he is film theory jesus

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115967

>>2115966

Talking about capeshit for 16 hours straight makes you worse than /tv/ ever could be.

That's worse than brapposting.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115977

Film is not objective

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115978

>>2115961

Well, for someone as retarded as hbomberguy you do need ten hours to prove him wrong

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115991

>facts hurt my feelings

>therefore they don't exist

leftypol all up in here

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115992

>>2115949

>"The Irishman is 210 minutes long"

Factually wrong.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115994

>>2115992

He's only off by a minute.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115997

>>2115994

No he's not. You are factually wrong too.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2115998

>>2115978

I understand that his Dark Souls 2 video was retarded casual bullshit but holy fuck, it does not need an Atlas Shrugged-level of analysis

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116002

>>2115998

Well, give me a shorter video that explains why Hbomberguys view on DS2 is shit

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116004

>>2116002

I can explain it pretty quickly. He likes how it's easier and more forgiving, missing the entire point of Fromsoft's games.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116015

>>2115764

From what I got in this video, is that mauler was more interacting with his group and their own subject rather than interacting with the guest, beside the point of Korra in a small section of the video.

I'm wondering if e;r didn't accept to come thinking it would mainly be about korra or something, and not what mauler's group' subject is. So you have two different taste with no overlap, which give that e;r wasn't interested in their stuff.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116023

File: d7cc4f2b3c14cc9⋯.png (52.03 KB, 278x609, 278:609, Screenshot-2020-01-15.png)

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116024

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116041

>>2116023

>muh approximations, muh 3rd hand information

>can't even get simple facts right

wew

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116053

>>2116015

Maybe it's because E;R actually knows something about writing and film but he's friends with Mauler and feels he can't just say no to him about appearing in his shitty streams. He never talks and its like he's not even there.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116287

>>2115641

Mauler has always stated certain aspects of film can be objectively looked at. How well something is executed, how consistent a story is, how easy it is for the audience to see what is happening are a few examples. Film and Art aren't either objective or subjective. They are both. A line is a line, a circle is a circle. Whether certain lines or circles make your peepee hard is all subjective. Whether the artist intended to make your peepee hard is also subjective. But whether the artist managed to make a fucking straight line isn't up for debate. It's either straight or not.

Same concept applies to film, albeit differently. How does a certain shot evoke a feeling? Is it supposed to evoke a feeling? This is subjective. But whether this shot has been executed properly according to the current standards can be objectively looked at. Standards can change, but at the moment of judging you are looking at something with one single standard. Measurable criteria are elements that you can measure for that standard.

For example you decide that Star Wars The Last Jedi should be viewed as a comedy (as defined in the year 2019). You tally up the aspects that make it a comedy, ineffective villains, nonsensical happenings, serious moments punctuated by heavy irony, and then you compare it to the markers of comedy. Then you decide if the film objectively is a comedy film or not. If it turns out that it matches the criteria of comedy more than anything else, then you can objectively call it a comedy. Now whether that comedy film can make you laugh is entirely subjective. Certain elements of humor can be objective, such as irony. This of course devolves into philosophical musings on what the fuck humor is, so let's not go there. Either way, there are some objective standards to be looked at in any art/film, and Mauler's philosophy is that matching as close to objectivity as possible for your critiques makes for a more well established/backed up critique. Because anyone can just say "I don't like it because muh feelings".

>>2115714

Same argument could be made about movies. Why bother watching movies when they don't matter? It's not going to affect real life, you could be learning a new language instead of wasting time on movies. He does it for the same reason. For fun. And because he got tired of seeing shit like Patrick Williams and wanted to make his own content.

>>2115735

Give a listen to the first few minutes of one of his star wars (forget which one) critiques, not the unbridled series, to get an understanding of how he views films.

>>2115748

>In his words, that's subjective and aesthetic that doesn't need to be analyzed

He has stated he doesn't know much about cinematography, and that these are not necessary to the underlying story. Execution of the story is a different matter from the story itself. You can argue with him that many aspects of a film were very well done in terms of cinematography, but you can't use that to argue that the story was good. Similarly you can't argue that just because it has good cinematography that you can ignore when it starts to contradict the story. Of course you can see him go after the low hanging fruit like Star Wars defenders as proof that he doesn't have formal education necessary to tackle the more artsy films, but you shouldn't be a gaslighting faggot.

>All he does is check to see if the rule are consistent with itself but never does he talk about if the script is actually tight

What do you mean if the script is actually tight? Do you mean if it fulfills the necessary pacing and story elements? Even if this is the case, he has never stated himself as the be all and end all of critique. He has only offered his perspective.

I feel its the fact that so many other critics have lent legitimacy to his arguments is the cause of this phenomenon. He's just a guy who watches movies and talks about it, and somehow struck gold by going against the mainstream narrative. You can see his personal bias show up every so often (capeshit), but he attempts to explain it to whoever questions him. The problem is his yes-men surrounding him. And the yes-men won't change because he's been blocked off from differing opinions, because most of those differing opinions tend to be on the SJW side.

>>2116053

E;R comes on because his fans overlap with Maulers, and they've been clamoring for E;R for many streams. E;R tends to not talk because he does a lot better with scripted videos rather than live podcasting. Internet Historian has also stated this reason for not going on EFAP, and the lack of E;R in recent streams kinds of hints at this too.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116288

>>2115961

>>2115967

>longman bad

>>2115966

So then go out there and attack his arguments. We need someone to take this faggot welshman down, why not you? Or is this too beneath you? He's not film theory jesus. He's just a guy who says reasonable things that goes against the bullshit mainstream ones spout.

>>2115719

>He's genuinely not a movie critic, because he's only ever talks about half of what constitutes a movie.

Agreed. You shouldn't discount his arguments about the story, but yes he isn't able to critique film making.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116315

>>2116287

>He has stated he doesn't know much about cinematography, and that these are not necessary to the underlying story. Execution of the story is a different matter from the story itself.

Bullshit, film is a visual fucking medium. Cinematography can absolutely affect a film in a good or bad way. If I made a horror film and shot it flat, it's going to fucking destroy the atmosphere and tension to the point where it doesn't fucking matter how well the script is, it fails at generating that dread because the execution of the script can be better than what's actually written in it.

The notion that they're not important for a story is fucking insulting. There's shot composition and mise-en-scene, which is all fucking about conveying a story visually through the placement of camera, actors, props, locations and use of cinematography, and the latter is used to analyze these elements.

Star Wars for example, was a fucking mess narratively. George Lucas followed his script closely and his film was a disaster so what saved it? The editing because they cut out, rearranged and re-purposed footage to tell a better story than what was written in the fucking script.

A script is merely an element of film but film is a complex art form, like all art is. But film is special in that there's many moving parts to it. You cannot just fucking pick one of them and say "that's more important" because "story." It's not that fucking simple.

>What do you mean if the script is actually tight? Do you mean if it fulfills the necessary pacing and story elements?

It means if everything in the film is in the service of the story and wastes no time. It doesn't have anything to do with pacing or story elements but how the film progress from point A to B. The Terminator is a good example, the entire film is centered around a chase so every story beat has to be in service to this plot. There's not time wasted. A film with a tight script could be fast or slow paced, that doesn't matter.

> Even if this is the case, he has never stated himself as the be all and end all of critique. He has only offered his perspective.

This is coming from the guy who claims art is "objective." He may say that his views aren't "end-all-end-all" but he absolutely acts like it is, especially on EFAP. That completely contradicts his "objectivity" crusade because if his critiques weren't end all considering that they're "factual." I originally wrote a post that explained this better but like a mongoloid retard I accidentally deleted it and I can't remember all my fucking points but I do remember this:

Mauler is an asshole who says he doesn't believe his critiques are end all yet constantly mocks and targets people for giving their opinions. Granted, I fucking hate video essayists and reviewers but Mauler genuinely gives off the impression that he targets them for not liking or liking something he likes or hates. I know that sounds like pussy shit but if I remember what I originally wrote verbatim, I'll update it. But Mauler knows nothing about film past the surface level shit anyone can pick apart. That wouldn't be a problem if he didn't go through the lengths he does to mock and discredit people's opinions and views. If he has to go through the trouble of making an 11 hour video mocking people's thoughts on films then I expect him to know about fucking films. He doesn't even know film theory or narrative structure.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116316

>>2116287

>>2116315

Oh yeah, I remember another part of it.

>You can see his personal bias show up every so often (capeshit), but he attempts to explain it to whoever questions him. The problem is his yes-men surrounding him. And the yes-men won't change because he's been blocked off from differing opinions, because most of those differing opinions tend to be on the SJW side.

He's always been like that ever since he talked about video games. His attitude on video essayists and objectivity has remained the same. He switched to films after his Last Jedi video did great but he doesn't know anything about the medium and that's a problem when you claim objectivity while ignoring the other aspects of film besides from writing and even then, again, he only talks about the surface level details of stories. Ignoring that film is a visual medium that uses not just the "written medium" but sound as well to convey a story. Film isn't one thing, it's many things.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116327

>>2116315

>The notion that they're not important for a story is fucking insulting.

>Not necessary = Not important

Never said not important. ==May== not be necessary.

>Cinematography can absolutely affect a film in a good or bad way.

I agree. Mauler agrees. End of discussion.

>If I made a horror film and shot it flat, it's going to fucking destroy the atmosphere and tension to the point where it doesn't fucking matter how well the script is, it fails at generating that dread because the execution of the script can be better than what's actually written in it.

Agreed, it will fail because a horror film is supposed to evoke some form of dread in the audience. This requires stakes and logical progression for how the horror operates. Consequently you can't have a horror film that works if it's all dread inducing cinematography without consistency. The key here is you specified horror film, which has specific criteria to fulfill. The execution of the story is still separate from the story itself.

>Star Wars for example, was a fucking mess narratively.

Your point on the Lucas Star Wars is interesting. I hope you expand upon it to explain why exactly Lucas's original script was horrible narrative and how the editing helped to improve it a lot. Having this discussion would be a lot more useful than this.

>You cannot just fucking pick one of them and say "that's more important" because "story."

You can also argue that all moving parts are to tell the story. If your story to begin with is shit, then no matter how well crafted the film is the end product is still flawed. Take The Last Jedi for example. Very lovely film, but some of the story elements really make you wonder. Thus as a whole the film feels empty, the visuals amounting to a terrible mess that plays out. For the films and shows that Mauler covers, this is very apparent. Is this the only way to look at film? No. Never said so by Mauler either. Does he act like this is? Personally I don't think so. He will present his arguments on why this is a better way to look at film, and you can challenge that at any point. The problem again is that most of the people who challenge his view tend to choose a very stupid hill to die on.

>This is coming from the guy who claims art is "objective." He may say that his views aren't "end-all-end-all" but he absolutely acts like it is, especially on EFAP. That completely contradicts his "objectivity" crusade because if his critiques weren't end all considering that they're "factual.

You're steadily progressing into strawmen. He never claimed art was objective only. He just claims that to him, looking at aspects of art with as much objectivity as possible leads to better critique. He doesn't act like he's "be-all-end-all" on EFAP, that's more of the furry cast. If he does then you can discount him. If he's not wrong, then you're just going to have to suffer through his annoying smug welshness.

>Objectivity crusade

Nothing further needs to be said other than there is no crusade.

>yet constantly mocks and targets people for giving their opinions

mocking people for their opinions because those opinions are stupid? If you shout out to a crowded space "Fuck you all you're all retards", are you not liable to get lynched? Of course it's not right to go after their other aspects instead of their argument, but Mauler tends to do both. Especially if going after their other aspects results in more luls. As for targeting people? They tend to target first. Jenny is perhaps one of the few that you could argue was "targeted" by EFAP but even then it's more because of her opinions. Nails that stick up tend to get beaten down by hammers, and EFAP tends to not care if they miss the head.

>go through the trouble of making an 11 hour video mocking people's thoughts on films

This is where the confusion comes in. EFAP is unscripted livestreaming. There's literally no effort other than perhaps 30 minutes to 1 hour of preparation for the topics to cover. Everything is done live, and the length tends to show as they babble and shoot off into stupid tangents. His critique series tends to focus more on the actual craft and there is a lot of effort put in to make it as airtight as possible and entertaining. You may view it as low-brow, and I could agree, but it doesn't take away from the fact that he makes valid points. You can't counter his points by saying it's only pleb-tier analysis, you have to explain why pleb-tier analysis is wrong. Otherwise you come off as an elitist prick. His unbridled series focuses purely on funnies and is an overblown reaction. Yet even then, it's still making sure to be fact focused. If you think he mocks people in his critique/unbridled series, then it's because the person he's mocking makes it really easy (Like Patrick Willems with his "Star Wars is a movie about space wizards intended for children" as a defense for why the film can be shit).

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116328

>>2116315

>>2116316

>Film isn't one thing, it's many things

Perfectly valid. But an extreme counter to a nonexistent assertion. Even so, polishing turds. You can disagree with the concept that film is focused on bringing out the story, but I hope you can present some specific examples of what film is and whether these examples are supposed to be the norm or if they are outliers. If a film is designed to not have a coherent story and is instead attempting to evoke some reaction, then that can be accounted for by changing the criteria by which you judge it (like you do with horror).

>But Mauler knows nothing about film past the surface level shit anyone can pick apart.

>he only talks about the surface level details of stories. Ignoring that film is a visual medium that uses not just the "written medium" but sound as well to convey a story

Perfectly valid. He goes for the low hanging fruit and it shows. But here's the thing. Hypothetically, if you go up to him and explain how the musical choice in the new star wars movies enhances every detail of the story as well as enhancing the impact of its themes and back up this assertion with researched examples, he won't ignore it. He will agree assuming the evidence is sound. It will then make the film in his eyes objectively executed better, but it will still have a incoherent story. Regardless of how well versed he is in the art of film making, can you go against his assertion that the film is terrible because of the story?

Just stop watching him. Stop paying attention to people who revere him. If he turns into what he set out to destroy, then someone else will have to destroy him. Become the change you want to see, like he became the change he wanted to see. And stop attacking strawmen. By any chance does your name begin with Q?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116330

File: 3ab8cacc3ea5d73⋯.jpeg (78.91 KB, 334x308, 167:154, 3ab8cacc3ea5d736f64974652….jpeg)

>>2116287

>>2116288

>>2116327

>but you shouldn't be a gaslighting faggot

>you can't use that to argue that the story was good

>You shouldn't discount his arguments about the story

>End of discussion

>You can't counter his points by saying it's only pleb-tier analysis

>You can disagree with the concept that film is focused on bringing out the story

So glad somebody is here to tell me how I can and can't talk about films, very cool

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116333

I don't like it

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116334

It's really no surprise that Mauler's fans make bloated long-winded posts that go on way longer than they need to.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116339

>>2116315

Way to miss the fucking point retard

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116343

>>2116327

>tfw so autistic the text was too long

Fuck me.

>Never said not important. ==May== not be necessary.

But it is necessary because a film isn't just a script. There are films without a script that still function as a film because they follow a narrative structure or an outline. The script itself can or cannot be followed through different phases of production. Dialogue or scenes can be added, altered or removed rather or not it's in the script.

>I agree. Mauler agrees. End of discussion.

Then why are they not necessary? If he agrees, why doesn't he study or look more into cinematography so he can understand why it's important and comment on it?

>Consequently you can't have a horror film that works if it's all dread inducing cinematography without consistency.

Depends on what kind of horror film you're trying to make. You don't need a razor sharp "consistent" script, you need to think about what's horrifying and how to portray that horror. If you want an example, look at Psycho, the original Hitchcock film and the remake. They both share the exact same script but one is a classic, the other a shitty imitation but how could that be possible if both films are line-by-line the same script?

>The execution of the story is still separate from the story itself.

>Your point on the Lucas Star Wars is interesting. I hope you expand upon it to explain why exactly Lucas's original script was horrible narrative and how the editing helped to improve it a lot. Having this discussion would be a lot more useful than this.

Because the way George Lucas wrote the script was to push as much world building and lore down the audience's throat because he found that more important than the story, which lacked the heart and adventurous spirit of the final cut. Scenes were repurposed and rearranged so the film didn't jump all over the place. Luke was introduced the same time as the attack on the Rebel ship which ruined both the pacing and shoved Luke into the story at a point where he's not contributing to it just to give exposition. The characters in the script monologued and gave exposition which was simplified in the filming of the scene and then simplified even further in the editing of the scene.

The destruction of the Death Star is another example, in the original script it was not going anywhere near the Rebel base. It was in fact far, far away as written in the script. Meaning all the suspense and tension was gone. So they took some footage from earlier in the film. Repurposed it and added lines of dialogue to make it seem like the Death Star was heading towards the Rebel base.

>You can also argue that all moving parts are to tell the story. If your story to begin with is shit, then no matter how well crafted the film is the end product is still flawed. Take The Last Jedi for example. Very lovely film, but some of the story elements really make you wonder. Thus as a whole the film feels empty, the visuals amounting to a terrible mess that plays out.

Visual can or can't make up for a story, that's up to whoever's watching it since good cinematography is sometimes all someone needs to enjoy a film. I don't like Last Jedi and really, of course people use that example but visual is not aesthetic and you can definitely say that Last Jedi has great visuals despite the terrible script but what about a film that isn't the Last Jedi? What about films that don't rely on story but lets the visual do the talking? Some of Andrei Tarkovsky films are all about experiencing the harsh and brutal emotion of the imagery that the audience sees without too much emphasis on dialogue or traditional means of story telling. And again, a film can be told visually through shot composition and cinematography to express the emotion and weight of the story. There's a reason why film studies teaches you how to analyze this, that's as important as the writing and the audio.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116344

>>2116343

>For the films and shows that Mauler covers, this is very apparent. Is this the only way to look at film? No. Never said so by Mauler either. Does he act like this is? Personally I don't think so. He will present his arguments on why this is a better way to look at film, and you can challenge that at any point. The problem again is that most of the people who challenge his view tend to choose a very stupid hill to die on.

You're right that the people he argues with are morons but if someone had a basic understanding of film and narrative structure, Mauler would have a hard time trying to explain his points about a film script and objectivity.

But film is more than that and there's a problem when he claims objectivity. Again, he may say that's not what he's trying to do but his actions differ. The fact he spends hours and hours talking about people, bringing up objectivity is contradicting to that statement. If something is objective, it's factual, it's very rarely up to debate. He believes that it's a better way to look at film because he doesn't understand film pass just some writing or just looking at film going frame-by-frame to find plot holes and inconsistencies but yet, for someone who talks so much about writing, he doesn't really bring up stuff like the narrative structure of a film. That is how is the film constructed and why the writing is weak or strong because of that. Or film theory, which is all about the methods of story telling and writing that people making films use to direct a movie or inform their opinion on a film.

>You're steadily progressing into strawmen. He never claimed art was objective only. He just claims that to him, looking at aspects of art with as much objectivity as possible leads to better critique. He doesn't act like he's "be-all-end-all" on EFAP, that's more of the furry cast. If he does then you can discount him. If he's not wrong, then you're just going to have to suffer through his annoying smug welshness.

I would believe you if he didn't spend so long doing that. In his Star Wars Force Awakens introduction video, all he does is jerk himself off about being objective and criticizing other video essayists. Granted, the people he talked about are retarded but then in his Last Jedi video he says that YouTube "needs someone like him" to filter these people out: https://youtu.be/yFnMMzqjYGw?t=6488

I should say again that I hate video essayists but if I were to be, say, "objective" about it. He spends several hours talking about these people while pretending to know more about film than he actually does.

I used to agree that his furfag friends where the problem and not him but I slowly started to realize that he's just as guilty as them and it doesn't help the people who surround him suck his dick and reinforces the notion that he's this "savior" YouTube apparently needs.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116345

>>2116344

>Nothing further needs to be said other than there is no crusade.

EFAP's run time is 20 Days, 21 Hours, 22 Minutes, 48 Seconds. That's not counting the time he spends in The Force Awakens and some of his other videos discussing other people but while saying it's a crusade is admittedly hyperbolic, the insane length of his attempts to find and comment over people's thoughts on movies is nearly obsessive. It doesn't help either that they get off topic very easily.

>mocking people for their opinions because those opinions are stupid? If you shout out to a crowded space "Fuck you all you're all retards", are you not liable to get lynched? Of course it's not right to go after their other aspects instead of their argument, but Mauler tends to do both. Especially if going after their other aspects results in more luls. As for targeting people? They tend to target first. Jenny is perhaps one of the few that you could argue was "targeted" by EFAP but even then it's more because of her opinions. Nails that stick up tend to get beaten down by hammers, and EFAP tends to not care if they miss the head.

There's a problem in doing so because the impression stops being "oh, these guys are just countering points" to just flat out attacking people's opinions while calling it criticism. We don't call "criticism" the act of disagreeing with people's points and countering it, we call that debate. It also stops appearing to be genuine attempts to see/counter other people's points when they just mock and ridicule the people they're talking about. Not disagree with them but just mocking them in a near personal manner. I've been on imageboards for years and I've seen and been through my share of ridicule. I have no issue with it and I even partake in it. I'm okay with seeing morons get picked apart but EFAP does that all the time no matter who it is. To be fair, it's more Mauler's gay furries who do that but he does partake in it. It gets to the point where EFAP is known for being, unironically "those assholes that mock people's appearance and opinions" which is unnecessary. You can counter people's points without mocking them to the extent that they do.

>Inb4 "waaaaah fucking meanies waaaah"

If it was all about mocking people who deserve it like Quinton or Hbomberguy, I'd be fine with it but sometimes its just people being like "yeah, I think this is a good/bad thing" and them pausing it to scream "YOU FUCKING MORON DIPSHIT OBJECTIVELY IT'S NOT/IT IS!" They do it to nearly everyone they talk about.

>This is where the confusion comes in. EFAP is unscripted livestreaming. There's literally no effort other than perhaps 30 minutes to 1 hour of preparation for the topics to cover. Everything is done live, and the length tends to show as they babble and shoot off into stupid tangents. His critique series tends to focus more on the actual craft and there is a lot of effort put in to make it as airtight as possible and entertaining.

Why not just give effort? Their planning could be watching the video and discussing it. Using examples from the video to prove their point. Not going through it frame-by-frame, because inevitably they're going to fuck up and get a detail of their video wrong and get fucked for it. I recall there's a few times they mistake a word said and think it's another word. Or a point that requires a little more research. This could be avoided easily by just watching it, writing a little outline of things to discuss and then during the stream just talk about it. That's it. It doesn't need to be 11 hours long.

>You may view it as low-brow, and I could agree, but it doesn't take away from the fact that he makes valid points. You can't counter his points by saying it's only pleb-tier analysis, you have to explain why pleb-tier analysis is wrong. Otherwise you come off as an elitist prick. His unbridled series focuses purely on funnies and is an overblown reaction. Yet even then, it's still making sure to be fact focused. If you think he mocks people in his critique/unbridled series, then it's because the person he's mocking makes it really easy (Like Patrick Willems with his "Star Wars is a movie about space wizards intended for children" as a defense for why the film can be shit).

I agree actually, he does have good points on the things he talks about and about these people. It's the way he acts is the problem. It is easy to pick apart retarded video essayists, it is easy to pick apart retarded plot points in a film. But it's hard to actually explain why they're bad. To go deeper about than the surface level critiques he gives that anyone could give if they just pay attention.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116355

>>2116345

>this stream is long and tedious

Sorry anon but no shit. The number of people who stream prepared content is vanishingly small.

Mauler has got a nice voice. That's literally it. The actual content is essentially him and his critic buddies brainstorming early drafts for critique videos. Most complaints about length come from people not realising you are getting behind the scenes or maybe people think video essay fags just sit down and knock out a 2 hour video with no effort.

>To go deeper about than the surface level critiques

Nobody will watch it. There were/are video essayist people out there who did/do interesting stuff about film. Nobody watches it because the movies aren't blockbusters and you have to know something to appreciate what's being shown.

Everyone who can sequence can understand plot and these fags talk about popular movies. This is just the next stage of RLM. It's not popcorn criticism…we need a term for it tbh.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116359

https ://www.youtube. com/watch?v=8xu0erPY-Ss&t=77s

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116360

>>2116355

>Sorry anon but no shit. The number of people who stream prepared content is vanishingly small.

That's an excuse, he can definitely improve his content by taking the extra steps required to make sure his videos don't go so long that it takes half a day to see understand his point.

>Mauler has got a nice voice. That's literally it.

That's arguable, he's very monotoned and it gets grating over time which is why I can't stand watching EFAP for longer than an hour.

>The actual content is essentially him and his critic buddies brainstorming early drafts for critique videos. Most complaints about length come from people not realising you are getting behind the scenes or maybe people think video essay fags just sit down and knock out a 2 hour video with no effort.

Then why not make two separate streams? One where he discusses brainstorming ideas and ones where he discusses video essays? Why must he come in unprepared?

>Nobody will watch it. There were/are video essayist people out there who did/do interesting stuff about film. Nobody watches it because the movies aren't blockbusters and you have to know something to appreciate what's being shown.

You can apply film theory and deeper critiques to blockbusters to explain why it's good or bad. There's several video essayists that can do that, a blockbuster is still a movie. Even if it's not that popular, who fucking cares? The point is to discuss art, right? Then just discuss, someone will hear it and it could inspire someone in their writing.

>Everyone who can sequence can understand plot and these fags talk about popular movies. This is just the next stage of RLM. It's not popcorn criticism…we need a term for it tbh.

They're long-form video essays, which Plinkett does I think.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116361

>>2116360

>That's an excuse

It's an explanation.

>why not make two separate streams

Some of them still make critique videos so you could watch those.

>apply film theory and deeper critiques to blockbusters

No fuck off. Either you're really this dumb or you're a pleb who wants someone to make him feel big brained about watching kids movies. Yeah fuck why not just apply film theory and like make some trashy blockbuster suddenly intereting. lmao

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116362

This thread reeks of salty jennyniggers mad that jenny is exposed as a fucking shill and a retard. Imagine thinking informing the unwashed masses about why TLJ sucks is bad.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116364

>>2116343

>he doesn't really bring up stuff like the narrative structure of a film. That is how is the film constructed and why the writing is weak or strong because of that. Or film theory, which is all about the methods of story telling and writing that people making films use to direct a movie or inform their opinion on a film.

I agree. He would do a lot better if he could tackle movies that aren't shit and require a bit more understanding of structure.

>Lucas script

So changes made in execution to change the story, meaning they aren't separate. Understood. I guess either I'm wrong and he is too, or I've misunderstood his point.

>>2116345

>There's a problem in doing so because the impression stops being "oh, these guys are just countering points" to just flat out attacking people's opinions while calling it criticism.

>To be fair, it's more Mauler's gay furries who do that but he does partake in it.

>pausing it to scream "YOU FUCKING MORON DIPSHIT OBJECTIVELY IT'S NOT/IT IS!" They do it to nearly everyone they talk about.

I actually agree with this. EFAP tends to get derailed by the attack dogs. Mauler often tries to give the video they cover a fair shake, but more and more he's just letting Rags go at it. It's annoying trying to listen to them piece together their thoughts then suddenly go on a tangent because some fucker in chat said rhino milk. I know that Rags is one of the founders and hosts, but it doesn't excuse this decline into just attacks. I wish mauler do more with the brit crowd. They tend to be a lot more mellow.

>Why not just give effort? Their planning could be watching the video and discussing it.

Because muh streambux. That and I doubt many people would tune in to watch them plan out their thoughts. It's always more "entertaining" to see them tear into people, even if those people are undeserving. They fall into the problem of popularity, where they got popular due to their Disney Star Wars critique and shitting on it. Anything else they try to branch out into isn't as popular. GoT was an exception because it turned out like Star Wars by making a lot of fans angry and was very easy to look at the flaws.

>autism posting

I'm glad you wrote all this out. It makes your points a lot clearer. Sorry for my autism in response.

>>2116362

I wanted to see what critics of Mauler had to say. I was disappointed at first because their arguments were terrible. Then when they were expanded upon, I could see the merits. Mauler should take some of them to heart if he wants to continue to improve. You might not need a degree telling you that you can now watch movies properly, but you should at least study more of the craft and reference these aspects if you want to get serious with it. For Mauler, this should be right up his alley. I guess the real issue is he doesn't have a challenger. Most of the people who argue against him are retarded, so he never has a need to grow past just surface level.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116369

>>2116361

>It's an explanation.

It doesn't though, it does not excuse his lack of planning because no one else is doing it, why should he? He said himself that he likes content that are well-written/well-researched so why not apply that to his streams?

>No fuck off. Either you're really this dumb or you're a pleb who wants someone to make him feel big brained about watching kids movies. Yeah fuck why not just apply film theory and like make some trashy blockbuster suddenly intereting. lmao

Who says blockbusters are kids movies? Sometimes the flaws of a film are far more complex than the surface level details and using film theory could help dig into why these films have those flaws and what makes it bad story telling.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116371

>>2116364

It's alright, anon. I apologize for the spergy initial response I gave to you. As someone who posts on a barely functional Philippine basket weaving forum, I care a lot about movies. There's a lot going on in a film, it's like a watch. It has a lot of little cogs that function in unison to make a watch work. Those cogs are: writing, visuals, audio, acting, directing, editing and so on. I recommend reading some books about film theory or watching videos explaining film theory. It can help in learning things like mise-en-scene and help improve analyzation skills.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116429

>>2115641

99% of people claiming that something is subjective only do so because it doesn't fit their opinion or accomodate their feelings and can't come to term with reality.

an example of such lies: "beauty is subjective"

meanwhile "world ugliest dog" is a thing, a literal competition, and there is no doubt as to their state of ugliness.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116445

>>2116364

A problem that might come up is that the other host of his podcast is so full of himself you'd think his lungs are full of his own farts or something.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116537

>>2116445

You mean Rags? Whatever happened to that other gay furry he had on there?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116569

>>2116537

From what I understand he got anxiety or some shit over some real life issues, or maybe it the internet and twitter so he took a hiatus and nuked his videos.

This was a few months or a year ago. He then came back, made a decent video on the Watchmen TV show(this is when I first even heard of him), made another video on whatever, then apparently had another round of PTSD and made a "goodbye I'm leaving the internet for good" video.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116659

>>2116369

>Who says blockbusters are kids movies?

Everyone that isn't a man/womanchild.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116670

>>2116659

But a blockbuster is just a film that's successful. It doesn't need to be fantasy genre shit.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116744

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>Gahoole mention

>Channel Awesome mentions

>MovieBlob mentions

>JENNAY mentions

Was this the greatest stream of all time?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116748

>>2116744

>fathole

hummm.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116781

Does anyone know who else is in the Anti Mauler Review Crew? I know it's Quinton, Ralph, Lindsay, Jennay but no idea who else

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116786

File: 339609d5c70eebc⋯.jpg (127.33 KB, 738x908, 369:454, blockbusters.jpg)

>>2116670

>doesn't need

Yeah right. Only if you adjust for inflation and go back to pre-70s do you get movies for adults being blockbusters. Face it anon you watch childrens movies like all the other baby brains.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116789

File: 98b1ef509ec6904⋯.jpg (93.33 KB, 900x400, 9:4, lt.jpg)

>>2116781

Someone send this to Mauler cause I dunno how

Can you guess who they are

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116790

>>2116744

>>Gahoole mention

The Snyder movie.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116910

What's the spicscord? I literally can't find this shit. Is it Patreon only?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116940

File: cceb908abdac120⋯.jpg (1.47 MB, 961x1482, 961:1482, Birth_of_a_Nation_theatric….jpg)

>>2116786

Unironically brainlet thinking, pic related grossed $1.8 billion dollars when adjusted for inflation making it a blockbuster.

Your move, baitnigger.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116961

>>2116940

> grossed $1.8 billion dollars

How on earth could the public opinion change so drastically in the span of 2-3 decades?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2116966

>>2116961

>How could public opinion so drastically shift in 2-3 decades, that people were no longer receptive to a message of virile self-realization for their people

Shitposting answer: (((how indeed)))!

Real answer: not downplaying the efforts entryists and subversives, liberal and progressivist rhetoric has been part of American politics since it's founding, though of course the exact scope of what this enlightenment philosophy would progress to certainly wasn't anticipated by the founders. The logical advance of this inborn taint of enlightenment philosophy, along with the post-war era of unprecedented material plenty and security naturally produced a decadent and maladjusted people, alienated from their traditions and religious virtues, which could no longer identify with the confidence and virile will to shape the world of their forebears, or even just to assert their right to exist in the face of foreign aggression.

Once people are forced to reckon with a less comfortable and risk free existence then this decadence will fade, and the film will resonate in the same way again.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2117131

>>2116940

>muh ancestor posting

Yeah you're the big brained nigger alright.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2117189

>>2117131

That's nice, mate. Too bad you can never answer the question without trying to autistically bait anons into derailing the thread.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2117228

People associating with furries aren't any better than furries themselves.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2117607

>>2117228

I may be wrong but I'm pretty sure one of the furries he hung around was a pedo.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2117608

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2117625

>>2117607

That's an oxymoron. All furries are pedos like how all male feminist are cucks or sexual abusers.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2117749

MauLer is a king

Rags too, He is not a furry it's just an avatar

Wolf is not a pedophile he just lost a loved one

PROVE ME WRONG

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2117774

>>2117749

It's hard not be called a furry or be convinced if you have an entire folder of images and gifs you use for a persona(I assume they're comissioned too because I doubt he's an artist).

Mauler's alright though. He at least in the podcast tries to be as fair as possible and even if they completely shit on a guy's video he still somewhat maintains a level of cordiality should the creator jump in to defend himself. I could swear that first hour of his Force Awakens video reeked of asshurt against hhbomberguy and whomever else he mentions since it comes off as a "Hey guys I had online drama with X and Y and this is my defense case".

On an unrelated note what the fuck is up with animated reviewers? It's like most of them barely use whatever the stand-in for themselves in a creative or funny way, just have the thing move eyes or hands.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2117940

File: 3fd792ba2648a70⋯.png (1.26 MB, 1057x1200, 1057:1200, 03981a8df04fab30e5adc804a9….png)

>>2117749

>Rags is not a furry

"Objectively" wrong, he commissioned porn of his avatar and has a furaffinity account.

https://www.furaffinity.net/user/-rags/

>Wolf is not a pedophile he just lost a love one

Was that Wolf? If that's true then I'd say there is probably more to it since "pedophile" is quite a fucking leap from "losing a love one."

>MauLer is a king

Yaaaas, I too love pasty, balding cunts telling me how smart they are.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2117941

>>2117940

>not even an anthropomorphic dog

>just straight up bestiality

Rope all the furfags.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2117944

File: dd81af5a4f03592⋯.jpg (19.43 KB, 308x373, 308:373, Analogman.jpg)

>>2117940

I want to fuck that dog

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2118055

>>2117607

Wolf allegedly asked for nudes from an underage girl. I don’t now the details, it’s just something I heard

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2118059

>>2118055

hmmmmmmmm

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2118345

>>2118055

that type of behavior seems to be a pattern among ecelebs

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2118370

>>2117940

What the fuck is wrong with e-celebs

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2118405

>>2118370

>be guy who hit a dead end in life

>start making love or hate letters to movies, books or vidya you enjoy or dislike

>get popular of it

>make a living off of it through e-begging sites like patreon or youtube superchats or whathaveyou

>get an ego because people are asking for your opinions and are listening to you

>get an even bigger ego because you think your popularity vindicates you and it makes anyone who thinks anything other than you're the best a meanie bobeenie

>and you've got nothing else to do because it's your primary revenue source

I have no idea how exaggerated Wolf's story is but I can at least give him credit for realizing how being an e-celeb was cancer and this is from someone who keeps his and mauler's stuff around as entertaining background noise when doing tedious shit.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2118484

File: 9e5e04136935729⋯.jpg (5.2 KB, 203x248, 203:248, images.jpg)

>>2118055

So we're now believing any claims made by sjws looking to discredit people they dislike?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2118486

File: 87fd5029d4607bd⋯.jpg (130.11 KB, 647x659, 647:659, 87f.jpg)

His streams are objectively too long

<longman bad!

Yes

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2118488

>>2118486

you dont wanna listen to someone for 11 hrs be boring as shit well buddy your just objectively a loser

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2118506

File: 54c347e19e39fe1⋯.jpeg (5.04 KB, 256x197, 256:197, easy.jpeg)

>Haha guys look at his fucking face

>Women Bad

>I'm a furry!

>Objectively subjective

>I'm gonna suck your dick if you don't stop talking!

>Quinton (A film student), Jenny (A script doctor), Ralph (A director) don't know better than us, an Autist, a Furry and fucking Jay

You people like this? Yikes.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2118507

>>2115949

you're objectively wrong

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2118521

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

Daily reminder that Mauler's furfaggot friend made embed related.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2118639

>>2118521

Jesus Christ. Which one?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2118687

>>2117774

It's lazy, easy editing. They're unbearable faggots.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2118696

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

 No.2118713

>>2118696

It really would not surprise me, although I still have to make sure. do you have proof?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.



[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Post a Reply]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir ]