I love the Critic as much as anyone (more for the character stuff really, and I get fairly pissed with the people who thinks his comedy is like a shit-throwing monkey - wtf are you watching?) but Doug is an absolute gem of a reviewer. Even when he's criticising, he does it so smiley and positive - except for that one - that it gives me fuzzies.
I cut up one dozen new men and you will die somewhat, again and again.
Just a minor note, it's Chester A Bum, and his page is at Bum Reviews. But I agree, although they're less entertainment oriented, it's still pleasing to hear Walker dissect the film meaningfully.
Fixed.
My only problem with it (and certain other features on the webpage) is that it's largely unscripted, and therefore takes so damn long. You'll spend at least a quarter of each video watching them go "Uh, yeah, so that's really just it. [The last thing I said three times]. That's really what I have to say about it, you know, [one more time, stated a little differently]." If they would gather their thoughts beforehand and do a little editing like they do with Bum or NC features, it would dramatically increase the watchability.
But yeah, overall it's nice to see that he's a much more evenhanded critic than his portrayed characters.
"Pale Ebenezer thought it wrong to fight, but Roaring Bill (who killed him) thought it right." - Hillaire Belloc, The Pacifist
@Shrikes It's not all bad. I like having the excuse of watching Doug for thirty minutes or so. :p
I cut up one dozen new men and you will die somewhat, again and again.
I'm too lazy to go check, but usually, don't Doug's supplement reviews to Bum reviews only last about 10 minutes or so? I can only think of one exception to that off of the top of my head.
Okay yeah you seem to be right, I don't know where 20 minutes came from, the last two were 13 and 14 but 10 seems to be more normal. I'll fix that too :D
@Shrikesnest I think the charm of the reviews is the way it's unscripted and so feels so genuine, maybe you could edit that without spoiling the magic but I don't think generally the pay-off is worth the loss. It's true that he often does end up repeating a little too much though
What I don't get is why he brings up spoilers in his Bum Reviews, but doesn't in his own. If he's going to take a longer, more in-depth review, wouldn't it be better to have the long one have the spoilers and the short one just display his opinion?
Here are my 2 biggest problems with Doug the critic: 1)his unfair comparisons-this is something his brother and himself call him out for,he criticize a movie for what it should be instead of what they are like "why can't every superheroe movie be more like 'the Dark knight'",why can't 'Tangled'be more like princess and the frog"and then "why can't 'the princess and the frog' be more like 'Tangled".what makes it even more frustrating when I see him bitch about a movie for lack of originality like in his list of movies that he likes and everybody seems to love. 2)Angrish-I found it amusing at first but by the 2nd and 3rd time ,it becomes really annoying.
Doug the critic as in his non- Nostalgia Critic reviews? I say that because I never picked up on much angrish at all, in fact what impressed me is he seems to have a genuine desire to love the heck out of almost everything he touches. He's certainly not always right in his criticism but he seems so genuine and even handed about it. I probably haven't seen all of them though, so maybe I missed the agnrish
@Tom He only angrishes when kids are getting hurt, and even then it's more stepford Tranquil Fury.
I cut up one dozen new men and you will die somewhat, again and again.
Even the Nostalgia Critic doesn't really "angrish". Sure, he gets angry, but it doesn't make his speech unclear.
I'm a Troper!!!Leave a Comment:
Doug Walker reviews - More Bum than Critic
If you didn't know, now in every Bum Review, Doug Walker also does a 10 minute review himself of the same film and posts that in the same section. You should watch this! Apart from nothing else for the opportunity to see Doug not in character. Particularly if you're a hater, you need to watch these because this is what he's like as a person. It's completely unscripted, just him talking to the camera, normally immediately after he's seen the film.
The interesting thing is, he's more Chester A. Bum than Nostalgia Critic in real life. When he gets excited he begins to flap his arms about and suddenly you can see the enthusiasm of Bum slipping through and the same voice creeps into his throat. On the other hand, so far I've seen almost nothing of the critic. He seems like a fun enthusiastic and incredibly likeable person, well worthy of all that he's managed to accomplish.
And the reviews themselves are delightful. Completely honest, and very wise, I've found myself agreeing more with him than almost any other reviewer I've read. But whats particularly special is that he tries to look at it from every angle, rather than just laying into a film, he'll try to work out what sort of person would like it and should go and see it and what type of character traits or personally history would stop someone from trying to enjoy a film. There's a lot of insight, especially given the lack of preparation and he's happy to try and put films into their wider context too and took about the values of the film or the impact it might have.
The tone is absolutely positive, but that doesn't mean he doesn't point out the flaws, or actively dislike some of the films and point that out. In fact even for good films, like The Avengers he's not afraid of highlighting the parts that may not work or even things that would be major problems for certain demographics. It's just rather than laying into it and trying to get humour from the scorn with which he treats the films suckiness, it's quiet, humble and sincere and there's a touch of disappointment that he hasn't been able to find enjoyment in the film.
It really is a shock to find these, and they almost feel a bit out of place in the context of Channel Awesome, but they're well worth a look