💰 Grifter Callum Nathan Thomas Edmunds / MauLer93 / MauLer and the EFAPshere - Objective discussion about not-Channel Awesome featuring Rags, Southpaw and more!

[PaladinBoo]

Drinker is product. Just consume it and return next week for next product. That's how this works. Drinker is just a mirror for the people he hates. I think there's some kind of psychological mumbo-jumbo associated with that, but I'm not pretentious enough to think of what the terminology is.

I believe the term you are looking for is "para-social bonding". You see this a lot with the Fandom Menace fans as you would with a Twitch thot simp. A lot of their followers are lonely, autistic nerds who are desperate to have their views validated and to have friends. They see someone who is successful who shares a lot of similar personality traits as them or tells them the right things and these lonely, beaten down nerds want to be a part of their group. However, what the likes of the Fandom Menace is doing is Twitch thot levels of predatory. The Twitch thot is at least honest.
People have been noticing that the likes of Nerdrotic and Mauler only accept donations 10 dollars or more. Even then they will only read off chats and highlight ones that donate 50 or more bucks. Contrast this to Mister Metokur. While Jim would always read off larger donations first, however, Jim always made it an effort to read every super chat he got. Even ones where people only donated a dollar to him. This is a man who is suffering from cancer but makes a effort to let his fans know that he values their dollar and their input. This is a sharp contrast to the members of the Fandom Menace who tell their audience that unless they donate big they can fuck off. It's the lack of humility is what is making people sour on the Fandom Menace.
That and Chrissie Mayr. Sorry but that bitch just ain't funny and why the fuck is she on their shows? Bitch ain't a nerd nor does she like nerd stuff. She offers nothing but to be another token woman and a pair of tits and ass on the screen.

 

[Cheeseknife]

I believe the term you are looking for is "para-social bonding". You see this a lot with the Fandom Menace as you would with a Twitch thot simp. A lot of their followers are lonely, autistic nerds who are desperate to have their views validated and to have friends. They see someone who is successful who shares a lot of similar personality traits or tells them the right thing and these lonely, beaten down nerds want to be a part of their group. However, what the likes of the Fandom Menace is doing is Twitch thot levels of predatory. The Twitch thot is at least honest.
People have been noticing that the likes of Nerdortic and Mauler only accept donations 10 or more. Even then they will only read off chats and highlight ones that donate 50 or more bucks. Contrast this to Mister Metokur. While Jim would always read off larger donation first, however, Jim always made it an effort to read every super chat he got. Even ones where people only donated a dollar to him. This is a man who is suffering from cancer but makes a effort to let his fans know that he values their dollar and their input. This is a sharp contrast to the members of the Fandom Menace who tell their audience that unless they donate big they can fuck off. It's the lack of humility is what is making people sour on the Fandom Menace.
That and Chrissy Mayr. Sorry but that bitch just ain't funny and why the fuck is she on their shows? Bitch ain't a nerd nor does she like nerd stuff. She offers nothing but to be another token woman and tits and ass on the screen.

Good points, although "projection" is what I was actually thinking of.

What you described is apt for the person posting above you, though.

 

[Kars den Karb]

My point is that his "previous work" isn't anything special either. I specifically remember he covered Midsommar almost immediately after Red Letter Media did and he gave a piss-poor take on it because he didn't really get it. This is where I really noticed the grifting taking place--I watch RLM's video on day and then, all of a sudden, Drinker's video pops up soon after... Yeah, he's totally covering Midsommar because he just loves film so much. It's not because some huge YouTube channel also happened to cover it, right?

Overall he doesn't actually engage the medium in any way that's actually meaningful. That's why he thrives on capeshit because he can't see the forest for the trees so there's media made for the more simple-minded folks of the world.

The thing is, he's not contradicting himself when he praises GoWR because he's on board with the mainstream critics. The guy knows who butters his bread and so goes where the wind take him. So he'll quietly brush aside all the obvious woke details GoWR has because he can't be too contrary the mainstream or he risks losing his rent.

I don't even give him credit for "basic" tier stuff. Someone could read the synopses of films off Wikipedia plus other trivia and call themselves a critic and achieve the same results.

This is the entire reason people follow him. It has nothing to do with actual criticism of anything.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=d0HHjJXmCIw
Oh, gee, I dunno, Drinker. If I toss a coin, will it land heads or tails?

I guess we're just obligated to click the video to find out, right?

I mean, no, Drinker isn't doing this out of a love of film and never represented his channel as such. He talks about a love of "storytelling in all forms," and as he explains this it becomes apparent that functionally means media designed for mass market appeal, plotted to edify or echo traditional virtue and morality, with a focus on four-quadrant movies and summer blockbusters. This was his manifesto all the way back when he first made his patreon, and as far as I can tell he's stayed roughly within those bounds up until now.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=rkP3TNMHXb4:68

I don't think you can knock him that hard for covering capesh!t when you make videos about Digimon, Swat Kats, and Spiderman 2. You have great taste with Swat Kats, but that's basically in the same realm as Drinker's subject matter. At first this confused me, but I think I'm beginning to understand is that you have a problem with how he covers things, not necessarily what. Your videos are far more granular (scene-by-scene episode summaries) and you're obviously more ideologically specific judging from your posts (although this doesn't figure very large in the videos).

The truth is that throughout history, there are people who succeed because they are fantastic at articulating simple, but nevertheless timeless, wisdom to the general public. Drinker happens to be one of those people, and his work has solidified a general normie sentiment that amounts to, "please make more traditional stories with less gays, token minorities, and dumb female fantasy heroes," which I am perfectly fine with. It's only this recent turn with GOW:R that troubles me.

Because not everyone wears their beliefs on their shoulder. A shcizo leftie may try to promote his beliefs or perspectives, but sometimes the truth comes out. Like how James Cameron's Avatar relies on a White Savior narrative despite the fact that he tries desperately to promote the film as woke. If you're bringing up #MeToo, realize that #MeToo incidentally hurt both sides of the political spectrum. Again, justifying a centrist position on the narrative even though the real matter of focus should have been that the mobs on Twitter should not to be used a judge, jury, and executioner for misdeeds done by whomever.

The real narrative should have focused on the failures of both the justice system corporations constantly sweeping serious matters under the rug so as to make social media the only outlet for outcry. Instead, however, individual people were made to pay for their crimes because they fell under a hashtag while those who enabled them just walk free.\

You're missing my point. To put it bluntly, season 1 of The Boys was about the corrupting influence of fame and Hollywood celebs and studio heads being irredeemably evil people. I find Drinker's review pretty fair.

But the overall point to be made is people who were actually invested in the source material knew the entire thing was woke to begin with. Those people who actually did their due diligence and read the comics didn't need Seasons 2 and beyond to realize this. You can argue source material versus Amazon's show all you want, but if you concede that Drinker didn't look at the source material, then that means he doesn't care about the original arists who made the story in the first place. All he cares about is the corporate hacks who changed the story to make a TV show. That's still just bad criticism.

I can forgive this if it was just me and some friend of mine with a passing interest, but Drinker wants to pass himself off as someone who does his due diligence in showing love and dedication to a craft. If so, he should at the very least respect the authors of an original work to see what they created before it was dismantled by corporate media.

Okay, first of all, the critic doesn't have much of an obligation to the original source material. Ultimately the adaptation needs to stand on its own and can be judged on its own without anyone needing to do homework. There are many amazing movies that have been created off the backs of short stories and graphic novels, but professional critics have never bothered to investigate most of them. Admittedly this gets a little touchy with adaptations of extremely famous works like Lord of the Rings, but only because the originals are so incredible and influential that the adaptation will necessarily be measured against them. Which brings me to my second point:

The original The Boys comic is not that great.

Even amid all the liberal sperging in season 2, the highlights of the TV show are consistently funnier, sharper, and simply made with better craftsmanship than anything in the comic, which is gimmicky, less aware, less complex, and mostly about being edgy. Also, making "woke" a bright line between them is really not meaningful. The only reason the comic is less politically dumb than the show is because it was written from 2006-2012. It bashes religion and conventional morals constantly, and if you know anything about political development in the early 2010s, that's basically the primordial soup of woke. Garth Ennis is as obnoxious as anyone nowadays - his idea of Batman is "a billionaire aristocrat who beats up poor people, as well as the mentally ill." Unsurprisingly, he also approved of the show.

 

[Active User]

Ennis staunchly hates superheroes in general (with I believe the exceptions of Superman and maybe Spider-Man) and it really shows in what he writes, because he's still salty that superhero comics displaced the different genres he preferred within Western comics as a genre. The dude's written some good stuff, but he seems to really need an editor, with The Boys being what happens when he doesn't have one and is given free reign to write a story in the genre he hates. The comic can be amusing, but not really for the right reasons. While it works better as an attack on celebrity culture than an attack on superheroes, it lacks clarity of purpose especially given Ennis' track record. The show's definitely an improvement.

I recommend reading Thor: Vikings on readcomic or something because Ennis wrote it and it's really funny how it was originally supposed to be in continuity but then everyone refused to follow up on it because it had shit like New York City being turned into a concentration camp by time traveling zombie vikings within a couple of days. It's another "so bad it's good" style thing.

 

[Nozomi]

"I don't give a fuck." *posts 10 paragraphs*

I hope Mauler does something stupid again ASAP.

 

[Laughing Jackass]

People will return to the liquor store to purchase more alcohol despite the fact they had an awful night full of vomiting and/or had a terrible headache the next morning.

I don't like the comparison of actual addiction and habitual stupidity.

Besides, I'm saying it's easy enough to get something free instead, which is less true for liquor. People will take free over not if they have the option, and that options more available for that kinda media.

 

[Hagfish]

Because not everyone wears their beliefs on their shoulder. A shcizo leftie may try to promote his beliefs or perspectives, but sometimes the truth comes out. Like how James Cameron's Avatar relies on a White Savior narrative despite the fact that he tries desperately to promote the film as woke.

"tries to promote the film as woke"
Is woke just an insert for "all things leftist"? James cameron's Avatar movies have always been primarily oriented around conservationalism and enviromentalism, the importance and preservation of it. He takes a dumbed down version of dances with wolves and makes it into an enviromentalist story with purdy colours and sexy aliens, and thats it. his Ideology in that regard has been persistent. And the only reason that conservationalism is considered leftist is because mainstream republicans hates enviromentalism and group the two things together.

The white saviour narrative is just a convenient device.

But the overall point to be made is people who were actually invested in the source material knew the entire thing was woke to begin with. Those people who actually did their due diligence and read the comics didn't need Seasons 2 and beyond to realize this. You can argue source material versus Amazon's show all you want, but if you concede that Drinker didn't look at the source material, then that means he doesn't care about the original arists who made the story in the first place. All he cares about is the corporate hacks who changed the story to make a TV show. That's still just bad criticism.

I see, So woke is literally just "anything leftist" according to you. Garth Ennis's comics are some of the least politically correct stories that currently exist, from preacher, to the Crossed all the way down to the Punisher. They are neither diverse, progressive nor do they even pull their punches when it comes to mocking miniorities, homosexuals or any other group of people. Sure, he'll spew shit about racial equality, but the moment dialogue between blacks happen it quickly switches over to ebonics.
Garth is left-wing, but he sure as fuck aint woke, and calling The Boys comic "woke" is a gross misuse of the term.

"those people who actually did their due diligence and read the comics"
Did YOU read the fucking comics? The show and the comics have diverted massively and reading the comics to get a grasp of how the show will turn out is an exercise in being retarded.
Besides, Drinker is reviewing and criticizing THE SHOW. it doesnt matter what the original comic was like, because he is reviewing THE SHOW. The actors, the props, the script, the dialogue, that is what he is reviewing.
You can actually review an adaptation without reviewing the source material. i know, im also baffled, surprised and shook by this factoid.

I can forgive this if it was just me and some friend of mine with a passing interest, but Drinker wants to pass himself off as someone who does his due diligence in showing love and dedication to a craft. If so, he should at the very least respect the authors of an original work to see what they created before it was dismantled by corporate media.

What kind of nonsense grand-standing bullshit is this?
Imagine applying this standard back when everyone was gangstomping the twillight movies.
"you have to read the books first. Sure, they were based on the wet-dreams of a perverted Karen, but you must read them or you aren't respecting the craft".

I've read the boys comic in its entirety, i haven't seen the show. but considering how the show changes gender, character dynamics, entire plot-lines, removes the edginess, combines characters and what have you, i dare say that the comic and show are two entirely separate entities.

Spoiler: Spoilers for the comic

Black Noir not being a clone of Homelander, right out of the gate, changes the show drastically from the comic.

 

[Cheeseknife]

I don't like the comparison of actual addiction and habitual stupidity.

Besides, I'm saying it's easy enough to get something free instead, which is less true for liquor. People will take free over not if they have the option, and that options more available for that kinda media.

Where the addiction stems from is the para-social relationship that @RangerBoo was talking about. You get addicted to the fantasy that somehow your hatred is going to transfer its energy or whatever into your achieving something you've deemed good and right because your adversaries are going to pay for what they're doing. Like imagining that a YouTuber with over a million subs calling stuff "woke" every now and then is somehow sticking it to these corporate shysters means said corporations give a damn about anything he says.

"tries to promote the film as woke"
Is woke just an insert for "all things leftist"? James cameron's Avatar movies have always been primarily oriented around conservationalism and enviromentalism, the importance and preservation of it. He takes a dumbed down version of dances with wolves and makes it into an enviromentalist story with purdy colours and sexy aliens, and thats it. his Ideology in that regard has been persistent. And the only reason that conservationalism is considered leftist is because mainstream republicans hates enviromentalism and group the two things together.

The white saviour narrative is just a convenient device.

Wait, how do you know all this?

Oh, right, because that's how James Cameron and his team promoted his film. So, I guess you don't even need to think about it. Just stop thinking for yourself and let the people who make the films do their thinking for you. Just like Kars den Karb said about Drinker--stop developing your own opinions and just listen to how he promotes himself through his own self-assessments. Just turn your brain off because people are somehow incapable of lying when they produce a video and tell you about themselves and their art.

Just stop thinking for yourselves and let the people who produce the entertainment you consume do your thinking for you. You can't be trusted with your own thoughts.

What kind of nonsense grand-standing bullshit is this?

Maybe come up with a counterargument, then? If you wrote a comic and published it and someone took it and turned it on its head and everyone judged your work from thereon after based on a complete corporate rehash, are you saying you wouldn't have a problem because the corporations clearly know better than you do? You're the artist, but these corporations just know what to do with your art and ideas better than you or your fans know. That's how that works?

 

[Hagfish]

Wait, how do you know all this?

Oh, right, because that's how James Cameron and his team promoted his film. So, I guess you don't even need to think about it. Just stop thinking for yourself and let the people who make the films do their thinking for you. Just like Kars den Karb said about Drinker--stop developing your own opinions and just listen to how he promotes himself through his own self-assessments. Just turn your brain off because people are somehow incapable of lying when they produce a video and tell you about themselves and their art.

Just stop thinking for yourselves and let the people who produce the entertainment you consume do your thinking for you. You can't be trusted with your own thoughts.

Ah yes, impeccable logic. "anyone who disagrees with me is a SHEEP with no opinions of their own. And i dont even need to refute their points, because they are sheep and are therefore automatically wrong".

Are you legitimately retarded or are you just incapable of making a point thats more airtight than a fishing net? I base my understanding of Cameron being an enviromentalist based on his...
-Long term enviromental activism
-his numerous enviromental projects
-constant enviromental documentaries
-him making lifestyle decisions based around it
-the fact that he cant go five minutes without mentioning global warming.
If that isn't enough to make a decent assessment of a person, then what is? Do i have to stalk Cameron and observe with my own eyes as he saves a whale? Thats good for irrefutable proof, but if i were to base my entire life based entirely on finding irrefutable proof for things i'd be wasting it more than i am now. And it wouldnt help any, because the moment i tell you "I saw cameron be an enviromentalist with my own two eyes", you'd just call me a liar, and we're back on square one.

The problem with your whole brainfart logic is that you erode the very notion of assessing reality based on what information we do have, but you only do so selectively against people you disagree with because you're also a hypocrite. You can obviously never be wrong, but everyone else is wrong based on some ridiculous standard you'd never in a million years apply to yourself.

Do you comprehend the problem with this logic of yours, or are you just straight up too dense?

Maybe come up with a counterargument, then? If you wrote a comic and published it and someone took it and turned it on its head and everyone judged your work from thereon after based on a complete corporate rehash, are you saying you wouldn't have a problem because the corporations clearly know better than you do? You're the artist, but these corporations just know what to do with your art and ideas better than you or your fans know. That's how that works?

No one is saying that "muh evil corporations" know better, you strawmanning fuckhead. People are saying that the adaptation is different from its source, and should be judged thusly. If anything, an artist would prefer the adaptation be judged separately. GOT brought more readers to ASOIAF, but was also distinct enough that people didnt get a bad taste in their mouth when reading ASOIAF, which George is presumably fucking joyous about.
He wins financially, he wins in terms of gaining a larger audience, his fantasy setting is getting spinoffs and adaptations out the wazoo, and his books are becoming more popular. Ack, poor author and artist, i knew thee well.

artists consent to having their work adapted, and they know full well that the nature of the adaptation is out of their control, as part of the fucking contract they signed.
Garth Ennis isn't sitting and quietly sobbing in a dark room with a gun in his mouth because
"my god, my work is being adapted and being changed. farewell cruel world".

Your logic falls apart in both directions.
If the adaptation is too close, then comparing comic/book with movie/show is unnessecary since its the same plot-beats.
if the adaptation is wildly different, then comparing comic/book with movie/show is irrelevant because they are not the same.
And when you, as a critic of movies and shows, based your youtube channel on criticizing movies and shows, then you should talk about movies and shows, because that's what people are there for.
IF someone watches drinker and wants to show "is The Boys show any good or not", they dont want a 15 minute essay on the comics, they want to know if the show is good or not.

 

[Hankus McSix]

I would like to take a moment to just point out that in 2019 MauLer released part 0 of the force awakens critique and despite being paid 2K a month on Patreon and getting more in super chats than most waiters make in tips, can't be assed to finish the series because he's too busy playing video games and talking with friends on how wrong people are.

That is all, carry on.

This is why I had great respect for creators like SsethTzeentach. I dunno what it's like now haven't watched him in a while. But I remember his patreon was payed per video instead of monthly and he closed down his patreon and subscribestar at one point cause he wasn't making any videos during that time.

Meanwhile Mauler is sitting on his Patreon getting 1000 quid per month and his last update was in 2019. Like what the actual fuck, Mauler is unironically pulling a Spoony with this shit.

Btw. these are from his two Patreon goals that he reaches every month

The second one is technically correct since he does Efap weekly but come on

 

[WootieWot]

He even supports a couple of Synth's opinions in that the gameplay is "casual" and not very challenging, and that the first part of the game is a walking simulator (he actually says "walking simulator").

Those criticisms of his are what I would call, 'safe criticisms' as in those are accepted criticisms of the game that most Ragnarok lovers will either agree with or understand. He didn't criticize the holy grail of this game which is the story and its characters. He did a Mauler by just explaining the story and giving it credit as he went along with no criticism added to any sections of the story whatsoever which gives the impression to the viewer that the story was as good as it can get and there was no issue with the writing whatsoever which is what the mainstream opinion is of Ragnarok. Nowhere did he apply the same standards he applies to movies and shows that are popular to dislike or hate to Ragnarok.

He even makes his criticism of the game as a walking simulator seem not as bad by claiming that it's only temporary and when you've gone through the 'initial segment' which is the first couple of hours and then the game starts to open up. Now if we take the main story only into consideration, the game is around 70 % cutscenes and this includes QTE segments, so when he says 'initial segments' that and that they only last for a few hours. How many hours are we talking about? What about all the other cutscenes and walky-talky scenes after these 'initial segments'? How many of them does the game throw at us? Going by his review only, I can only say as Critical Drinker likes to say, DON'T KNOW!

Also, he parrots what the phony mainstream game journalist have been saying ever since GOW ( 2018 ) came out which is that Kratos and the game he is in now is now more mature in comparison to the older games, which is just false, the older game always had a mature storyline, all Drinker is doing here is mimicking the mainstream view of the newer games in comparison to the older games, older games which he obviously hasn't played.

And him defending the race-swapping, well all I got to say to that is that he should change his name to The Hypocrite Grifter.

He made his video in such a way as to receive the least dislike and hate as possible, not to be as honest as possible, honesty doesn't seem to be a virtue that's valuable to The Hypocrite Grifter.

 

[Cheeseknife]

Ah yes, impeccable logic. "anyone who disagrees with me is a SHEEP with no opinions of their own. And i dont even need to refute their points, because they are sheep and are therefore automatically wrong".

Are you legitimately retarded or are you just incapable of making a point thats more airtight than a fishing net? I base my understanding of Cameron being an enviromentalist based on his...
-Long term enviromental activism
-his numerous enviromental projects
-constant enviromental documentaries
-him making lifestyle decisions based around it
-the fact that he cant go five minutes without mentioning global warming.
If that isn't enough to make a decent assessment of a person, then what is? Do i have to stalk Cameron and observe with my own eyes as he saves a whale? Thats good for irrefutable proof, but if i were to base my entire life based entirely on finding irrefutable proof for things i'd be wasting it more than i am now. And it wouldnt help any, because the moment i tell you "I saw cameron be an enviromentalist with my own two eyes", you'd just call me a liar, and we're back on square one.

The problem with your whole brainfart logic is that you erode the very notion of assessing reality based on what information we do have, but you only do so selectively against people you disagree with because you're also a hypocrite. You can obviously never be wrong, but everyone else is wrong based on some ridiculous standard you'd never in a million years apply to yourself.

Do you comprehend the problem with this logic of yours, or are you just straight up too dense?



No one is saying that "muh evil corporations" know better, you strawmanning fuckhead. People are saying that the adaptation is different from its source, and should be judged thusly. If anything, an artist would prefer the adaptation be judged separately. GOT brought more readers to ASOIAF, but was also distinct enough that people didnt get a bad taste in their mouth when reading ASOIAF, which George is presumably fucking joyous about.
He wins financially, he wins in terms of gaining a larger audience, his fantasy setting is getting spinoffs and adaptations out the wazoo, and his books are becoming more popular. Ack, poor author and artist, i knew thee well.

artists consent to having their work adapted, and they know full well that the nature of the adaptation is out of their control, as part of the fucking contract they signed.
Garth Ennis isn't sitting and quietly sobbing in a dark room with a gun in his mouth because
"my god, my work is being adapted and being changed. farewell cruel world".

Your logic falls apart in both directions.
If the adaptation is too close, then comparing comic/book with movie/show is unnessecary since its the same plot-beats.
if the adaptation is wildly different, then comparing comic/book with movie/show is irrelevant because they are not the same.
And when you, as a critic of movies and shows, based your youtube channel on criticizing movies and shows, then you should talk about movies and shows, because that's what people are there for.
IF someone watches drinker and wants to show "is The Boys show any good or not", they dont want a 15 minute essay on the comics, they want to know if the show is good or not.

I never told you to agree with me. I told you the entire basis for your opinions was rooted in their own self-assessment.

You're a sheep by merit of the fact that their self-assessment is the entire baseline for your conclusions rather than your own assessment.

It's quite literally, "I know what this guy is all about because he said so in a video." XD

Gee, I didn't realize it was *that* easy to convince someone of anything you want them to believe about you that you want.

You definitely want to buy that used car. Don't ask any questions, just take it give me your money. ; )

 

[WootieWot]

I would like to take a moment to just point out that in 2019 MauLer released part 0 of the force awakens critique and despite being paid 2K a month on Patreon and getting more in super chats than most waiters make in tips, can't be assed to finish the series because he's too busy playing video games and talking with friends on how wrong people are.

That is all, carry on.

The picture of Mauler being a fatass, is how many years old now? One thing for certain is that they were from a time when Mauler used to upload more frequently to his main channel. One thing about obesity is that it's one of those blatant signs of laziness and lack of self-control and these traits will obviously reflect on his work ethic and how frequently he will work on uploading content on his channel, if he's lazy in real life, he will most likely be lazy in his 'work place' as well. What I'm trying to get to is that, if we use his huge amount of increase in laziness when it comes to his 'Youtube career' and reflect that back to his real life, you got to wonder how fat he must be now.

Maybe he could already be considered a candidate for my 600 lbs life? Hahaha.

 

[Schway]

Yes, this is abundantly clear in seasons 2 & 3, but season 1, which received the Drinker's official stamp of approval, is focused on a thinly-veiled portrayal of a ruthless talent agency. Starlight's central conflict is a coverup of her rape by said agency, Hughie's is trying to get revenge for an Ezra Miller-esque hit and run (also covered up), and Homelander, for all his Bushian bombast, is a villain because he's an amoral, hypersensitive narcissist who literally cannot live without popular adulation. In fact, the worst people in the season are caustic portraits of modernist, materialist, Professional Managerial Class liberals.

So Homelander ripped off the WTC 9/11 speech for a "terrorist attack" he committed himself. Ostensibly an attack on conservatives, but are we really going to take umbrage on behalf of ironclad conservative George W. Bush now? There was also that subplot with Starlight's televangelist ministry, but against the rest of the show it's pretty much background noise. I would also keep in mind that the comic also had a very edgy view of Christianity that basically sprung from the same backwater as New Atheism, which culminated in Homelander claiming the mantle of God as he dropped a family of rubes to their deaths.

Yes, but that is all in line with what I said, the show doesn't criticize woke and take shots at both sides as many "anti-woke" reviewers claimed, it in fact promotes it by pinning any problems on people in power not being committed enough. This is a wedge, their argument is these managerial liberal companies are ran by people who aren't committed enough to our progressive values. Can't you see how they cover up sexual harassment of women? Can't you see how they use black people as marketing tools instead of promoting them for diversity and because we owe them that? And the proposed solution that would be ready-made presented by media would be as it always has been in the last decades, pumping in more progressive management offices that can exert pressure on the control structure of those companies. Effectively the argument is "Wow look how shit this is, it's only shit because there's not enough progressivism" or "Real progressivism has never been tried" if you like that one better.


I mean you can't really wrap a whole episode going after Christians and portraying them as hypocrites as being background noise, and if you want to go back to "wow the comics were like that too" then I find that kinda funny considering that they changed a bunch of things that would have been unpalatable from the comics but apparently left this over.

Leaving in things that suit your progressive narrative but replacing/editing ones that run counter or offend your sensibilities, hmmm... It's almost like it's not exactly a non-ideological show.

So yeah season 1 is less overt, but it was clear to me watching it what the message and the direction of the show is.

 

[Hagfish]

This is why I had great respect for creators like SsethTzeentach. I dunno what it's like now haven't watched him in a while. But I remember his patreon was payed per video instead of monthly and he closed down his patreon and subscribestar at one point cause he wasn't making any videos during that time.

Meanwhile Mauler is sitting on his Patreon getting 1000 quid per month and his last update was in 2019. Like what the actual fuck, Mauler is unironically pulling a Spoony with this shit.

Btw. these are from his two Patreon goals that he reaches every month
View attachment 4338495
View attachment 4338499
The second one is technically correct since he does Efap weekly but come on

Mauler is extremely lazy, and if it werent for his fans being such simps they would have held his feet to the fire long ago. But then again you also have to remind yourself what kind of a fucking person would sit down for a 5-10 hour review of a star wars movie released several years ago. Mauler can make and release a video within a short timespan if he truly wants to as shown with one of his reviews literally being released within like, a week of the movie airing, but therein lies the crux.
Even in the 2019 patreon update it was made very clear that his focus is increasingly on EFAP. And if socialblade is anything to go by EFAP is growing whilst MauLer is declining. The rapid fire release date of EFAP shit outpacing his main channel stuff by a massive margin.

Ssethtzeentach not only closed his patreon and subscribestar because he wasnt releasing videos, but he actively released a video without getting paid on patreon for it to make up for his wonky release dates. basically night and day in comparison to mauler.

I never told you to agree with me. I told you the entire basis for your opinions was rooted in their own self-assessment.
You're a sheep by merit of the fact that their self-assessment is the entire baseline for your conclusions rather than your own assessment.

It's quite literally, "I know what this guy is all about because he said so in a video." XD

My assessment of them is based on their actions and words. Their past deeds and how they live, its literally all the information i have when it comes to assessing them, and its decent evidence.
If i eat a sandwich, and i like the sandwich, then my favorable attitude towards the sandwich is based on my tastebud's assessment of it. My tastebuds could be lying, but they haven't betrayed me for the past decades, so why would they now.
Sometimes you have to base your understanding of reality on what information you do have.

I am certain there is not an alligator in my basement, based on the facts and information available to me. thus i make the assessment that my basement is alligator free.
Now, i dont know for 100% certainty that there isnt an alligator in my basement, but if i were to live my life as if there was one, that would be considered lunacy.

Are you still too dense to grasp at what im trying to tell you, or is it finally coming through? is fact based deduction a viable tactic? do you also by any chance believe Evolution to be a lie?

Gee, I didn't realize it was *that* easy to convince someone of anything you want them to believe about you that you want.

You definitely want to buy that used car. Don't ask any questions, just take it give me your money. ; )

Im going to use my arcane powers of deduction to deduce that you're a fucking retard, based on the observable evidence of you being too obtuse to grasp the basics of fact-based deduction.

i own a used car, and it runs perfectly, because i used my powers of arcane powers of deduction to see whether it was a good buy or not, based on observable evidence.
Based on the "real fandom" clip, i deduce that you got assburgers.

Magic, bitch.

 

[Kars den Karb]

Yes, but that is all in line with what I said, the show doesn't criticize woke and take shots at both sides as many "anti-woke" reviewers claimed, it in fact promotes it by pinning any problems on people in power not being committed enough. This is a wedge, their argument is these managerial liberal companies are ran by people who aren't committed enough to our progressive values. Can't you see how they cover up sexual harassment of women? Can't you see how they use black people as marketing tools instead of promoting them for diversity and because we owe them that?

That's a great description of millennial lefties, but it just doesn't apply to season 1. Where are the prog values? Starlight wanting to be a better role model to young women? That's leftist?

I mean you can't really wrap a whole episode going after Christians and portraying them as hypocrites as being background noise, and if you want to go back to "wow the comics were like that too" then I find that kinda funny considering that they changed a bunch of things that would have been unpalatable from the comics but apparently left this over.

Leaving in things that suit your progressive narrative but replacing/editing ones that run counter or offend your sensibilities, hmmm... It's almost like it's not exactly a non-ideological show.

I'm conflating a couple of your points, but re: "anti-woke reviewers" I went back and watched the Drinker's review, and he never claimed a dumb centrist perspective like even-handed or non-ideological. He also calls out the Christian episode. I can't see the problem with anything he said.

Even in the 2019 patreon update it was made very clear that his focus is increasingly on EFAP. And if socialblade is anything to go by EFAP is growing whilst MauLer is declining. The rapid fire release date of EFAP shit outpacing his main channel stuff by a massive margin.

The popularity is downstream of the release schedule. EFAP is performing better than Mauler's reviews because he doesn't make reviews anymore. Consistency is necessary for youtube success, and while I find Mauler's content to be indulgent at best, millions of people ate it up. I have no doubt that he would've been able to run out the gravy train indefinitely if he just took the time to make videos, especially with phase 4 of the MCU going down in flames.

Heck, if he can pull himself away from discord, he still can. Imagine a Mauler takedown of Wakanda Forever. 3 million views easily.

 

[Berrakh]

it in fact promotes it by pinning any problems on people in power not being committed enough. This is a wedge, their argument is these managerial liberal companies are ran by people who aren't committed enough to our progressive values. Can't you see how they cover up sexual harassment of women? Can't you see how they use black people as marketing tools instead of promoting them for diversity and because we owe them that?

So true!
It was shocking for me to find out that many “anti-woke” people couldn’t see past simplistic wedges like these.
I understand, for example, making a statistical argument that woke soft-on-crime policies hurt poor black people the most (I bet this is true) but to say the problem with wokeness is the hypocrisy of the woke is morally and intellectually feeble.

 

[Schway]

That's a great description of millennial lefties, but it just doesn't apply to season 1. Where are the prog values? Starlight wanting to be a better role model to young women? That's leftist?

It's been a while since I watched s1, but I'm pretty sure those examples I gave are right from the show, there's a scene where they talk about bringing in another black hero for the marketing with the urban community, most of starlight's stuff touches on this, with the costume, interviews etc. The whole narrative spins around the idea that corps are dishonest about their wokeness and just do it to appease the populace or something, which is basically reverse of reality.

If you'd like, you can give me examples of them criticizing some actual progressive principle instead of just the execution of it by corporations. That would be a good way to exonerate s1

CD at a point in that vid says it's so spot on that "he wonders how they got away with it", this is why they got away with it because fundamentally it's just a narrative to incentivize more progressivism not less. There is a distinct idea pushed when it comes to boys of it being counter-cultural, or against the mainstream narrative when it is not.

To answer your loaded question about starlight. Yeah it is leftist, because the kind of role model she wants to be is a modern emancipated woman and that's fundamentally something leftist pushed for and maintain.

 

[Gloria The Glorious]

Ah, conversation about media where people with disagreements try to understand what the fuck the other is saying. I unironically love Every Page An Explanation.

 

[Cheeseknife]

Yes, but that is all in line with what I said, the show doesn't criticize woke and take shots at both sides as many "anti-woke" reviewers claimed, it in fact promotes it by pinning any problems on people in power not being committed enough. This is a wedge, their argument is these managerial liberal companies are ran by people who aren't committed enough to our progressive values. Can't you see how they cover up sexual harassment of women? Can't you see how they use black people as marketing tools instead of promoting them for diversity and because we owe them that? And the proposed solution that would be ready-made presented by media would be as it always has been in the last decades, pumping in more progressive management offices that can exert pressure on the control structure of those companies. Effectively the argument is "Wow look how shit this is, it's only shit because there's not enough progressivism" or "Real progressivism has never been tried" if you like that one better.


I mean you can't really wrap a whole episode going after Christians and portraying them as hypocrites as being background noise, and if you want to go back to "wow the comics were like that too" then I find that kinda funny considering that they changed a bunch of things that would have been unpalatable from the comics but apparently left this over.

Leaving in things that suit your progressive narrative but replacing/editing ones that run counter or offend your sensibilities, hmmm... It's almost like it's not exactly a non-ideological show.

So yeah season 1 is less overt, but it was clear to me watching it what the message and the direction of the show is.

Ultimately what this all goes to show is we're never going to get quality entertainment. Actually, I won't say "never" because you never say never, but the reality is that folks at the top just aren't hiring talent or by merit. All they want is troons, fags, pedos, and the like. Just a monkey-house where the animals are all smearing poo on the walls and calling it art and telling you ought to like it or you're racist something-a-phobic.