The Official Unofficial That Guy with the Glasses Thread.

I don't know, I saw her in a crossover with iRawss where she was suppose to be the embodiment of hell or something stupid like that. She actually wasn't as bad as the guy who put a heavy filter over his voice which made it impossible to understand him.

edited 8th Dec '14 3:29:42 PM by odiefromtheoz

I believe you refer to TheDiva of Musical Hell. And the guy with a heavily digitalized voice (was it really that hard to understand?) is DJ SoundBite.

edited 8th Dec '14 5:03:12 PM by Motyka5

I dont really understand your issue with people doing silly things with the format. You'd prefer more of the exact same thing?

Do you dislike Red Dwarf for being a sitcom in an unusual setting? Because me, Jack and loads of others are just doing the review format in an unusual setting.

Or is it just that you are annoyed at us for doing it badly? Are there any 'unusual set up' reviewers that you think do it well?

Like I said, NC tends to do it well because it's usually in parallel with the work. Like, look at his Purge review. Yeah there's a whole subplot about pinky and the brain splitting up but it's used to illustrate a point with the film. Generally, the more character focused reviewers don't do that. Count Jackula or whatever he's called had a video on the film Trick R Treat, and in it he has a gag about how on his planet they have extreme blood orgies. Why? What's the point? What does that contribute to the criticism? It's not even a good joke, it's barely a joke.

And I mean, people can fuck around with the format sure, but it's getting to the point where I can hardly just watch a review. Now everyone is a superhero or an alien or a historical figure. It's getting to the point that it isn't unusual anymore, it's stagnant. Can't anyone just sit in front of a camera and talk about a bad movie?

edited 8th Dec '14 8:54:23 PM by odiefromtheoz

Well I dunno about some of the ones you have issue with but me and Jackula have been doing it for a long time. Maybe 'it' is stagnant to you but we've been doing it since before that, when we started almost all reviewers were 'the BLANK in the BLANK' and were just people sitting in their bedroom. I cant talk for Jack but I chose every part of my style and gimmick because it was different from any other reviewer Id ever seen (even something as unimportant as standing in the reviews instead of sitting) I wanted to be recognisable and memorable.

Maybe it feels stagnant to you because you found it after other people picked up on the good idea and tried to run it into the ground? If so, that's hardly our fault. Going back to the more general comedy example, the Zucker Abrams and Zucker team invented a distinctive style of comedy film with the Kentucky Fried Movie and Airplane and in the years since the same style has included Top Secret, 3 Naked Guns, 2 Hot Shots, all the Selzer and Friedberg films, Spy Hard, An American Carol, the Onion Movie and many many more. If someone who grew up with the Selzer and Friedberg movies saw Airplane they (quality aside) would likely think it wasn't original, even though it was an early example of the genre and WAS fairly original when it was made.

My show (usually) operates like a very traditional review show- VOICE OVER EXPLAINS, TO CAMERA FOR PUNCHLINE, FUNNY CLIP, OOOH A CAMEO but in everything but its basic construction it was designed to be different (from how review shows were made back in 2009 when I started). Its hardly my fault that other people had similar ideas to me in the years since I began, is it?

Honestly, if I (or Jack or whoever) took your idea and removed all the stuff you feel is unnecessary then we'd lose a chunk of our current fans (some of whom have been watching for years) and we'd likely pick up almost no new ones (because people who like that style already have a plethora of people they watch).

As for the blood orgies in Jacks Show (or even the minion stuff in mine) those arent always jokes. Its wordbuilding. Linkara is a comic book reviewer who goes on crazy adventures, while Hagan is a supervillain, dictator who reviews as a hobby. Therefore the stuff from the 'real world' of the character that bleeds into the show isnt always supposed to be comedy, its the characters 'real life'. It just so happens to involve supervillainy. My point is, that you might have issue with Mine and Jacks shows for not making sense, but they might only not make sense because you expect something that their not, and were never supposed to be.

@Raven Wilder, the old site won't be around for long, but we can still do a comparison. I'll use the Atop the Fourth Wall episodes.

The old page. You see that one of the first lines is "Display #" with a drop-down box next to it? That lets you pick how many episodes you want to see listed on a page, no doubt to give you a choice when hardware or Internet connection limitations exist. There is an option for "All", in case you want to use it.

The new page. Not only does it list all of Linkara's videos, not just Atop the Fourth wall, but it only lists eight episodes at a time. Ever. And if you don't know the exact name of the episode you want, you either have to click through fifty-three pages to try looking for it, or you have to go to his wiki page, find the episode you want, then go back to the main site and type it into the search bar. How is this more efficient?

I just think it's a stupid gimmick. You don't need worldbuilding when you're a reviewer because all it does is DETRACT from the review, drawing focus to yourself over the film. That's my issue. It doesn't if you've been doing it for a long time because it doesn't make it any less obnoxious or awful. if you feel the need to make a story that badly, write a comic.

You seem to have misinterpreted my critique as "this is too popular" but it isn't. I've always found this review format awful and needless.

edited 9th Dec '14 7:03:19 AM by odiefromtheoz

Aww, crap, its one of those "[x] is too mainstream common nowadays" complaints I hate those type of complaints, they are so common nowadays...

Seriously dude, shut up and go do something you enjoy, if you don't like sitcoms then you don't start complaining to sitcom writer about how much you think sitcoms suck and why they should do something else. If reviews should be all about the movie to you and not sketches or characters or whatever, watch something else and don't tell content creators they should do something else that their audience isn't watching them for.

Like for example, I don't like "bloody orgy" jokes or other type of combination of sexual and violence jokes Count Jackula has, but I still find the character itself funny and I don't think it detracts from his movie reviews. However, I don't go complaining on comment section on how much I feel icky at jokes that complain those two aspects :P Just like how I don't go to Hagan's comment section complain about how she shouldn't shoot minions because I don't find that joke funny, clearly the majority of audience does.

Goddang it, never again use down arrow to respond to posts, its annoying and makes it hard to respond to you without using double posting :P And because edit wars between two posts is annoying. Speaking of which, you clearly edited your post after my initial making fun of your initial post considering my edit does show that I just think you are whining about oranges and apples.

edited 9th Dec '14 7:07:34 AM by SpookyMask

Why are you here in this thread? Or, alternatively, is there any reviewer from the TGWTG/Channel Awesome team you like?

Pretty much my point, why are you complaining about format that other people like as if your opinion is only one that matters and every content creator using that format should change their ways to fit your tastes instead of, you know, watching something else.

Its like some people who complain about Blockbuster Buster despite not watching his show, it just seems asinine "Oh I hate this guy, I just saw him post a new video how dare he" :P

edited 9th Dec '14 7:09:27 AM by SpookyMask

Hagan is the one who engaged me on this. i voiced an opinion on a review format and she objected to it. I never said she had to stop doing it, but I think it's dumb. I still think that. You don't have to agree with it or discuss it with me, but I'm totally within my ability to do so.

*shrugs* I do sometimes forget that "You" in English refers to things generally and not the person you are talking to :p Still, you DID feel need to randomly start complaining about format in a thread about site where that format is used by pretty much everyone.

Plus I still think its "Too mainstream" argument to say that NC doesn't count because [x reason] when he really does count as what the character format is about :P You don't watch NC or any character format using videos for the review itself, of course if review itself is insightful then its what makes the video great. But overall, most of NC and others' videos is riffing/nitpicking/making fun of the movie in many different ways, with only ending of video having their overall opinion on it

Like I said, I brought up a criticism of a common trend I don't care for. It's kind of ridiculous to say I'm in the wrong for that. I also never said the NC wasn't a character or 'too mainstream' which you keep leaning on for some reason. I said his skits were used to illustrate a point about the film, and were themselves critiques, keeping them on topic. My issue is when the reviewer seems to take precedence over the review.

Moving on...

So have all the new talents premiered on the site yet?

Pan Pizza hasn't.

^^Pfft, but debates are fun But okaaaaai

I think it's time to start setting up TVT pages for The Good Hook and Brandon's Cult Movie Reviews. I'm not really good with creating pages from scratch, so any help would be appreciated.

Shark Jumping: Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer

Tim and Beth are really getting a great back-and-forth going, even if I was kind of distracted by what was up with Beth's hair.

Brandon is my new favourite reviewer. The Once Upon a Girl review sold me on him (and satisfied my long-standing curiosity regarding that film). And who knew Starcrash even had a sequel? (Again, curiosity satisfied)

Yeah, I noticed her new hairstyle. It wasn’t that distracting, but I did notice it.

Yeah, I need to watch more of his work but I can tentatively say that he's going to end up in "The Best" category in my ranking of the new producers. (Coming late December/early Januray.)

Some Jerk With A Camera, Small World Part 2. With more ride black comedy and THE GREATEST CAMEO EVER.

Finally, someone on the site–other than the Team Snob–reviews a Tyler Perry movie, with iRawss tackling A Madea Christmas.

Well, the movie doesn't look THAT bad but Ross said it wasn't the worst Madea movie, and since he plans of reviewing the rest of them... I guess we should be very afraid.

(Oh yeah, iRawss has a website now.)

Fun fact: I'm partially responsible for this video. I wrote an e-mail to Ross a while back asking if he was going to review a Tyler Perry movie and he replied that I had gotten him into an idea of doing a video on A Madea Christmas. You're welcome, folks! *gets repeatedly punched in a face*

To be fair, someone has to be brave to tackle a Tyler Perry movie. Unless you have great skills at not getting angry or annoyed by his movies, it's gonna make you feel those movies are really, really bad.

Glad it's not just Team Snob that has to do all the work.

So, apologies if this is out of line, but am I the only one who doesn't really like Blockbuster Buster? It just seems that (since he deals primarily in sequels and adaptations) many of his criticisms boil down to "It's not like the original!"

Nah, you're not the only one, BB has his fair share of detractors. And yeah, when it comes to his criticisms regarding unfaithfulness towards the source material, I cannot help but ask "So? If it works in the movie, who cares?".

I still like his videos, though. They're not always the funniest and ERod relies too much on clips for jokes sometimes (not to mention that he could do something about shitty audio quality of those clips), but his enthusiasm works.