TV Tropes Org
site search
Atop The Fourth Wall back to reviews
Comments
Funny and worthy of being on the site, but...
Now let me just say that Atop the Fourth Wall is hilarious in my opinion, he comes up with great jokes about stupid comics. Linkara's character is also more pleasant than many others on the site, and he's got amusing sidekick characters. He gives good insight on what a comic book buyer like him looks for, and provides opinions on social matters that I can agree with, off-topic as they are. A good "show" to watch and enjoy.

But... I don't know how to begin other than one word: Narm.

Maybe it's Narm Charm for some, but I just can't get into these story arcs he has. Linkara tries to build up epic story arcs for his reviews, which isn't a bad thing, but it's awfully distracting sometimes. I wasn't watching his series yet for most of the Mechakara stuff and only really saw the climactic conclusion, and I liked it. Then came Lord Vyce and Linkara's disappearance.

I'm not saying the arc was a bad idea, but it could've been done better, maybe if it wasn't stretched out for as many months as it was. Eventually "Linkara reviews bad comics" became "Linkara and friends battle a multiversal terrorist bent on conquering everything in order to protect them from a greater threat while dealing with robots and Silent Hill psychological attacks, and he squeezes in a review when convenient". (Long name, but not the point.) Now it's not like he does a video without any review on occasion for the sake of a story (except a recent Recap Episode, but it was forgivable for the Take That Me tone it took). But what I'm getting at is that the review of a comic feels forced like "oh nuts I forgot, this is a review show, better work one in". His story concepts are good, but Linkara needs to tone it down and remember- This is a review show of bad comics.

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I just don't appreciate the epic scale of Vyce and the Entity like he and some other fans do, it just rubs me the wrong way and I feel distracted by it.

My overall rating of Atop the Fourth Wall is 8/10, it's still a good review show and a must-see for people visiting the site, even people who aren't a fan of comics (like me). The big, dramatic stories are really the only major problem I have. If there's a good thing to say about a comic review show, it probably applies to this one too.
I think you're spot on. I absolutely love his reviews and I've been much more aware of more mainstream comicbooks because of Linkara. Still, I don't follow his storylines because I don't necessarily watch his videos in order and sometimes I forget to stick around til the end to see what's going on.
comment #7998 LaCapitana 7th Jun 11
I don't understand how it can be "distracting" or how the reviews can seem to be "thrown in". The plot bits are always before the opening theme song, and after Linkara says "this comic sucks.", aside from rather special occasions. The plot points very clearly are just to help the reviews, and when you think "huh, the review kinda was lame but the plot seemed to have more effort" it is because the review started lame, and the plot was added to help spruce up the whole package, hence the impression that sometimes the reviews seem like an afterthought. But the whole "distracting" thing I just don't get, honestly. Its online media. Just take the little ball at the bottom and skip around to the meat of the show if it bugs ya.
comment #7999 TVG 7th Jun 11
Skipping them doesn't really take away that problem though, it just keeps people like me from seeing the part we'd rather not. Good for avoiding it, but that doesn't mean they're not still there. And like I said, it's kind of a Love It Or Hate It deal, some people like the story bits.
comment #8045 MosquitoMan 9th Jun 11
Well, I know but I'm saying that the story bits should be kept around, because while people who don't like them can skip it, if they are taken away, the people who liked them can't get them back, hence, if they were to go away, it'd just make people unhappy, hence why I don't understand the purpose of criticizing it.
comment #8055 TVG 10th Jun 11
I never understood the whole need for epic or expansive plots to begin with.

He's a geek on the internet reviewing bad comics. How can you really make any sort of interesting plot out of that? Add to the fact that the plots really end up being...incredibly corny, and yet he tries to take them so seriously. We're supposed to believe that Mecha-kara is a genuine threat, when he can be bested by a dancing ninja and a Power Rangers toy giving someone "internet reviewer" powers?
comment #8110 TerminusEst13 16th Jun 11
Now why in the world would you think that an author who includes dancing ninjas and Power Rangers in his plot was taking his story seriously?
comment #8111 eveil 16th Jun 11
Again, that he was trying to build up Mecha-kara as a genuine evil threat. And that he was shortly after trying to leave "dramatic" cliffhangers talking about the next plot.

The problem I've noticed a lot of people try with these sort of meta-plots is that they think they can combine silliness and seriousness and promptly switch it on or off at the drop of a hat. No. It doesn't work that way.
comment #8128 TerminusEst13 16th Jun 11 (edited by: TerminusEst13)
That's called acting and parody. It's no more serious than any of the Angry Video Game Nerd plots.
comment #8131 eveil 17th Jun 11
No, playing it entirely straight except for some goofy moments and snarking does not constitute "parody", no matter how bad your acting is. That is not what parody means. What are you parodying, anyway? Other web-review overdramatic plots? You could do a lot better than that if you're trying to parody it.

A better parody of that would be a reviewer who needs to get his reviews up on the internet for his fans to read them or else the universe will explode, or something.
comment #8137 TerminusEst13 17th Jun 11 (edited by: TerminusEst13)
bottom line of you dislike the plot's just skip them most fans enjoy them.
comment #9370 Supergamer81 20th Aug 11
It's just a show. You should really relax.

The plots are corny, but the whole point of it is Narm Charm.
comment #10027 Raysenn 17th Sep 11
It's kind of funny that the MST 3 K Mantra has become some sort of attempt at a catch-all against criticism, when it's supposed to be for research/science errors. I'm very relaxed. Just because someone likes something on the internet that I don't isn't making me all tense and upset, and it certainly doesn't mean I can't say why.*

I don't believe it's Narm Charm, I think it's more the idea that he wants to try and create stories—with him as the lead character, building himself up as someone impressive/smart/powerful. It feels like the video equivalent of a self-insert fan-fiction.
comment #10032 TerminusEst13 17th Sep 11
Lewis is a pretty nice guy, if opinionated. Linkara has repeatedly demonstrated himself as being arrogant, assuming, and just generally not particularly friendly. I don't think it's self-insert, Linkara is just a character Lewis is playing (even if it only got that way through Divergent Character Evolution), but because Lewis is the writer and Linkara tends to come out on top people tend to see it your way.

And the MST 3 K Mantra is a catch-all against criticism, at least where Plot Holes are concerned. The point of the mantra is that the plot isn't the point, it's the jokes/action bits/characterization whathaveyou, and that you should focus on that and not Fridge Logic like how Joel eats and breaths, and other science facts. Not related to research at all.
comment #10033 Wackd 17th Sep 11 (edited by: Wackd)
It's about not sweating the small stuff, yeah, including research/science errors* —but the idea that it's supposed to patch up plot holes (if the plot isn't the point) kind of breaks down if the work in question tries to develop a storyline.

MST 3 K isn't plot-based and has minimal continuity. Ergo, questions about plot (such as Servo identifying colors when he's colorblind) shouldn't be focused on. AT 4 W wasn't plot-focused at all early on, but now not only has a continuity but tries to go epic in scope and crosses over with other continuities. Is it still comedy-focused? Yeah. But there's really only so much the Rule Of Funny can cover, especially when certain segments aren't trying to be funny in the first place.
comment #10034 TerminusEst13 17th Sep 11 (edited by: TerminusEst13)
Fair enough. It's debatable whether the plot is strong enough in focus or scope to be covered by a mantra saying one shouldn't care about plot bits, but regardless I thought your use of the term was wrong. MST 3 K Mantra is more about ignoring Plot Holes and Fridge Logic than it is about ignoring Did Not Do The Research.
comment #10043 Wackd 17th Sep 11 (edited by: Wackd)
Yes, the MST 3 K Mantra covers this. How many of the episodes are plot related? The vast mayority are not plot related. Even now only a minority of the episodes cover the plot, and it's very easy to simply ignore it.

It's debatible whether the plot holes and the incredible content of What Do You Mean Its Not Awesome are intentional. In which case, the Mantra applies. If not, then it is not covered by the Mantra.
comment #10452 Raysenn 2nd Oct 11
Lately Lewis has been sequestering the story-based parts of his videos after the credits. I think that's a good move. If you're not into the story, there's a clear cut-off point where you can stop the video.

Yet I still think that if he wants to tell a story, he'd be better off creating a separate all-story show and keeping AT 4 F all-review. I don't think there's a rule at TGWTG that all videos MUST be a review of something.
comment #15682 Filby 5th Aug 12
In order to post comments, you need to Get Known
TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy