There are subjectives, and then there are these. While you may believe a work fits here, and you might be right, people tend to have rather vocal, differing opinions about this subject. Please keep these off of the work's page.
Some of The Critic's hyperbolic bashings of Princess Peach in his Top 11 Dumbasses In Distress video were actually unfounded criticisms. Her self-aware attitude on being kidnapped is Played for Laughs and not meant to be insulting to Mario or the player. His claim that she's "done nothing in any of the Mario games" is flat out untrue; he only sights Super Mario Bros. 2, in which the entire game was Mario's dream, and the various sport games and the Super Smash Bros. series, which aren't in the main series, but doesn't credit the Super Mario RPG and Paper Mario series in which she's an active character. Him saying that her using "a frying pan and her butt" to fight being "what women in the 40's would use" (Rapunzel AND Flynn Rider would beg to differ on the frying pan!) and her fighting with her emotions being lame just reeks of Real Women Never Wear Dresses. And in general, he seems to project his own feelings onto Mario and wonder why anyone would want to save her when she gets kidnapped all the time. Perhaps Mario just doesn't find "save the princess" adventures as annoying as you do, Critic?
Admittedly, wondering why Mario bothers to save Peach after she gets kidnapped so much is one of the most common jokes about the series, which has even been lampshaded in a few of the games. Although, by now this joke has probably gotten a little stale.
While not on the level of Peach, he could be hyperbolic on some of the others too, like Jubilee (which he later admitted to in his "Temple of Doom" review), Mary Jane (the lunchroom scene really didn't count as a Distressed Damsel moment, Doug, just a sweet one for her and Peter, otherwise she'd have been fine if not a little sore and bruised), and especially Lois Lane (arguing that a smarter, more independent Lois should NEVER be kidnapped or in trouble because smart, independent people are apparently invulnerable.)
At the end of the review of the remake of The Haunting (1999). Good grief. He did a joke where he "impersonated" the director/writer of the remake, and said that his movie was more mature than the original cut, all the while getting louder, whinier, and more childish. It could've passed as a "meh" joke, but it just kept going and going. It's easy to forget he's trying to mock the director, and think he's just having his genuine reaction to the remake. Loud and childish for the sake of humor can only go so far before realizing you're just watching a grown man throw temper tantrums at movies simply because he doesn't like them.
His Transformers Generation 1 review. Every single GEEWUN, "MICHAEL BAY RAPED MY CHILDHOOD!!" argument in one video, combined with the usual unfunny gags. The worst part is a Soundwave gag that goes on for way too long.
First half of "What's Up With The Princess Hate?" was awesome. Second half? Not so much. He makes the unnecessary assumption that most grown women enjoy being called girls, he shows off a bit of a Madonna-Whore Complex by "most women" being pictured with Britney and Kim Kardashian while "there are some who don't" being pictured with a business woman (gorgeous and lipglossed of course), and muddling points gave the impression that women who enjoy princessy things are to blame for society not liking women with power.
Tina A and Dawg in the Pearl Harbor skits. Doug has proved he's great at satire, so why these lazy characters that don't do anything but conform to what you're meant to be bashing? That Rachel said afterwards she wanted the stereotypes Gender Flipped and nobody listened to her makes it all the worse. Bye bye days of sympathy towards actresses I guess.
Speaking of Pearl Harbor, my crowning moment of Wall-Banging has to be the "The Reason You Suck" Speech against Michael Bay for the film and making light of the tragedy. The problem is it feels borderline hollow and hypocritical, as it's started by his Berserk Button being pressed during a scene where a sailor falls into the water and says that he can't swim, with him accusing Bay of not even bothering to do research. The only thing is as several people have pointed out, at the time in real life many sailors actually didn't know how to swim and it being a requirement to join the navy wasn't mandated until after the events of Pearl Harbor, meaning Doug himself didn't even bother to do the research either. It winds up feeling more and more like Doug making light of the whole tragedy just as an excuse to throw yet another insult at a director that's a personal favorite punching bag of his, and it feels outright disgusting.
The segment of "Doug's Top 10 Favorite Characters" involving Tyrion Lannister, where he gets major facts about him egregiouslywrong: Tyrion was not born into the Royal Family (he was the King's brother-in-law and uncle to the successor), nor is Tywin (Tyrion's father) the King (He's a rich and powerful nobleman). For someone who kept gushing about how much he loved the show, you'd think he'd get one of the show's central concepts right.
"The Looney Tunes Show: Good Or Bad". It wasn't that he liked it, as with everything he's perfectly entitled to dis/like whatever he wants, it was the obnoxious attitude to people who didn't. They could have perfectly good reasons for not liking the changes, humor or Lola, but he just characterized them as whiny hypocrites who needed to be talked down to.
A particularly ridiculous part of that editorial is when he compares the show to previous Looney Tunes movies and spinoffs (particularly Space Jam, Duck Dodgers and Baby Looney Tunes) to address how hypocritical people are for liking those, but not the show he's mainly talking about. He then goes on to show some particularly stupid clips from each of the pre-mentioned spinoffs, responding to them in the role of a stupid fan who finds them funny. And then he shows a bunch of the main subject's more over-the-top clips and plays some EXTREME MUSIC over them in an attempt to make them look awesome before responding to them as the same stupid fan who claims the Looney Tunes are now dead. If there's one thing I thought Doug was well above, it was using the same kind of manipulative tactics you would find in an early 90s Sega commercial...
The Rachel scenes and "spirit of the fart joke" bits in the Master of Disguise review. Unfunny, over-long, and the worst part: blatantly an excuse to keep using both actors. Doug, you put a bullet through the head of the show that actually used them. Shoehorning them in at every opportunity is just rubbing salt into the wounds.
"Did Seinfeld Lie To Us". Not the analysis itself, but the last three minutes, i.e the advertisement. There's something very wrong with the fact that Doug refuses to talk about The Review Must Go On and leave Ask That Guy on a cliffhanger for months on end... right up until he can get money for both. Not to mention that putting Demo Reel extras with the same production that killed it off so cruelly is pretty damn lazy.
The Sailor Moon review had a whole article dedicated to pointing out the sexism. Also, putting up sexualized pictures of girls staring sexy-like at the camera while talking about hot-topic subjects like trafficking, ending the whole thing on a pedophile joke, was disturbing, despite the probable intent of showing said images being fairly clear ("Okay folks. here's what hyper-sexualized young girls really look like! Still on board with that?"). The hackneyed jab about women not liking Star Wars was simply the cherry on top.
"Why Is Loki So Hot?" had some bizarre assumptions, like women wanting woobie men because they feel like they'd save said woobie and thus get owed sex, or All Girls Want Bad Boys because they want an attack dog to fight their battles for them. Plus Have I Mentioned I Am Heterosexual Today? tends to be less insulting to queer fans when it's parodied, not played straight like it was here.
In "Dawn Of the Commercials", we have the Nostalgia Critic claiming that "men can't be sexually harassed at work by women because they are too dumb to notice that a woman's into them, and only go after women who have no desire for them". Following it up with a sketch of the wicked witch hitting on one of her guards, who completely misses it and instead hits on a woman who insults him. This is repeated twice.
The Nostalgia Critic's review of Thomas and the Magic Railroad is pretty hypocritical. Earlier on, he stated that he considered the show brainless, yet he also stated that he never actually watched the show. If you never watched it, how can you call it brainless? He also complained about big name stars being in it, such as Peter Fonda, Alec Baldwin, and Mara Wilson, acting as if they couldn't have possibly wanted to be in the film, and also complains about Peter Fonda and Alec Baldwin's performances, saying that they're overacting, yet stating that Mara Wilson is underacting and behaving like she doesn't care. If he doesn't like "overacting" or underacting, then what the hell is good enough for him? Peter Fonda and Alec Baldwin clearly care about their performances. NC also constantly says "IT'S THOMAS THE FUCKING TANK ENGINE!", as if it's beneath him. He also made a joke involving the time Alec Baldwin sent his daughter an angry voicemail in response to a scene with Alec Baldwin "overacting". If the DMOS page wasn't locked, this would definitely be on there.
The Spoony One's bashing on Tron: Legacy. The dude was seriouslymissing the point of the movie, overanalyzing everything and claiming it didn't "innovate" like the original did, even going so far as to say that "Inception" was "Tron: Legacy done right". First of all, Tron was never meant to be a serious look into the advancements of technology, but an escapist romp into an absurd computer world, so saying that it wasn't "deep" enough is ridiculous. Second, the only "innovation" that the original had was it's graphics, and at the time, it got an Oscar Snubfor supposedly "cheating" by use of CG. Third, a lot of his analysis makes no sense; for instance, he claims that the Encom corporates are "evil" for wanting money, and Sam was doing what he was doing to be a "rebel"; the Encom corporates were "evil" because they abandoned Sam's father's ideals for the company and disrespected him by downplaying his part in the company, and Sam didn't trust anyone on the board (including Alan, his sole supporter) to take his interests as the company's primary shareholder seriously - his actions are what any other disgruntled computer techie would do with their brainchild when they're being screwed over by their bosses. Finally, to top off the absurdity, he places the movie on his top 10 worst movies of 2010 for being fanwank slop, yet puts Scott Pilgrim vs. The World on his top 10 BEST movies list for the exact same reason. Trying to have your cake and eat it, too, Mr. Spoony?
Overall, Bennett The Sage's review of Final Fantasy IX was pretty good. But then, literally as the credits rolled, there was an unexpected Mood Whiplash. Without warning, there's a message in the credits that basically reads "To all you fangirls who think Kuja is hot, just shut up and admit you're a lesbian already." Okay... I know that Kuja is literally the poster guy for Dude Looks Like a Lady, but that's still no excuse for the tons of Unfortunate Implications this statement delivers. First of all, this statement implies that all female fans of Kuja simply like him because he's "hot." Well... this troper is a female, and a Kuja fan; but it's because I think he's a fascinating character. Second of all, it feels like Bennett is saying that girls who like more feminine-looking men automatically like women. So... there's no such thing as Camp Straight, then? Not all men have to fit the general idea of what a man should be like! And it's such a shame too, because besides that one stupid little statement, the review itself was positive. Bennett, I think you're an interesting reviewer; just don't make stupid comments like this anymore, okay?
Bennett's "review" (rather a prolonged delay of a review) of Violence Jack is understandable. The anime is very difficult to watch and make fun of due to it's graphic imagery and content. While he did spend the entire video procrastinating, he had good intentions. One problem: Bennett has worked with ''ZoneSama'', who specializes in animations of extremely detailed sexual assault of already existing cartoon characters. Massive Hypocrite much?
The Rap Critic's cameo on Atop the Fourth Wall, where he delivered what has to be the most biased, hateful description of Vanilla Ice imaginable. (We can't even claim Linkara wrote that for him - he's made a point of saying his guests do their own lines.) Not only does he claim the man's entire career was built on racism, but he dismisses Rob Van Winkle's current, rather successful career with a wave of his hand and a "Just some minor hardcore groups" (say what you will about them, the Insane Clown Possecannot be called "minor"). Yes, Vanilla Ice is an easy target, but this is a masterpiece of spite and Critical Research Failure.
Paw Dugan's review of The Princess and the Frog, as many have pointed out, has some pretty glaring mistakes. Right from the start of the review, Paw seems to focus less on the movie itself, and more on how Randy Newman wrote the songs, and that automatically makes them bland and uninteresting. Then he starts playing a character called "The Pedantic Semantic" when the subject of Tiana's race and nationality comes up, where he screws up the nationalities of some of the other Disney Princesses, and claims Pocahontas can't be the first American Disney Princess because "the colonies weren't around at the time." To add insult to injury, Paw makes no mention of the movie's Ensemble Darkhorse, Charlotte; claims Dr. Facilier had no motivation for his actions (he wanted power and made a pact with the voodoo spirits to achieve this); and finally completely fails to addressthe final two songs in the movie (they're reprises, but still). Oh, and throughout the review, he repeatedly mispronounces "New Orleans". Now, Paw is clearly allowed to express his dislike for a movie, or his dislike for a musician (Newman); that's fine. But when that dislike starts to affect the quality of your work, it's time to step back and take a deep breath. Seriously, Paw; we expect a lot better from you.
Jim Sterling made a similar claim in his "Sexualisation and Men?" video, claiming that the men aren't there for female gamers to gawk at, unlike female fanservice characters. While he's not entirely wrong in this regard, both Linkara and Sterling both seem to disregard the entire aspect that the idealized male form is still a sexual object for people. For straight women and gay men, they can still take it as fanservice even if it's not intended as such, and for straight men, it's a nearly-impossible appearance that it's also rooted in society's expectations of what an attractive male should look like! So, yes, while men like Kratos aren't there for eye candy, their appearance is still sexualized to a very gross degree!
The Sibling Rivalry review for Man of Steel. Not that they panned it because they're completely entitled, but the Walkers spend less time actually reviewing the movie and more bashing the people who enjoy it, with Doug openly hoping that they pissed the majority audience off. Weird coming from the guy who kept trying to preach Fan Hatering being wrong.
Film Brain's little diatribe in To Boldly Flee, stating that Britain hasn't contributed anything to culture apart from comedic crossdressing and the Spotted Dick dessert is just, so wrong that whomever wrote it really needs to get out from under their rock. Guess they've never seen Monty Python, Father Ted, Fawlty Towers, The Office, Extras, Hot Fuzz, Shawn of the Dead, Sherlock, Dr Who, A bit of Fry and Laurie, Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, and a myriad of other things that I guess the writer was just too lazy to even think about.