Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 44 (click to see context) from:
* Bartzv: While ''Heavens To Metroid'' isn't what made me turn away from him as a fan, it perfectly illustrates how deficient he is at arguing for a dissenting viewpoint. In order to justify his dissenting views he will: 1. Resort to using straw man arguments that slander the other side. 2. Provide counterarguments that don't actually address the core of the other side's arguments. 3. Display some blatant hypocrisy in the process. In Heavens to Metroid he argues that Other M's detractors are just pissed off because Samus is taking orders from a man and because what the game revealed about Samus' personality negated with what fans assumed she was like this whole time. The problem with these arguments is that they don't address the actual issue many people have with the game's portrayal of Samus as a character, namely that the way Samus was written makes her look weak and submissive with very little agency in the events of the story. Then in his revisited video he argues that the game tried to use an old school game narrative mechanic in the weapon authorization and that didn't mesh well with the modern storytelling techniques the game also used and that resulted in stuff that's being interpreted as UnfortunateImplications. Not only does this argument sound like someone using mental gymnastics to justify liking something many see as awful, but once again it doesn't address the actual criticisms of how Samus was written as a character. He just blames it entirely on the authorization mechanic, writes off the UnfortunateImplications as just being in people's heads, and then accuses anyone accusing Sakamoto of sexism (a reasonable conclusion considering Sakamoto was completely in charge of the story) of being racist towards Japanese society as a whole. That last one in particular is hypocritical for two reasons: 1. He's unfairly painting his opponents with the same broad strokes he's claims his opponents are unfairly using on the Japanese. 2. He's essentially saying that you can't criticize artists for troubling things in their work unless there's hard evidence that they hold those views themselves, a standard he himself has never applied to any creator he has ever criticized before or since. This kind of behavior is baffling coming from someone with a reputation for being very analytical.
to:
* Bartzv: While ''Heavens To Metroid'' isn't what made me turn away from him as a fan, it perfectly illustrates how deficient he is at arguing for a dissenting viewpoint. In order to justify his dissenting views he will: 1. Resort to using straw man arguments that slander the other side. 2. Provide counterarguments that don't actually address the core of the other side's arguments. 3. Display some blatant hypocrisy in the process. In Heavens ''Heavens to Metroid Metroid'' he argues that Other M's detractors are just pissed off because Samus is taking orders from a man and because what the game revealed about Samus' personality negated with what fans assumed she was like this whole time. The problem with these arguments is that they don't address the actual issue many people have with the game's game's portrayal of Samus as a character, namely that the way Samus was written makes her look weak and submissive with very little agency in the events of the story. Then in his revisited video he argues that the game tried to use an old school game narrative mechanic in the weapon authorization and that didn't mesh well with the modern storytelling techniques the game also used and that resulted in stuff that's being interpreted as UnfortunateImplications. Not only does this argument sound like someone using mental gymnastics to justify liking something many see as awful, but once again it doesn't address the actual criticisms of how Samus was written as a character. He just blames it entirely on the authorization mechanic, writes off the UnfortunateImplications as just being in people's heads, and then accuses anyone accusing Sakamoto of sexism (a reasonable conclusion considering Sakamoto was completely in charge of the story) of being racist towards Japanese society as a whole. That last one in particular is hypocritical for two reasons: 1. He's unfairly painting his opponents with the same broad strokes he's claims his opponents are unfairly using on the Japanese. 2. He's essentially saying that you can't criticize artists for troubling things in their work unless there's hard evidence that they hold those views themselves, a standard he himself has never applied to any creator he has ever criticized before or since. This kind of behavior is baffling coming from someone with a reputation for being very analytical.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 44 (click to see context) from:
* Bartzv: While Heavens To Metroid isn't what made me turn away from him as a fan, it perfectly illustrates how deficient he is at arguing for a dissenting viewpoint. In order to justify his dissenting views he will: 1. Resort to using straw man arguments that slander the other side. 2. Provide counterarguments that don't actually address the core of the other side's arguments. 3. Display some blatant hypocrisy in the process. In Heavens to Metroid he argues that Other M's detractors are just pissed off because Samus is taking orders from a man and because what the game revealed about Samus' personality negated with what fans assumed she was like this whole time. The problem with these arguments is that they don't address the actual issue many people have with the game's portrayal of Samus as a character, namely that the way Samus was written makes her look weak and submissive with very little agency in the events of the story. Then in his revisited video he argues that the game tried to use an old school game narrative mechanic in the weapon authorization and that didn't mesh well with the modern storytelling techniques the game also used and that resulted in stuff that's being interpreted as UnfortunateImplications. Not only does this argument sound like someone using mental gymnastics to justify liking something many see as awful, but once again it doesn't address the actual criticisms of how Samus was written as a character. He just blames it entirely on the authorization mechanic, writes off the UnfortunateImplications as just being in people's heads, and then accuses anyone accusing Sakamoto of sexism (a reasonable conclusion considering Sakamoto was completely in charge of the story) of being racist towards Japanese society as a whole. That last one in particular is hypocritical for two reasons: 1. He's unfairly painting his opponents with the same broad strokes he's claims his opponents are unfairly using on the Japanese. 2. He's essentially saying that you can't criticize artists for troubling things in their work unless there's hard evidence that they hold those views themselves, a standard he himself has never applied to any creator he has ever criticized before or since. This kind of behavior is baffling coming from someone with a reputation for being very analytical.
to:
* Bartzv: While Heavens ''Heavens To Metroid Metroid'' isn't what made me turn away from him as a fan, it perfectly illustrates how deficient he is at arguing for a dissenting viewpoint. In order to justify his dissenting views he will: 1. Resort to using straw man arguments that slander the other side. 2. Provide counterarguments that don't actually address the core of the other side's arguments. 3. Display some blatant hypocrisy in the process. In Heavens to Metroid he argues that Other M's detractors are just pissed off because Samus is taking orders from a man and because what the game revealed about Samus' personality negated with what fans assumed she was like this whole time. The problem with these arguments is that they don't address the actual issue many people have with the game's game's portrayal of Samus as a character, namely that the way Samus was written makes her look weak and submissive with very little agency in the events of the story. Then in his revisited video he argues that the game tried to use an old school game narrative mechanic in the weapon authorization and that didn't mesh well with the modern storytelling techniques the game also used and that resulted in stuff that's being interpreted as UnfortunateImplications. Not only does this argument sound like someone using mental gymnastics to justify liking something many see as awful, but once again it doesn't address the actual criticisms of how Samus was written as a character. He just blames it entirely on the authorization mechanic, writes off the UnfortunateImplications as just being in people's heads, and then accuses anyone accusing Sakamoto of sexism (a reasonable conclusion considering Sakamoto was completely in charge of the story) of being racist towards Japanese society as a whole. That last one in particular is hypocritical for two reasons: 1. He's unfairly painting his opponents with the same broad strokes he's claims his opponents are unfairly using on the Japanese. 2. He's essentially saying that you can't criticize artists for troubling things in their work unless there's hard evidence that they hold those views themselves, a standard he himself has never applied to any creator he has ever criticized before or since. This kind of behavior is baffling coming from someone with a reputation for being very analytical.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 43 (click to see context) from:
* ImpudentInfidel: In his Really That Good video about Titanic, he goes on a ten minute rant about how the backlash against the movie was purely motivated by sexism and dismissing every possible criticism of it as so invalid that the people citing them must be lying one by one. Stilted acting is allowed in this genre and cannot be criticized according to him, just to give one example. He then throws in one line at the end that he's not calling you, the hypothetical viewer who doesn't like the film, sexist. It's a blatant "I'm not racist but..." attempt to avoid responsibility for his words. Just to make it worse he's explicitly projecting the reasons school-age Bob didn't like the movie on to everybody else and sees no problem with this. The whole thing comes out of nowhere, runs on circular logic, and is offensive as hell. Even if you agree with the broad strokes of his point (that at least part of the movie's bad reputation was resentment at the success of a female-targeted genre movie) it's a serious DontShootTheMessage moment.
to:
* ImpudentInfidel: In his Really That Good video about Titanic, he goes on a ten minute rant about how the backlash against the movie was purely motivated by sexism and dismissing every possible criticism of it as so invalid that the people citing them must be lying one by one. Stilted acting is allowed in this genre and cannot be criticized according to him, just to give one example. He then throws in one line at the end that he's not calling you, the hypothetical viewer who doesn't like the film, sexist. It's a blatant "I'm not racist but..." attempt to avoid responsibility for his words. Just to make it worse he's explicitly projecting the reasons school-age Bob didn't like the movie on to everybody else and sees no problem with this. The whole thing comes out of nowhere, runs on circular logic, and is offensive as hell. Even if you agree with the broad strokes of his point (that at least part of the movie's bad reputation was resentment at the success of a female-targeted genre movie) it's a serious DontShootTheMessage moment.moment.
* Bartzv: While Heavens To Metroid isn't what made me turn away from him as a fan, it perfectly illustrates how deficient he is at arguing for a dissenting viewpoint. In order to justify his dissenting views he will: 1. Resort to using straw man arguments that slander the other side. 2. Provide counterarguments that don't actually address the core of the other side's arguments. 3. Display some blatant hypocrisy in the process. In Heavens to Metroid he argues that Other M's detractors are just pissed off because Samus is taking orders from a man and because what the game revealed about Samus' personality negated with what fans assumed she was like this whole time. The problem with these arguments is that they don't address the actual issue many people have with the game's portrayal of Samus as a character, namely that the way Samus was written makes her look weak and submissive with very little agency in the events of the story. Then in his revisited video he argues that the game tried to use an old school game narrative mechanic in the weapon authorization and that didn't mesh well with the modern storytelling techniques the game also used and that resulted in stuff that's being interpreted as UnfortunateImplications. Not only does this argument sound like someone using mental gymnastics to justify liking something many see as awful, but once again it doesn't address the actual criticisms of how Samus was written as a character. He just blames it entirely on the authorization mechanic, writes off the UnfortunateImplications as just being in people's heads, and then accuses anyone accusing Sakamoto of sexism (a reasonable conclusion considering Sakamoto was completely in charge of the story) of being racist towards Japanese society as a whole. That last one in particular is hypocritical for two reasons: 1. He's unfairly painting his opponents with the same broad strokes he's claims his opponents are unfairly using on the Japanese. 2. He's essentially saying that you can't criticize artists for troubling things in their work unless there's hard evidence that they hold those views themselves, a standard he himself has never applied to any creator he has ever criticized before or since. This kind of behavior is baffling coming from someone with a reputation for being very analytical.
* Bartzv: While Heavens To Metroid isn't what made me turn away from him as a fan, it perfectly illustrates how deficient he is at arguing for a dissenting viewpoint. In order to justify his dissenting views he will: 1. Resort to using straw man arguments that slander the other side. 2. Provide counterarguments that don't actually address the core of the other side's arguments. 3. Display some blatant hypocrisy in the process. In Heavens to Metroid he argues that Other M's detractors are just pissed off because Samus is taking orders from a man and because what the game revealed about Samus' personality negated with what fans assumed she was like this whole time. The problem with these arguments is that they don't address the actual issue many people have with the game's portrayal of Samus as a character, namely that the way Samus was written makes her look weak and submissive with very little agency in the events of the story. Then in his revisited video he argues that the game tried to use an old school game narrative mechanic in the weapon authorization and that didn't mesh well with the modern storytelling techniques the game also used and that resulted in stuff that's being interpreted as UnfortunateImplications. Not only does this argument sound like someone using mental gymnastics to justify liking something many see as awful, but once again it doesn't address the actual criticisms of how Samus was written as a character. He just blames it entirely on the authorization mechanic, writes off the UnfortunateImplications as just being in people's heads, and then accuses anyone accusing Sakamoto of sexism (a reasonable conclusion considering Sakamoto was completely in charge of the story) of being racist towards Japanese society as a whole. That last one in particular is hypocritical for two reasons: 1. He's unfairly painting his opponents with the same broad strokes he's claims his opponents are unfairly using on the Japanese. 2. He's essentially saying that you can't criticize artists for troubling things in their work unless there's hard evidence that they hold those views themselves, a standard he himself has never applied to any creator he has ever criticized before or since. This kind of behavior is baffling coming from someone with a reputation for being very analytical.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 32 (click to see context) from:
No, the worst part of the whole debacle is what it reveals about Bob's mindset; a series of ugly, elitist opinions about the way audiences should be subordinate, prostrating themselves before the Great Artist, passively absorbing the opinions and themes of that Artist without ever questioning or thinking about them, gratefully accepting themselves as his inferiors and receiving his Great Thoughts without sullying them with their own. This is, to be blunt, a fucked and archaic view of art theory that's been rightly left on the rubbish heap of intellectual thought for years, and Bob trying to re-light the pyre because in his mind ''any'' gamer-led movement must consist entirely of fratboys and harassment-minded stalkers casts him in the worst light of almost anything he's ever done.
to:
No, the worst part of the whole debacle is what it reveals about Bob's mindset; a series of ugly, elitist opinions about the way audiences should be subordinate, prostrating themselves before the Great Artist, passively absorbing the opinions and themes of that Artist without ever questioning or thinking about them, gratefully accepting themselves as his inferiors and receiving his Great Thoughts without sullying them with their own. This is, to be blunt, a fucked and archaic view of art theory that's been rightly left on the rubbish heap of intellectual thought for years, and Bob trying to re-light the pyre because in his mind ''any'' any gamer-led movement must consist entirely of fratboys and harassment-minded stalkers casts him in the worst light of almost anything he's ever done.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 43 (click to see context) from:
* ImpudentInfidel: In his Really That Good video about Titanic, he goes on a ten minute rant about how the backlash against the movie was purely motivated by sexism and dismissing every possible criticism of it as so invalid that ''the people citing them must be lying'' one by one. Stilted acting is allowed in this genre and cannot be criticized according to him, just to give one example. He then throws in one line at the end that he's not calling you, the hypothetical viewer who doesn't like the film, sexist. It's a blatant "I'm not racist but..." attempt to avoid responsibility for his words. Just to make it worse he's explicitly projecting the reasons school-age Bob didn't like the movie on to everybody else and sees no problem with this. The whole thing comes out of nowhere, runs on circular logic, and is offensive as hell. Even if you agree with the broad strokes of his point (that at least part of the movie's bad reputation was resentment at the success of a female-targeted genre movie) it's a serious DontShootTheMessage moment.
to:
* ImpudentInfidel: In his Really That Good video about Titanic, he goes on a ten minute rant about how the backlash against the movie was purely motivated by sexism and dismissing every possible criticism of it as so invalid that ''the the people citing them must be lying'' lying one by one. Stilted acting is allowed in this genre and cannot be criticized according to him, just to give one example. He then throws in one line at the end that he's not calling you, the hypothetical viewer who doesn't like the film, sexist. It's a blatant "I'm not racist but..." attempt to avoid responsibility for his words. Just to make it worse he's explicitly projecting the reasons school-age Bob didn't like the movie on to everybody else and sees no problem with this. The whole thing comes out of nowhere, runs on circular logic, and is offensive as hell. Even if you agree with the broad strokes of his point (that at least part of the movie's bad reputation was resentment at the success of a female-targeted genre movie) it's a serious DontShootTheMessage moment.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
No italics on DMOS pages.
Changed line(s) 20 (click to see context) from:
** StormKensho: Bob's "Heavens to Metroid" video, which was the video he made defending the notorious ''VideoGame/MetroidOtherM'' from its critics, had great potential to be a polarizing but fair video, going over the game's merits while also acknowledging known criticisms of the work while giving his own take on them. What did it turn out to be? Well, to paraphrase Bob's arguments: "If you don't like Metroid Other M, it's because you're a xenophobic feminazi who can't stomach Samus taking orders from a MAN!" That summation could qualify as a DMOS by itself, but the absolute and most disgusting nadir of the video, the moment where I could no longer count myself as a MovieBob fan, was when he attacked the superb MetroidPrime series[[note]]the most critically ''and'' commercially acclaimed games in the Metroid series[[/note]] because they were First-Person Shooters, which are "everything that's wrong with the gaming industry." While he's not entirely ''wrong'' in that regard, the MetroidPrime series is an example of FPS done well[[note]]with excellent and minimalistic writing and gameplay that pushed the series forward while retaining the feel of exploration and discovery that made the 2D Metroids so popular[[/note]]. And to lump those superb games in with the likes of VideoGame/CallOfDuty, VideoGame/{{Battlefield}}, and other FPS games simply because they share a genre is not only ridiculous and disingenuous, it's also ''downright prejudicial and moronic''. Bob, I get it: You're being intentionally provocative with your content as a means of drawing attention to yourself and making money while also expressing your opinion; But when you're actively slandering a series of games that are widely considered to be ''among the best games ever made'' in the Sixth Generation if not overall[[note]]Games that are among the many reasons why the Nintendo Gamecube was able to hold its own and are fondly remembered by even the most caustic of internet critics such as ''[[WebAnimation/ZeroPunctuation Yahtzee]]'', one of your own colleagues at Website/TheEscapist who was ''relentless'' in his takedown of Other M[[/note]] because the game you like doesn't stack up, you're just going to make yourself look like a complete and utter fool.
to:
** StormKensho: Bob's "Heavens to Metroid" video, which was the video he made defending the notorious ''VideoGame/MetroidOtherM'' from its critics, had great potential to be a polarizing but fair video, going over the game's merits while also acknowledging known criticisms of the work while giving his own take on them. What did it turn out to be? Well, to paraphrase Bob's arguments: "If you don't like Metroid Other M, it's because you're a xenophobic feminazi who can't stomach Samus taking orders from a MAN!" That summation could qualify as a DMOS by itself, but the absolute and most disgusting nadir of the video, the moment where I could no longer count myself as a MovieBob fan, was when he attacked the superb MetroidPrime series[[note]]the most critically ''and'' commercially acclaimed games in the Metroid series[[/note]] because they were First-Person Shooters, which are "everything that's wrong with the gaming industry." While he's not entirely ''wrong'' wrong in that regard, the MetroidPrime series is an example of FPS done well[[note]]with excellent and minimalistic writing and gameplay that pushed the series forward while retaining the feel of exploration and discovery that made the 2D Metroids so popular[[/note]]. And to lump those superb games in with the likes of VideoGame/CallOfDuty, VideoGame/{{Battlefield}}, and other FPS games simply because they share a genre is not only ridiculous and disingenuous, it's also ''downright downright prejudicial and moronic''. moronic. Bob, I get it: You're being intentionally provocative with your content as a means of drawing attention to yourself and making money while also expressing your opinion; But when you're actively slandering a series of games that are widely considered to be ''among among the best games ever made'' made in the Sixth Generation if not overall[[note]]Games that are among the many reasons why the Nintendo Gamecube was able to hold its own and are fondly remembered by even the most caustic of internet critics such as ''[[WebAnimation/ZeroPunctuation Yahtzee]]'', one of your own colleagues at Website/TheEscapist who was ''relentless'' relentless in his takedown of Other M[[/note]] because the game you like doesn't stack up, you're just going to make yourself look like a complete and utter fool.
Changed line(s) 43 (click to see context) from:
* ImpudentInfidel: In his Really That Good video about Titanic, he goes on a ten minute rant about how the backlash against the movie was purely motivated by sexism and dismissing every possible criticism of it as so invalid that ''the people citing them must be lying'' one by one. Stilted acting is allowed in this genre and cannot be criticized according to him, just to give one example. He then throws in one line at the end that he's not calling you, the hypothetical viewer who doesn't like the film, sexist. It's a blatant "I'm not racist but..." attempt to avoid responsibility for his words. Just to make it worse he's ''explicitly'' projecting the reasons school-age Bob didn't like the movie on to everybody else and sees no problem with this. The whole thing comes out of nowhere, runs on circular logic, and is offensive as hell. Even if you agree with the broad strokes of his point (that at least part of the movie's bad reputation was resentment at the success of a female-targeted genre movie) it's a serious DontShootTheMessage moment.
to:
* ImpudentInfidel: In his Really That Good video about Titanic, he goes on a ten minute rant about how the backlash against the movie was purely motivated by sexism and dismissing every possible criticism of it as so invalid that ''the people citing them must be lying'' one by one. Stilted acting is allowed in this genre and cannot be criticized according to him, just to give one example. He then throws in one line at the end that he's not calling you, the hypothetical viewer who doesn't like the film, sexist. It's a blatant "I'm not racist but..." attempt to avoid responsibility for his words. Just to make it worse he's ''explicitly'' explicitly projecting the reasons school-age Bob didn't like the movie on to everybody else and sees no problem with this. The whole thing comes out of nowhere, runs on circular logic, and is offensive as hell. Even if you agree with the broad strokes of his point (that at least part of the movie's bad reputation was resentment at the success of a female-targeted genre movie) it's a serious DontShootTheMessage moment.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 42 (click to see context) from:
* SuperLuigu: This goes back a ways, but Bob having his followers join the ScrewAttack forum to vote in the "My Vids Don't Suck" contest in 2008 or so, ensuring that ''The Game Overthinker'' was the winner, regardless of what the actual ScrewAttack g1 audience would have voted for (this was years before ''WebAnimation/DeathBattle'', when SA content was confined to the site and ''Game Trailers'').
to:
* SuperLuigu: This goes back a ways, but Bob having his followers join the ScrewAttack forum to vote in the "My Vids Don't Suck" contest in 2008 or so, ensuring that ''The Game Overthinker'' was the winner, regardless of what the actual ScrewAttack g1 audience would have voted for (this was years before ''WebAnimation/DeathBattle'', when SA content was confined to the site and ''Game Trailers'').Trailers'').
* ImpudentInfidel: In his Really That Good video about Titanic, he goes on a ten minute rant about how the backlash against the movie was purely motivated by sexism and dismissing every possible criticism of it as so invalid that ''the people citing them must be lying'' one by one. Stilted acting is allowed in this genre and cannot be criticized according to him, just to give one example. He then throws in one line at the end that he's not calling you, the hypothetical viewer who doesn't like the film, sexist. It's a blatant "I'm not racist but..." attempt to avoid responsibility for his words. Just to make it worse he's ''explicitly'' projecting the reasons school-age Bob didn't like the movie on to everybody else and sees no problem with this. The whole thing comes out of nowhere, runs on circular logic, and is offensive as hell. Even if you agree with the broad strokes of his point (that at least part of the movie's bad reputation was resentment at the success of a female-targeted genre movie) it's a serious DontShootTheMessage moment.
* ImpudentInfidel: In his Really That Good video about Titanic, he goes on a ten minute rant about how the backlash against the movie was purely motivated by sexism and dismissing every possible criticism of it as so invalid that ''the people citing them must be lying'' one by one. Stilted acting is allowed in this genre and cannot be criticized according to him, just to give one example. He then throws in one line at the end that he's not calling you, the hypothetical viewer who doesn't like the film, sexist. It's a blatant "I'm not racist but..." attempt to avoid responsibility for his words. Just to make it worse he's ''explicitly'' projecting the reasons school-age Bob didn't like the movie on to everybody else and sees no problem with this. The whole thing comes out of nowhere, runs on circular logic, and is offensive as hell. Even if you agree with the broad strokes of his point (that at least part of the movie's bad reputation was resentment at the success of a female-targeted genre movie) it's a serious DontShootTheMessage moment.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 42 (click to see context) from:
* SuperLuigu: This goes back a ways, but Bob having his followers join the ScrewAttack forum to vote in the "My Vids Don't Suck" contest in 2008 or so, ensuring that ''The Game Overthinker'' was the winner, regardless of what the actual ScrewAttack g1 audience would have voted for (this was years before ''WebAnimation/DeathBattle'' , when SA content was confined to the site and ''Game Trailers'').
to:
* SuperLuigu: This goes back a ways, but Bob having his followers join the ScrewAttack forum to vote in the "My Vids Don't Suck" contest in 2008 or so, ensuring that ''The Game Overthinker'' was the winner, regardless of what the actual ScrewAttack g1 audience would have voted for (this was years before ''WebAnimation/DeathBattle'' , ''WebAnimation/DeathBattle'', when SA content was confined to the site and ''Game Trailers'').
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 42 (click to see context) from:
* SuperLuigu: This goes back a ways, but Bob having his followers join the ScrewAttack forum to vote in the "My Vids Don't Suck" contest in 2008 or so, ensuring that ''The Game Overthinker'' was the winner, regardless of what the actual ScrewAttack g1 audience would have voted for (this was years before ''WebAnimation/DeathBattle'' , when SA content was confined to the site and GameTrailers).
to:
* SuperLuigu: This goes back a ways, but Bob having his followers join the ScrewAttack forum to vote in the "My Vids Don't Suck" contest in 2008 or so, ensuring that ''The Game Overthinker'' was the winner, regardless of what the actual ScrewAttack g1 audience would have voted for (this was years before ''WebAnimation/DeathBattle'' , when SA content was confined to the site and GameTrailers).''Game Trailers'').
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 42 (click to see context) from:
* SuperLuigu: This goes back a ways, but Bob having his followers join the ScrewAttack forum to vote in the "My Vids Don't Suck" contest in 2008 or so, ensuring that The Game Overthinker was the winner, regardless of what the actual ScrewAttack g1 audience would have voted for (this was years before WebAnimation/DeathBattle , when SA content was confined to the site and GameTrailers).
to:
* SuperLuigu: This goes back a ways, but Bob having his followers join the ScrewAttack forum to vote in the "My Vids Don't Suck" contest in 2008 or so, ensuring that The ''The Game Overthinker Overthinker'' was the winner, regardless of what the actual ScrewAttack g1 audience would have voted for (this was years before WebAnimation/DeathBattle ''WebAnimation/DeathBattle'' , when SA content was confined to the site and GameTrailers).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Punctuation and allcaps removal.
Changed line(s) 10 (click to see context) from:
* Sign your entries
to:
* Sign your entriesentries.
Changed line(s) 18 (click to see context) from:
* {{Kingbacon}}: I used to be one of the few people who had no qualms with MovieBob. I like his snarky and in depth analysis of pop culture and nerd behavior. However, I will never forgive him for saying what he did in his episode ''JUNK DRAWER: GAME ON'', where he suggested that the only difference between console, handheld, and PC video games and the interactive bile that is App gaming are buttons. As if to say Apps COULD ever, SHOULD ever, or WOULD ever replace actual video games!
to:
* {{Kingbacon}}: I used to be one of the few people who had no qualms with MovieBob. I like his snarky and in depth analysis of pop culture and nerd behavior. However, I will never forgive him for saying what he did in his episode ''JUNK DRAWER: GAME ON'', where he suggested that the only difference between console, handheld, and PC video games and the interactive bile that is App gaming are buttons. As if to say Apps COULD could ever, SHOULD should ever, or WOULD would ever replace actual video games!
Changed line(s) 23 (click to see context) from:
* GZillafan77: in ''Film/TheExpendables'' review, he states that [[FanHater only machoo idiots would like it, which he claims are the worst kind of people.]] He also makes blanketed statements on way he dosen't like it. Only that the jokes aren't funny and the action sucks. The whole thing could be stated as "Film/TheExpendables sucks and you suck for watching it instead of Scott Pilgrim!"
to:
* GZillafan77: in ''Film/TheExpendables'' review, he states that [[FanHater only machoo macho idiots would like it, which he claims are the worst kind of people.]] He also makes blanketed statements on way he dosen't like it. Only that the jokes aren't funny and the action sucks. The whole thing could be stated as "Film/TheExpendables sucks and you suck for watching it instead of Scott Pilgrim!"
Deleted line(s) 30 (click to see context) :
Changed line(s) 39 (click to see context) from:
* whunt: His Really That Good series is a great idea. Sometimes movies are so hyped new audiences have the fresh experience lost on them. However, Bob blew it right off the bat with his ''Spider-Man'' video on the topic. Not only do I disagree with what he said about the casting choices and the love story, but he also fails to provide many counterarguments and just gush over his clear bias, ignoring the movie's flaws and only nitpicking superficially what was wrong with both installments. There is no address of valid criticisms like SeinfeldIsUnfunny or how many other films were able to one-up the Spider-Man aesthetic and feel even more like comic books. I haven't even watched the rest. I think there could be a decent case as to why Spider-Man and other films were Really NOT That Good, but Bob doesn't even consider that possibility.
to:
* whunt: His Really That Good series is a great idea. Sometimes movies are so hyped new audiences have the fresh experience lost on them. However, Bob blew it right off the bat with his ''Spider-Man'' video on the topic. Not only do I disagree with what he said about the casting choices and the love story, but he also fails to provide many counterarguments and just gush over his clear bias, ignoring the movie's flaws and only nitpicking superficially what was wrong with both installments. There is no address of valid criticisms like SeinfeldIsUnfunny or how many other films were able to one-up the Spider-Man aesthetic and feel even more like comic books. I haven't even watched the rest. I think there could be a decent case as to why Spider-Man and other films were Really NOT That Good, really not that good, but Bob doesn't even consider that possibility.
Changed line(s) 42,43 (click to see context) from:
* Vexer-I still like Moviebob in spite of me strongly disagreeing with a number of his reviews(I.E. Batman Vs Superman, Man of Steel, Amazing Spider Man 1 and 2, Pixels, Expendables, Transformers 1-3, Green Lantern, etc) and opinions(I.E. his statements regarding the retake ME3 movement). But by far his worst moment is his Big Picture video on 90s comics where he pretty does nothing but whine and bitch about RobLiefeld the entire time. Look I know the guy's a controversial figure and has his flaws, but that video crossed the line from distaste for his material into outright personal hatred to a rather disturbing degree. He also insults people that actually *gasp* like Liefeld and the other Image guys, which just makes him sound like a condescending jerk, hopefully he's learned since then.
* SuperLuigu : This goes back a ways, but Bob having his followers join the ScrewAttack forum to vote in the "My Vids Don't Suck" contest in 2008 or so, ensuring that The Game Overthinker was the winner, regardless of what the actual ScrewAttack g1 audience would have voted for (this was years before WebAnimation/DeathBattle , when SA content was confined to the site and GameTrailers ).
* SuperLuigu : This goes back a ways, but Bob having his followers join the ScrewAttack forum to vote in the "My Vids Don't Suck" contest in 2008 or so, ensuring that The Game Overthinker was the winner, regardless of what the actual ScrewAttack g1 audience would have voted for (this was years before WebAnimation/DeathBattle , when SA content was confined to the site and GameTrailers ).
to:
* Vexer-I Vexer: I still like Moviebob in spite of me strongly disagreeing with a number of his reviews(I.E. Batman Vs Superman, Man of Steel, Amazing Spider Man 1 and 2, Pixels, Expendables, Transformers 1-3, Green Lantern, etc) and opinions(I.E. his statements regarding the retake ME3 movement). But by far his worst moment is his Big Picture video on 90s comics where he pretty does nothing but whine and bitch about RobLiefeld the entire time. Look I know the guy's a controversial figure and has his flaws, but that video crossed the line from distaste for his material into outright personal hatred to a rather disturbing degree. He also insults people that actually *gasp* like Liefeld and the other Image guys, which just makes him sound like a condescending jerk, hopefully he's learned since then.
*SuperLuigu : SuperLuigu: This goes back a ways, but Bob having his followers join the ScrewAttack forum to vote in the "My Vids Don't Suck" contest in 2008 or so, ensuring that The Game Overthinker was the winner, regardless of what the actual ScrewAttack g1 audience would have voted for (this was years before WebAnimation/DeathBattle , when SA content was confined to the site and GameTrailers ).GameTrailers).
*
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 43 (click to see context) from:
* SuperLuigu : This goes back a ways, but Bob having his followers join the ScrewAttack forum to vote in the "My Vids Don't Suck" contest in 2008 or so, ensuring that The Game Overthinker was the winner, regardless of what the actual ScrewAttack g1 audience would have voted for (this was years before DeathBattle , when SA content was confined to the site and GameTrailers ).
to:
* SuperLuigu : This goes back a ways, but Bob having his followers join the ScrewAttack forum to vote in the "My Vids Don't Suck" contest in 2008 or so, ensuring that The Game Overthinker was the winner, regardless of what the actual ScrewAttack g1 audience would have voted for (this was years before DeathBattle WebAnimation/DeathBattle , when SA content was confined to the site and GameTrailers ).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 31 (click to see context) from:
* CoCage: The review of ''Film/TeenageMutantNinjaTurtles2014''. Bob does the same thing he did in his reviews of ''Film/TheAmazingSpiderMan 1 & 2'', [[BlatantLies saying that he never held any]] [[BiasSteamroller bias]] towards the new movie. This is his bullshit at its finest, because of all his disdain for the movie is in Bob’s previous blog posts; long before the film came out. The whole ninja turtles are aliens’ rumors being the start. He then goes on to say it’s worse than ''Turtles III'' and the ''The Next Mutation'' (big YMMV). There is some huge contradiction, because once again, in a previous blog post/Big Picture episode he said that the third movie should never be mentioned considering how lazy and bad it turned out. The worst part is him adding or making up flaws that weren’t in the movie. He goes on to say April got too much focus and was horribly played by Megan Fox. The former is not true, as she and the turtles get nearly an equal amount of screen time, and the latter is once again, YMMV. The movie does start a little slow and I would have preferred someone else, but Fox does a decent job. The other is an exaggerated flaw of Michelangelo always being “horny for April”. It is true Mikey is always the jokester, but the only time he usually puts the moves on April is when it’s not a serious scene. Even then the other turtles tell him to knock it off, just like in most other continuities. When things get serious he gets his act together. This is hypocritical considering Donatello is guilty of doing the same thing in ''WesternAnimation/TeenageMutantNinjaTurtles2012''. Always trying to impress April and hugely crushing on her. Something a lot of fans got tired of by end of the first and second season. For the record, I don't care much for the new Spider-Man Films and am neutral about Michael Bay at best (''Film/TransformersRevengeOfTheFallen'' being the exception), but Bob, if you are not going to bother giving a movie you don't like from the start a chance, don’t lie and make shit up. Seriously, his review comes up as a Bay hating checklist and ends with him saying that he’s done with being nice to the director. Not to mention acting like a whiny little prick for the film not being like the previous movies. Seeing this video, he is no longer a serious movie reviewer or a video game commentator in my eyes (even back then I had my doubts). This video is just a testament to everything wrong with him.
to:
* CoCage: The review of ''Film/TeenageMutantNinjaTurtles2014''. Bob does the same thing he did in his reviews of ''Film/TheAmazingSpiderMan 1 & 2'', [[BlatantLies saying that he never held any]] [[BiasSteamroller bias]] towards the new movie. This is his bullshit at its finest, because of all his disdain for the movie is in Bob’s previous blog posts; long before the film came out. The whole ninja turtles are aliens’ rumors being the start. He then goes on to say it’s worse than ''Turtles III'' and the ''The Next Mutation'' (big YMMV). There is some huge contradiction, because once again, in a previous blog post/Big Picture episode he said that the third movie should never be mentioned considering how lazy and bad it turned out. The worst part is him adding or making up flaws that weren’t in the movie. He goes on to say April got too much focus and was horribly played by Megan Fox. The former is not true, as she and the turtles get nearly an equal amount of screen time, and the latter is once again, YMMV. The movie does start a little slow and I would have preferred someone else, but Fox does a decent job. The other is an exaggerated flaw of Michelangelo always being “horny for April”. It is true Mikey is always the jokester, but the only time he usually puts the moves on April is when it’s not a serious scene. Even then the other turtles tell him to knock it off, just like in most other continuities. When things get serious he gets his act together. This is hypocritical considering Donatello is guilty of doing the same thing in ''WesternAnimation/TeenageMutantNinjaTurtles2012''. Always trying to impress April and hugely crushing on her. Something a lot of fans got tired of by end of the first and second season. For the record, I don't care much for the new Spider-Man Films and I am neutral about Michael Bay at best (''Film/TransformersRevengeOfTheFallen'' being the exception), but Bob, if you are not going to bother giving a movie you don't like from the start a chance, don’t lie and make shit up. Seriously, his review comes up as a Bay hating checklist (even though he didn't direct the movie, Jonathan Liebesman did) and ends with him saying that he’s done with being nice to the director. Not to mention acting like a whiny little prick for the film not being like the previous movies. Seeing this video, he is no longer a serious movie reviewer or a video game commentator in my eyes (even back then I had my doubts). This video is just a testament to everything wrong with him.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
%%
%%
%% STAFF NOTICE
%%
%% Please do not add an image to this page. Thank you.
%%
%%
%%
%% STAFF NOTICE
%%
%% Please do not add an image to this page. Thank you.
%%
%%
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Adding entry
Changed line(s) 34 (click to see context) from:
* Vexer-I still like Moviebob in spite of me strongly disagreeing with a number of his reviews(I.E. Batman Vs Superman, Man of Steel, Amazing Spider Man 1 and 2, Pixels, Expendables, Transformers 1-3, Green Lantern, etc) and opinions(I.E. his statements regarding the retake ME3 movement). But by far his worst moment is his Big Picture video on 90s comics where he pretty does nothing but whine and bitch about RobLiefeld the entire time. Look I know the guy's a controversial figure and has his flaws, but that video crossed the line from distaste for his material into outright personal hatred to a rather disturbing degree. He also insults people that actually *gasp* like Liefeld and the other Image guys, which just makes him sound like a condescending jerk, hopefully he's learned since then.
to:
* Vexer-I still like Moviebob in spite of me strongly disagreeing with a number of his reviews(I.E. Batman Vs Superman, Man of Steel, Amazing Spider Man 1 and 2, Pixels, Expendables, Transformers 1-3, Green Lantern, etc) and opinions(I.E. his statements regarding the retake ME3 movement). But by far his worst moment is his Big Picture video on 90s comics where he pretty does nothing but whine and bitch about RobLiefeld the entire time. Look I know the guy's a controversial figure and has his flaws, but that video crossed the line from distaste for his material into outright personal hatred to a rather disturbing degree. He also insults people that actually *gasp* like Liefeld and the other Image guys, which just makes him sound like a condescending jerk, hopefully he's learned since then.then.
* SuperLuigu : This goes back a ways, but Bob having his followers join the ScrewAttack forum to vote in the "My Vids Don't Suck" contest in 2008 or so, ensuring that The Game Overthinker was the winner, regardless of what the actual ScrewAttack g1 audience would have voted for (this was years before DeathBattle , when SA content was confined to the site and GameTrailers ).
* SuperLuigu : This goes back a ways, but Bob having his followers join the ScrewAttack forum to vote in the "My Vids Don't Suck" contest in 2008 or so, ensuring that The Game Overthinker was the winner, regardless of what the actual ScrewAttack g1 audience would have voted for (this was years before DeathBattle , when SA content was confined to the site and GameTrailers ).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 10 (click to see context) from:
* {{Kingbacon}}: I used to be one of the few people who had no qualms with MovieBob. I like his snarky and in depth analysis of pop culture and nerd behavior. However, I will never forgive him for saying what he did in his episode ''JUNK DRAWER: GAME ON'', where he suggested that the only difference between console, handheld, and PC video games and the interactive bile that is App gaming are buttons. As if to say Apps COULD ever, SHOULD ever, or WOULD ever replace actual video games! Other than that, I really have no beef with the guy other than the fact that he liked ''Disney/{{Frozen}}''.
to:
* {{Kingbacon}}: I used to be one of the few people who had no qualms with MovieBob. I like his snarky and in depth analysis of pop culture and nerd behavior. However, I will never forgive him for saying what he did in his episode ''JUNK DRAWER: GAME ON'', where he suggested that the only difference between console, handheld, and PC video games and the interactive bile that is App gaming are buttons. As if to say Apps COULD ever, SHOULD ever, or WOULD ever replace actual video games! Other than that, I really have no beef with the guy other than the fact that he liked ''Disney/{{Frozen}}''.
Changed line(s) 12 (click to see context) from:
** StormKensho: Bob's "Heavens to Metroid" video, which was the video he made defending the notorious ''VideoGame/MetroidOtherM'' from its critics, had great potential to be a polarizing but fair video, going over the game's merits while also acknowledging known criticisms of the work while giving his own take on them. What did it turn out to be? Well, to paraphrase Bob's arguments: "If you don't like Metroid Other M, it's because you're a xenophobic feminazi who can't stomach Samus taking orders from a MAN!" That summation could qualify as a DMOS by itself, but the absolute and most disgusting nadir of the video, the moment where I could no longer count myself as a MovieBob fan, was when he attacked the superb MetroidPrime series[[note]]the most critically ''and'' commercially acclaimed games in the Metroid series[[/note]] because they were First-Person Shooters, which are "everything that's wrong with the gaming industry." While he's not entirely ''wrong'' in that regard, the MetroidPrime series is an example of FPS done well[[note]]with excellent and minimalistic writing and gameplay that pushed the series forward while retaining the feel of exploration and discovery that made the 2D Metroids so popular[[/note]]. And to lump those superb games in with the likes of VideoGame/CallOfDuty, VideoGame/{{Battlefield}}, and other shallow FPS games simply because they share a genre is not only ridiculous and disingenuous, it's also ''downright prejudicial and moronic''. Bob, I get it: You're being intentionally provocative with your content as a means of drawing attention to yourself and making money while also expressing your opinion; But when you're actively slandering a series of games that are widely considered to be ''among the best games ever made'' in the Sixth Generation if not overall[[note]]Games that are among the many reasons why the Nintendo Gamecube was able to hold its own and are fondly remembered by even the most caustic of internet critics such as ''[[WebAnimation/ZeroPunctuation Yahtzee]]'', one of your own colleagues at Website/TheEscapist who was ''relentless'' in his takedown of Other M[[/note]] because the game you like doesn't stack up, you're just going to make yourself look like a complete and utter fool.
to:
** StormKensho: Bob's "Heavens to Metroid" video, which was the video he made defending the notorious ''VideoGame/MetroidOtherM'' from its critics, had great potential to be a polarizing but fair video, going over the game's merits while also acknowledging known criticisms of the work while giving his own take on them. What did it turn out to be? Well, to paraphrase Bob's arguments: "If you don't like Metroid Other M, it's because you're a xenophobic feminazi who can't stomach Samus taking orders from a MAN!" That summation could qualify as a DMOS by itself, but the absolute and most disgusting nadir of the video, the moment where I could no longer count myself as a MovieBob fan, was when he attacked the superb MetroidPrime series[[note]]the most critically ''and'' commercially acclaimed games in the Metroid series[[/note]] because they were First-Person Shooters, which are "everything that's wrong with the gaming industry." While he's not entirely ''wrong'' in that regard, the MetroidPrime series is an example of FPS done well[[note]]with excellent and minimalistic writing and gameplay that pushed the series forward while retaining the feel of exploration and discovery that made the 2D Metroids so popular[[/note]]. And to lump those superb games in with the likes of VideoGame/CallOfDuty, VideoGame/{{Battlefield}}, and other shallow FPS games simply because they share a genre is not only ridiculous and disingenuous, it's also ''downright prejudicial and moronic''. Bob, I get it: You're being intentionally provocative with your content as a means of drawing attention to yourself and making money while also expressing your opinion; But when you're actively slandering a series of games that are widely considered to be ''among the best games ever made'' in the Sixth Generation if not overall[[note]]Games that are among the many reasons why the Nintendo Gamecube was able to hold its own and are fondly remembered by even the most caustic of internet critics such as ''[[WebAnimation/ZeroPunctuation Yahtzee]]'', one of your own colleagues at Website/TheEscapist who was ''relentless'' in his takedown of Other M[[/note]] because the game you like doesn't stack up, you're just going to make yourself look like a complete and utter fool.
Changed line(s) 33 (click to see context) from:
* jai137: Recently that n his X-Men apocalypse review, he states that all previous X-Men movies were bad(except First class). While he is entitled to his opinion, it completely contradicts his earlier review of X-Men:Days Of Future Past, where he said it's a good movie. Just another place where he keeps contradicting his own reviews. It's like he hated the previous ones, but couldn't bring it out to say it until a crap sequel comes out, then he lets out his hate. Be prepared for a Star Wars review where the movie is bad, but he'll just say "it's JJ Abrams, it was always bad."
to:
* jai137: Recently that n his X-Men apocalypse review, he states that all previous X-Men movies were bad(except First class). While he is entitled to his opinion, it completely contradicts his earlier review of X-Men:Days Of Future Past, where he said it's a good movie. Just another place where he keeps contradicting his own reviews. It's like he hated the previous ones, but couldn't bring it out to say it until a crap sequel comes out, then he lets out his hate. Be prepared for a Star Wars review where the movie is bad, but he'll just say "it's JJ Abrams, it was always bad.""
* Vexer-I still like Moviebob in spite of me strongly disagreeing with a number of his reviews(I.E. Batman Vs Superman, Man of Steel, Amazing Spider Man 1 and 2, Pixels, Expendables, Transformers 1-3, Green Lantern, etc) and opinions(I.E. his statements regarding the retake ME3 movement). But by far his worst moment is his Big Picture video on 90s comics where he pretty does nothing but whine and bitch about RobLiefeld the entire time. Look I know the guy's a controversial figure and has his flaws, but that video crossed the line from distaste for his material into outright personal hatred to a rather disturbing degree. He also insults people that actually *gasp* like Liefeld and the other Image guys, which just makes him sound like a condescending jerk, hopefully he's learned since then.
* Vexer-I still like Moviebob in spite of me strongly disagreeing with a number of his reviews(I.E. Batman Vs Superman, Man of Steel, Amazing Spider Man 1 and 2, Pixels, Expendables, Transformers 1-3, Green Lantern, etc) and opinions(I.E. his statements regarding the retake ME3 movement). But by far his worst moment is his Big Picture video on 90s comics where he pretty does nothing but whine and bitch about RobLiefeld the entire time. Look I know the guy's a controversial figure and has his flaws, but that video crossed the line from distaste for his material into outright personal hatred to a rather disturbing degree. He also insults people that actually *gasp* like Liefeld and the other Image guys, which just makes him sound like a condescending jerk, hopefully he's learned since then.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
only one example per troper please
Deleted line(s) 27 (click to see context) :
*** Bartzv: As someone that generally still likes Moviebob, I have noticed that he does this from time to time when he presents a dissenting opinion. In order to justify it he'll : 1. Resort to using straw man arguments. 2. Provide counterpoints that don't actually address the arguments of the other side. Both of his Other M videos and his Big Picture videos on the Simpsons illustrate this. In Heavens to Metroid he argues that Other M's detractors are just pissed off because Samus is taking orders from a man and because what the game revealed about Samus' personality negated with what fans assumed she was like this whole time. The problem with these arguments is that they don't address the actual issue many people have with Samus' portrayal as a character, namely that the way Samus was written makes her look weak and submissive with very little agency in the events of the story. In his revisited video, he argues that the game tried to use an old school game narrative mechanic in the weapon authorization and that didn't work well with the modern storytelling techniques the game also used and that's where the UnfortunateImplications are coming from. Once again this doesn't address the actual criticisms of how Samus was written as a character; he just blames it entirely on the authorization mechanic, writes off the UnfortunateImplications as just being in people's heads, then accuses anyone criticizing Sakamoto of being xenophobic towards the Japanese. In his Big Picture two-parter on The Simpsons, he argues that the Simpsons is still a good show and that the show itself hasn't changed so much as the world around it has changed. While this is an interesting theory, it doesn't address the various problems people have with the show's writing in the later seasons, which is where most of the criticisms stem from. It's baffling that someone as smart and analytically skilled as him can miss the point of people's arguments so thoroughly.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 27 (click to see context) from:
*** Bartzv: As someone that generally still likes Moviebob, I have noticed that he does this from time to time when he presents a dissenting opinion. In order to justify it he'll : 1. Resort to using straw man arguments. 2. Provide counterpoints that don't actually address the arguments of the other side. Both of his Other M videos and his Big Picture videos on the Simpsons illustrate this. In Heavens to Metroid he argues that Other M's detractors are just pissed off because Samus is taking orders from a man and because what the game revealed about Samus' personality negated with what fans assumed she was like this whole time. The problem with these arguments is that they don't address the actual issue many people have with Samus' portrayal as a character, namely that the way Samus was written makes her look weak and submissive with very little agency in the events of the story. In his revisited video, he argues that the game tried to use an old school game narrative mechanic in the weapon authorization and that didn't work well with the modern storytelling techniques the game also used and that's where the UnfortunateImplications are coming from. Once again this doesn't address how Samus was written as a character, which is where many of the criticisms are coming from; he just blames it entirely on the authorization mechanic, writes off the UnfortunateImplications as just being in people's heads, then accuses anyone criticizing Sakamoto of being xenophobic towards the Japanese. In his Big Picture two-parter on The Simpsons, he argues that the Simpsons is still a good show and that the show itself hasn't changed so much as the world around it has changed. While this is an interesting theory, it doesn't address the various problems people have with the show's writing in the later seasons, which is where most of the criticisms stem from. It's baffling that someone as smart and analytically skilled as him can miss the point of people's arguments so thoroughly.
to:
*** Bartzv: As someone that generally still likes Moviebob, I have noticed that he does this from time to time when he presents a dissenting opinion. In order to justify it he'll : 1. Resort to using straw man arguments. 2. Provide counterpoints that don't actually address the arguments of the other side. Both of his Other M videos and his Big Picture videos on the Simpsons illustrate this. In Heavens to Metroid he argues that Other M's detractors are just pissed off because Samus is taking orders from a man and because what the game revealed about Samus' personality negated with what fans assumed she was like this whole time. The problem with these arguments is that they don't address the actual issue many people have with Samus' portrayal as a character, namely that the way Samus was written makes her look weak and submissive with very little agency in the events of the story. In his revisited video, he argues that the game tried to use an old school game narrative mechanic in the weapon authorization and that didn't work well with the modern storytelling techniques the game also used and that's where the UnfortunateImplications are coming from. Once again this doesn't address the actual criticisms of how Samus was written as a character, which is where many of the criticisms are coming from; character; he just blames it entirely on the authorization mechanic, writes off the UnfortunateImplications as just being in people's heads, then accuses anyone criticizing Sakamoto of being xenophobic towards the Japanese. In his Big Picture two-parter on The Simpsons, he argues that the Simpsons is still a good show and that the show itself hasn't changed so much as the world around it has changed. While this is an interesting theory, it doesn't address the various problems people have with the show's writing in the later seasons, which is where most of the criticisms stem from. It's baffling that someone as smart and analytically skilled as him can miss the point of people's arguments so thoroughly.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 27 (click to see context) from:
*** Bartzv: As someone that generally still likes Moviebob, I have noticed that he does this from time to time when he presents a dissenting opinion. In order to justify it he'll : 1. Resort to using straw man arguments. 2. Provide counterpoints that don't actually address the arguments of the other side. Both of his Other M videos and his Big Picture videos on the Simpsons illustrate this. In Heavens to Metroid he argues that Other M's detractors are just pissed off because Samus is taking orders from a man and because what the game revealed about Samus' personality negated with what fans assumed she was like this whole time. The problem with these arguments is that they don't address the actual issue many people have with Samus' portrayal as a character, namely that the way Samus was written makes her look weak and submissive with very little agency in the events of the story. In his revisited video, he argues that the game tried to use an old school game narrative mechanic in the weapon authorization and that didn't work well with the modern storytelling techniques the game also used and that's where the UnfortunateImplications are coming from. Once again this doesn't address how Samus was written as a character, which is where many of the criticisms are coming from; he just blames it entirely on the authorization mechanic, writes off the UnfortunateImplications as just being in people's heads, then accuses anyone criticizing Sakamoto of being xenophobic towards the Japanese. In his Big Picture two-parter on The Simpsons, he argues that the Simpsons is still a good show and that the show itself hasn't changed so much as the world around it has changed. While this is an interesting theory, it doesn't address the various problems people have with the show's writing in the later seasons, which is where most of the criticisms stem from. It's baffling that someone as smart as him, who typically displays rhetorical and analytical prowess can miss the point of people's arguments so thoroughly.
to:
*** Bartzv: As someone that generally still likes Moviebob, I have noticed that he does this from time to time when he presents a dissenting opinion. In order to justify it he'll : 1. Resort to using straw man arguments. 2. Provide counterpoints that don't actually address the arguments of the other side. Both of his Other M videos and his Big Picture videos on the Simpsons illustrate this. In Heavens to Metroid he argues that Other M's detractors are just pissed off because Samus is taking orders from a man and because what the game revealed about Samus' personality negated with what fans assumed she was like this whole time. The problem with these arguments is that they don't address the actual issue many people have with Samus' portrayal as a character, namely that the way Samus was written makes her look weak and submissive with very little agency in the events of the story. In his revisited video, he argues that the game tried to use an old school game narrative mechanic in the weapon authorization and that didn't work well with the modern storytelling techniques the game also used and that's where the UnfortunateImplications are coming from. Once again this doesn't address how Samus was written as a character, which is where many of the criticisms are coming from; he just blames it entirely on the authorization mechanic, writes off the UnfortunateImplications as just being in people's heads, then accuses anyone criticizing Sakamoto of being xenophobic towards the Japanese. In his Big Picture two-parter on The Simpsons, he argues that the Simpsons is still a good show and that the show itself hasn't changed so much as the world around it has changed. While this is an interesting theory, it doesn't address the various problems people have with the show's writing in the later seasons, which is where most of the criticisms stem from. It's baffling that someone as smart as him, who typically displays rhetorical and analytical prowess analytically skilled as him can miss the point of people's arguments so thoroughly.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 27 (click to see context) from:
*** Bartzv: As someone that generally still likes Moviebob, I have noticed that he does this from time to time when he presents a dissenting opinion. In order to justify it he'll : 1. Resort to using straw man arguments. 2. Provide counterpoints that don't actually address the arguments of the other side. Both of his Other M videos and his Big Picture videos on the Simpsons illustrate this. In Heavens to Metroid he argues that Other M's detractors are just pissed off because Samus is taking orders from a man and because what the game revealed about Samus' personality negated with what fans assumed she was like this whole time. The problem with these arguments is that they don't address the actual issue many people have with Samus' portrayal as a character, namely that the way Samus was written makes her look weak and submissive with very little agency in the events of the story. In his revisited video, he argues that the game tried to use an old school game narrative mechanic in the weapon authorization and that didn't work well with the modern storytelling techniques the game also used and that's where the UnfortunateImplications are coming from. Once again this doesn't address how Samus was written as a character, which is where many of the criticisms are coming from; he just blames it entirely on the authorization mechanic, writes off the UnfortunateImplications as just being in people's heads, then accuses anyone criticizing Sakamoto of being xenophobic towards the Japanese. In his Big Picture two-parter on The Simpsons, he argues that the Simpsons is still a good show and that the show itself hasn't changed so much as the world around it has changed. While this is an interesting theory, it doesn't address the various problems people have with the show's writing in the later seasons, which is where most of the criticisms stem from. It's baffling that a person who typically displays rhetorical and analytical prowess can miss the point of people's arguments like this.
to:
*** Bartzv: As someone that generally still likes Moviebob, I have noticed that he does this from time to time when he presents a dissenting opinion. In order to justify it he'll : 1. Resort to using straw man arguments. 2. Provide counterpoints that don't actually address the arguments of the other side. Both of his Other M videos and his Big Picture videos on the Simpsons illustrate this. In Heavens to Metroid he argues that Other M's detractors are just pissed off because Samus is taking orders from a man and because what the game revealed about Samus' personality negated with what fans assumed she was like this whole time. The problem with these arguments is that they don't address the actual issue many people have with Samus' portrayal as a character, namely that the way Samus was written makes her look weak and submissive with very little agency in the events of the story. In his revisited video, he argues that the game tried to use an old school game narrative mechanic in the weapon authorization and that didn't work well with the modern storytelling techniques the game also used and that's where the UnfortunateImplications are coming from. Once again this doesn't address how Samus was written as a character, which is where many of the criticisms are coming from; he just blames it entirely on the authorization mechanic, writes off the UnfortunateImplications as just being in people's heads, then accuses anyone criticizing Sakamoto of being xenophobic towards the Japanese. In his Big Picture two-parter on The Simpsons, he argues that the Simpsons is still a good show and that the show itself hasn't changed so much as the world around it has changed. While this is an interesting theory, it doesn't address the various problems people have with the show's writing in the later seasons, which is where most of the criticisms stem from. It's baffling that a person someone as smart as him, who typically displays rhetorical and analytical prowess can miss the point of people's arguments like this.so thoroughly.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** Bartzv: As someone that generally still likes Moviebob, I have noticed that he does this from time to time when he presents a dissenting opinion. In order to justify it he'll : 1. Resort to using straw man arguments. 2. Provide counterpoints that don't actually address the arguments of the other side. Both of his Other M videos and his Big Picture videos on the Simpsons illustrate this. In Heavens to Metroid he argues that Other M's detractors are just pissed off because Samus is taking orders from a man and because what the game revealed about Samus' personality negated with what fans assumed she was like this whole time. The problem with these arguments is that they don't address the actual issue many people have with Samus' portrayal as a character, namely that the way Samus was written makes her look weak and submissive with very little agency in the events of the story. In his revisited video, he argues that the game tried to use an old school game narrative mechanic in the weapon authorization and that didn't work well with the modern storytelling techniques the game also used and that's where the UnfortunateImplications are coming from. Once again this doesn't address how Samus was written as a character, which is where many of the criticisms are coming from; he just blames it entirely on the authorization mechanic, writes off the UnfortunateImplications as just being in people's heads, then accuses anyone criticizing Sakamoto of being xenophobic towards the Japanese. In his Big Picture two-parter on The Simpsons, he argues that the Simpsons is still a good show and that the show itself hasn't changed so much as the world around it has changed. While this is an interesting theory, it doesn't address the various problems people have with the show's writing in the later seasons, which is where most of the criticisms stem from. It's baffling that a person who typically displays rhetorical and analytical prowess can miss the point of people's arguments like this.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** ImpudentInfidel: It also revealed an almost complete ignorance of how video games, and RPGs in particular, are written. His argument was based on a film-specific variant of auteur theory and completely ignored the main complaint: that the ending was clearly written without the input of the main writing team, introduced massive changes to the mythology in the final minutes, and revealed a complete failure to grasp both the themes of the story and the mechanics of the setting.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Wanted to add another reason to the list. (If it's in the wrong section, please inform me about which section to write this
Changed line(s) 31 (click to see context) from:
* deusexadamjensen121: The end of his review of ''Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice'', even ignoring the obvious BiasSteamroller against DC film adaptations that has become standard for Bob by now. He blatantly lies about the ending of the film just to misrepresent the movie.
to:
* deusexadamjensen121: The end of his review of ''Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice'', even ignoring the obvious BiasSteamroller against DC film adaptations that has become standard for Bob by now. He blatantly lies about the ending of the film just to misrepresent the movie.movie.
* jai137: Recently that n his X-Men apocalypse review, he states that all previous X-Men movies were bad(except First class). While he is entitled to his opinion, it completely contradicts his earlier review of X-Men:Days Of Future Past, where he said it's a good movie. Just another place where he keeps contradicting his own reviews. It's like he hated the previous ones, but couldn't bring it out to say it until a crap sequel comes out, then he lets out his hate. Be prepared for a Star Wars review where the movie is bad, but he'll just say "it's JJ Abrams, it was always bad."
* jai137: Recently that n his X-Men apocalypse review, he states that all previous X-Men movies were bad(except First class). While he is entitled to his opinion, it completely contradicts his earlier review of X-Men:Days Of Future Past, where he said it's a good movie. Just another place where he keeps contradicting his own reviews. It's like he hated the previous ones, but couldn't bring it out to say it until a crap sequel comes out, then he lets out his hate. Be prepared for a Star Wars review where the movie is bad, but he'll just say "it's JJ Abrams, it was always bad."
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Added a DMOS
Changed line(s) 31 (click to see context) from:
----
to:
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* whunt: His Really That Good series is a great idea. Sometimes movies are so hyped new audiences have the fresh experience lost on them. However, Bob blew it right off the bat with his ''Spider-Man'' video on the topic. Not only do I disagree with what he said about the casting choices and the love story, but he also fails to provide many counterarguments and just gush over his clear bias, ignoring the movie's flaws and only nitpicking superficially what was wrong with both installments. There is no address of valid criticisms like SeinfeldIsUnfunny or how many other films were able to one-up the Spider-Man aesthetic and feel even more like comic books. I haven't even watched the rest. I think there could be a decent case as to why Spider-Man and other films were Really NOT That Good, but Bob doesn't even consider that possibility.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 15 (click to see context) from:
* GZillafan77: in ''Film/TheExpendables'' review, he states that [[FanHater only machoo idiots would like it, which he claims are the worst kind of people.]] He also makes blanketed statements on way he dosen't like it. Only that the jokes aren't funny and the action sucks. The whole thing could be stated as "TheExpendables sucks and you suck for watching it instead of Scott Pilgrim!"
to:
* GZillafan77: in ''Film/TheExpendables'' review, he states that [[FanHater only machoo idiots would like it, which he claims are the worst kind of people.]] He also makes blanketed statements on way he dosen't like it. Only that the jokes aren't funny and the action sucks. The whole thing could be stated as "TheExpendables "Film/TheExpendables sucks and you suck for watching it instead of Scott Pilgrim!"
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 29,30 (click to see context) from:
----
to:
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*Sheliek: 'There are (almost) no bad tactics, just bad targets.' Why? Because it's a more polite way of saying 'the ends justify the means.' As much as I agree with a lot of his views, that statement colours the rest of them in a disgustingly negative light.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 27 (click to see context) from:
** Hermes3: I agree. What was a fairly professional show has since devolved into how many ways can he turn a vulgar phrase. This troper's problem with MovieBob is that he tends to hurl insults at the movie and/or fandom and/or political group without backing up his statements. For example, in his review FantasticFour2015, he just waved off fan criticism of the new film's casting of a black actor for a canonically white role as being racist. Nevermind that the film ignored several decades of canon. He also has a tendency to be whiney. He spent time in a YouTube series about movies to complain about how the space program was canceled and how he would rather have cities on Mars rather than world peace because humanity did nothing for him. That, coupled with his general condescending tone and his self-pitying autobiography, he has made it difficult for those who would like him and learn from his insight to do so.
to:
** Hermes3: I agree. What was a fairly professional show has since devolved into how many ways can he turn a vulgar phrase. This troper's My problem with MovieBob is that he tends to hurl insults at the movie and/or fandom and/or political group without backing up his statements. For example, in his review FantasticFour2015, he just waved off fan criticism of the new film's casting of a black actor for a canonically white role as being racist. Nevermind that the film ignored several decades of canon. He also has a tendency to be whiney. He spent time in a YouTube series about movies to complain about how the space program was canceled and how he would rather have cities on Mars rather than world peace because humanity did nothing for him. That, coupled with his general condescending tone and his self-pitying autobiography, he has made it difficult for those who would like him and learn from his insight to do so.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 16 (click to see context) from:
** gameragodzilla: This troper also agrees. He never actually backs up anything that he says, only that he says the action was bad and the jokes were unfunny, something that quite a lot of people disagree with (considering how both movies topped the box office when they came out and made an absolute killing overseas). What is even stupider is that Moviebob claims that modern action movies are better than 1980's action movies, despite modern movies employing ShakyCam and quick cuts that obscure the action to the point of incomprehensibility. [[SarcasmMode Yeah, real improvement there.]] Seriously, this troper thinks that the only reason Moviebob hates this series so much is because of how poorly ''[[Film/ScottPilgrimVsTheWorld Scott Pilgrim]]'' did in comparison, because almost every time he mentions this movie, it's in comparison with Scott Pilgrim. BTW, this is coming from someone who seen and liked both Expendables and Scott Pilgrim.
to:
** gameragodzilla: This troper I also agrees.agree. He never actually backs up anything that he says, only that he says the action was bad and the jokes were unfunny, something that quite a lot of people disagree with (considering how both movies topped the box office when they came out and made an absolute killing overseas). What is even stupider is that Moviebob claims that modern action movies are better than 1980's action movies, despite modern movies employing ShakyCam and quick cuts that obscure the action to the point of incomprehensibility. [[SarcasmMode Yeah, real improvement there.]] Seriously, this troper thinks I think that the only reason Moviebob hates this series so much is because of how poorly ''[[Film/ScottPilgrimVsTheWorld Scott Pilgrim]]'' did in comparison, because almost every time he mentions this movie, it's in comparison with Scott Pilgrim. BTW, this is coming from someone who seen and liked both Expendables and Scott Pilgrim.
Changed line(s) 23 (click to see context) from:
* CoCage: The review of ''Film/TeenageMutantNinjaTurtles2014''. Bob does the same thing he did in his reviews of ''Film/TheAmazingSpiderMan 1 & 2'', [[BlatantLies saying that he never held any]] [[BiasSteamroller bias]] towards the new movie. This is his bullshit at its finest, because of all his disdain for the movie is in Bob’s previous blog posts; long before the film came out. The whole ninja turtles are aliens’ rumors being the start. He then goes on to say it’s worse than ''Turtles III'' and the ''The Next Mutation'' (big YMMV). There is some huge contradiction, because once again, in a previous blog post/Big Picture episode he said that the third movie should never be mentioned considering how lazy and bad it turned out. The worst part is him adding or making up flaws that weren’t in the movie. He goes on to say April got too much focus and was horribly played by Megan Fox. The former is not true, as she and the turtles get nearly an equal amount of screen time, and the latter is once again, YMMV. The movie does start a little slow and I would have preferred someone else, but Fox does a decent job. The other is an exaggerated flaw of Michelangelo always being “horny for April”. It is true Mikey is always the jokester, but the only time he usually puts the moves on April is when it’s not a serious scene. Even then the other turtles tell him to knock it off, just like in most other continuities. When things get serious he gets his act together. This is hypocritical considering Donatello is guilty of doing the same thing in ''WesternAnimation/TeenageMutantNinjaTurtles2012''. Always trying to impress April and hugely crushing on her. Something a lot of fans got tired of by end of the first and second season. For the record, this troper does not care much for the new Spider-Man Films and is neutral about Michael Bay at best (''Film/TransformersRevengeOfTheFallen'' being the exception), but Bob, if you are not going to bother giving a movie you don't like from the start a chance, don’t lie and make shit up. Seriously, his review comes up as a Bay hating checklist and ends with him saying that he’s done with being nice to the director. Not to mention acting like a whiny little prick for the film not being like the previous movies. Seeing this video, he is no longer a serious movie reviewer or a video game commentator in my eyes (even back then I had my doubts). This video is just a testament to everything wrong with him.
to:
* CoCage: The review of ''Film/TeenageMutantNinjaTurtles2014''. Bob does the same thing he did in his reviews of ''Film/TheAmazingSpiderMan 1 & 2'', [[BlatantLies saying that he never held any]] [[BiasSteamroller bias]] towards the new movie. This is his bullshit at its finest, because of all his disdain for the movie is in Bob’s previous blog posts; long before the film came out. The whole ninja turtles are aliens’ rumors being the start. He then goes on to say it’s worse than ''Turtles III'' and the ''The Next Mutation'' (big YMMV). There is some huge contradiction, because once again, in a previous blog post/Big Picture episode he said that the third movie should never be mentioned considering how lazy and bad it turned out. The worst part is him adding or making up flaws that weren’t in the movie. He goes on to say April got too much focus and was horribly played by Megan Fox. The former is not true, as she and the turtles get nearly an equal amount of screen time, and the latter is once again, YMMV. The movie does start a little slow and I would have preferred someone else, but Fox does a decent job. The other is an exaggerated flaw of Michelangelo always being “horny for April”. It is true Mikey is always the jokester, but the only time he usually puts the moves on April is when it’s not a serious scene. Even then the other turtles tell him to knock it off, just like in most other continuities. When things get serious he gets his act together. This is hypocritical considering Donatello is guilty of doing the same thing in ''WesternAnimation/TeenageMutantNinjaTurtles2012''. Always trying to impress April and hugely crushing on her. Something a lot of fans got tired of by end of the first and second season. For the record, this troper does not I don't care much for the new Spider-Man Films and is am neutral about Michael Bay at best (''Film/TransformersRevengeOfTheFallen'' being the exception), but Bob, if you are not going to bother giving a movie you don't like from the start a chance, don’t lie and make shit up. Seriously, his review comes up as a Bay hating checklist and ends with him saying that he’s done with being nice to the director. Not to mention acting like a whiny little prick for the film not being like the previous movies. Seeing this video, he is no longer a serious movie reviewer or a video game commentator in my eyes (even back then I had my doubts). This video is just a testament to everything wrong with him.
Changed line(s) 27 (click to see context) from:
** Hermes3: This troper agrees. What was a fairly professional show has since devolved into how many ways can he turn a vulgar phrase. This troper's problem with MovieBob is that he tends to hurl insults at the movie and/or fandom and/or political group without backing up his statements. For example, in his review FantasticFour2015, he just waved off fan criticism of the new film's casting of a black actor for a canonically white role as being racist. Nevermind that the film ignored several decades of canon. He also has a tendency to be whiney. He spent time in a YouTube series about movies to complain about how the space program was canceled and how he would rather have cities on Mars rather than world peace because humanity did nothing for him. That, coupled with his general condescending tone and his self-pitying autobiography, he has made it difficult for those who would like him and learn from his insight to do so.
to:
** Hermes3: This troper agrees.I agree. What was a fairly professional show has since devolved into how many ways can he turn a vulgar phrase. This troper's problem with MovieBob is that he tends to hurl insults at the movie and/or fandom and/or political group without backing up his statements. For example, in his review FantasticFour2015, he just waved off fan criticism of the new film's casting of a black actor for a canonically white role as being racist. Nevermind that the film ignored several decades of canon. He also has a tendency to be whiney. He spent time in a YouTube series about movies to complain about how the space program was canceled and how he would rather have cities on Mars rather than world peace because humanity did nothing for him. That, coupled with his general condescending tone and his self-pitying autobiography, he has made it difficult for those who would like him and learn from his insight to do so.
