Hello and welcome to TV Tropes, where bad moments burn. Y'know, with over 600 episodes and counting, Linkara's little web show about a guy who reviews comics on his futon would be bound to slip up at some point. So let's dig into Atop the Fourth Wall and see the moments that not even Linkara's biggest fans will defend.
Keep in mind:
- Sign your entries.
- One moment per work to a troper; if multiple entries for the same work are signed to the same troper, the more recent one(s) will be cut. For subpages that cover multiple works, it's permissible for one troper to have entries for more than one work.
- Moments only, no "just everything he said", "the entire episode", or "this entire work," entries.
- No contesting entries. This is subjective, the entry is their opinion.
- No natter. As above, anything contesting an entry will be cut, and anything that's just contributing more can be made its own entry.
- Explain why it's a
Dethroning Moment of Suck. - No ALLCAPS, no bold, and no italics unless it's the title of a work. We are not yelling the DMoSs out loud.
- Please no He Panned It, Now He Sucks!. Someone having a different opinion than you is not nearly a good enough justification for something being seen as stupid or offensive.
- Creator's works only. No moments on the author themselves or personal experience with them.
- Xaris: Normally, Linkara is among my favorite reviewers on the site, but in his double review of The Others #1 and Brute Force #1, he makes a joke decrying media bias... For no discernible reason. Honestly, I don't mind the political jokes, in fact, one of my favorite of his bits is his global politics bit in his and the Nostalgia Critic's Superman IV review even though I actually disagree with his suggestion that nuclear weapons were the main reason why the Cold War never escalated into full scale conflict. However, the media bias joke was an unnecessary bit that felt horribly shoehorned in for the sake of making a political point. It had nothing to do with the comic nor the context that lead up to the joke and left a bitter taste for the rest of the review.
- Red And White: The Power Rangers Zeo episode. I'll admit, I haven't been a great fan of the Vyce arc anyway (as people keep saying, the pacing has been awful and it's a case of "must be more epic") but the fight just smacked of huge self-indulgence. It's a really big shame, because the last showdown he had with Mechakara was brilliant, scary and just generally a Moment of Awesome.
- Archduke Cthulhu: In the collaborative One Moment in Time review, I enjoyed it for his massive Take That! of Quesada like his reviews of Countdown for DC, but the opening bugged me. He and his friend (The Last Angry Geek) beat up a guy who enjoyed One More Day and force-fed him his trade edition. That wasn't Comedic Sociopathy, that was being an obnoxious fanboy douchebag.
- JFP 1986: His review of the Godyssey wasn't truly bad, but I think he seriously dropped the anecdotal ball there. No mention whatsoever of Rob Liefeld currently being a born again Christian, the much publicized relaunch of Avengelyne that actually looks pretty cool, or that Alan Moore wrote some issues of Glory. And I was just a bit bothered when Linkara said we shouldn't care about Liefeld's departure from Image. As an aspiring comic book and pop culture historian, I happened to be fascinated with Image Comics history. And saying that Liefeld shouldn't work for any company because he only did the cover art for the Godyssey (which isn't entirely true, he also help plot it) is an unbelievably weak argument. I know these are just jokes, but it gives me the impression that for the most part, Linkara doesn't care for the history of any comic books that aren't Marvel Comics, DC Comics, Transformers, Star Trek or Doctor Who.
- bobdrantz: His review of Atari Force #1. The main reason is that he decided to do it live. Look, Linkara, I'm sure you thought you were doing something special for the fans. But, when I can't hear you over all the people screaming in the audience, there's a problem. It may have been a good idea at the time, but, it was poorly executed. Next time, Linkara, just stick to the multi-part specials instead.
- So We Ate Them: Silent Hill: Dying Inside #1-2. Three little words: "Special Needs monster". Linkara makes a point out of being one of the site's most tactful members. So why did he think that making a joke The Nostalgia Critic couldn't get away with was a good idea?
- NBC Comics:
- fluffything: I like AT4W, but his review just didn't feel quite right compared to his other works. Sure, it was funny, but, there was one aspect of it that really bothered me. Mainly that his biggest complaint was that the comics were all "to be continued..." stories in which the reader would have to watch the respective shows the comics were based on to find out what happens next. To me, this is just an example of laziness on Linkara's part. Why? Because "to be continued" storylines are actually pretty common in fiction. Heck, there are even entire FRANCHISES based on various parts of the story being told in multiple media to get a full understanding of what's going on. Plus, um, Linkara reviews comics, right? Did he forget that there are SEVERAL comic arcs that end in "to be continued" and that they don't have any resolution until the next chapter?
- starofjusticev21: Plus, that's the whole point of that comic. I actually had that when I was a kid, the network gave it away for free to try to attract interest in their upcoming cartoon lineup. He or whoever donated it might've had to pay for it all these years later, but it was originally a free promotional item (it says "$1.25 value" on the front, as in that's how much it would've cost if they'd charged for it), so acting like you got ripped off for not getting a complete story is silly. It's an advertisement, not an adaptation.
- Pgj1997: For me, it was his My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic (IDW) review. It's not that he was bashing an extremely popular franchise (of which I'm a fan of, but that's besides the point), it's the review in general. My main issue is that he pretty much writes it off as kiddie crap. Gee, it's not like the same thing can be pretty much be said about the entire comic book industry in general. His final thoughts consist of, and I quote: "Sure, these kinds of solutions are not exactly what you want to see in a story for little kids, but there you go". This argument can easily be applied to comics he's reviewed before this; the Tandy Computer comics and The Electric Tale of Pikachu being great examples of this. Oh, and his abundant references to Cupcakes (Sergeant Sprinkles), It's Been Done. A lot. And he certainly didn't bring anything new to the table.
- Para Chomp: His 15 Things Wrong With Civil War video did it for me. While all the points listed were valid, point number 6 really set me off. His complaint was that Goliath was killed by Ragnarok, stressing the fact that a black man was killed by a white "blond" man. Sure, Goliath was Stuffed into the Fridge but he stressed that the action was racist. No, any noteworthy character could have died at Ragnarok's hand and the same result would have happened, a hero killed another hero. The fact that Linkara is pushing racism is racist in itself.
- Vexer: For me, it was his #1 pick in his "15 Things Wrong with Identity Crisis" review, while Linkara has good reasons for him not personally being too fond of IC, his #1 reason felt like a lazy cop-out to me (he sorta did that with his Countdown video as well, but there, I could at least understand it) putting the question "What does this story accomplish" as #1 makes no real sense and feels too much like Linkara simply couldn't think of a proper choice for #1 and finished writing the script at the very last minute.
- Bobg: His parody of The Irate Gamer. I don't care that people don't like the man's videos, but I hate it when they make these mean-spirited parodies of him. Not liking someone's work is no justification for making videos like this. You just come off as a big bully who hates a person for the crime of making work that you don't like. The man never did anything to anyone. Okay, he did make some questionable comments, false flag videos, and use jokes from other reviewers, but that was a long time ago. Even at the time, it was hardly an excuse to treat him like some guy who deserved to be picked on. I am not adding this because he poked fun at a reviewer I like, I am adding it because his video is so mean-spirited that he comes off as a bully in it.
- Dr Zulu 2010: While I like his History of Power Rangers series, one thing that kinda rubs me the wrong way was in his video regarding Season 2 of the original series where he goes on a rant where the rangers kept screwing Bulk and Skull over revealing the rangers' identities. The issue is that Linkara is A: a comic book fan and reviewer whose one of his least liked stories is One More Day, who is all about the consequences of Peter Parker's unmasking during Civil War and the stupid decisions he did to avoid his responsibilities and B: didn't Zordon says that if their identity is revealed, they lose their powers anyway (granted, Rocky, Adam and Aisha know their identities during that time, but they became Power Rangers shortly after). I understand that Linkara loves Bulk and Skull, but is that really necessary to call the rangers dicks for that?
- Sir Pellucidar: Technically, this took place in a Nostalgia Critic review (Star Trek: Insurrection), but my complaint is entirely about Lewis, so here goes. When he was ranting about how the Ba'ku were so foolish and pathetic for rejecting advanced technology, Doug made a good point by asking him if he hated Amish people too. How did Lewis respond? "Well at least the Amish have a religious reason for rejecting technology. These people are just stupid!" - Okay, what? So having a religious motivation for something automatically makes it okay, and removes all possible blame and criticism? If the movie had included a part about the Ba'ku having a religious belief that led them to live as they did, he would have suddenly been completely fine with it? In real life, people do ridiculous, foolish, and evil things because of religion all the time (just look at ISIS for example). That doesn't mean that they can't be criticized for it. It seems to me that Lewis just came up with a lame excuse to try to justify his double standards when he realized that, if he wanted to be consistent, he would have to hate Amish people.
- Kizuna Tallis: I was a fan of Lewis, and I'll still occasionally check out a review if the subject seems interesting enough, but I've fallen out of love with a lot of his general style and the persona he depicts over the years and I'd say the Man of Steel review, or rather, the "live tweeting" Twitter thread he made on it, encapsulates many of my growing issues with him. In one tweet, he says he was only two minutes into the film and already had a full page of complaints and somehow failed to see whether that was an issue on his part. This is just CinemaSins-style nitpicking for the sake of nitpicking and comes off like sheer petulance on Lewis's part, like he's just gone into watching the movie already wanting to hate it just for not being the 1978 movie or a 1-to-1 adaptation of the source material or whatever have you. And look, while I'm a fan of MoS and BvS, I can understand where certain parts might not have landed with certain audience members and I even have my own criticisms of these movies, but this isn't fair or honest critiquing; this is just a nearly middle-aged comic book fan whose emotional attachment to a fictional character has clouded his ability to fairly approach and honestly engage with a piece of media that takes said character into a different direction from what's been traditionally done. While I can commend Lewis for not going the way of Fan Hater bullshit, that's a bare minimum at best.
