"angry" gamers/critics

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
I feel like Mike and Jay actually talk about the movie and it shows in their reviews. You get their honest opinions on the damn thing and don't have to wait until they post their real thoughts in another video a few months down the line. Doug just wants to be funny and increase his ad revenue.
 
Honestly Doug and his gang don't really review their movies; they're more a synopsis of what they watched as well as whatever dumb moments they can notice or pick out to make the movie out to be as bad as possible. They rarely are objective, because they know their fanbase full of foaming tards won't like it if they're happy, so they play it up with all the grace of Genghis Khan on tour in Baghdad.
 
ThunderCavalier said:
I've tried going back on some of Doug's old videos because my little brother is still a fan of the Nostalgia Critic and I... I can't seem to recapture my original enjoyment of his work. He seemed overly nitpicky, like he wanted to complain about a video being bad but he didn't know exactly what was wrong about a movie. It really separates him from people like Plinkett who not only have obvious knowledge of film theory and academia, but can show it in their reviews. You can go through Plinkett's blasting of Star Wars without getting bored, yet I tried watching one of Doug's videos and, despite them being even less than a quarter of the length of Plinkett's analyses, it seemed more repetitive.

I think the issue is that Doug's "critiques" are, well, superficial at best, and his shows have always generally been comedy routines in the guise of reviews.
Click to expand...
I think one of the issues is that we get older our tastes change for better or for worse and we've seen the same tricks before. Doug does bring up some fair points in his critiques, but he does too much telling and riffing and not enough summary. I think this what leads to him nitpicking to fall into the temptation of nitpicking. He is more of a movie commentator then a critic. While Doug does at least try new things with his reviews with his skits but he really hasn't grown as a critic. Look at Roger Ebert for instance. http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/jurassic-world-2015

Quick summary of the movie leaving room for the reviewer to expand on the individual details of what makes parts of the movie good or bad. What works, what doesn't work, comments about the technical aspects, speculation of where prior inspiration was from, comment on the character. There is room to point what bugs you personally but there is no need to keep harping on it. Doug does this way too much and even if he intends it to be a joke their reaches a point where you need to give it a rest.

In a way I think Doug uses the scene-by-scene nitpicks as a crutch, if wants to be a reviewer instead of a commentator then he needs to grow past the mst3k style. He doesn't even need to completely get rid of the skits if that is what he enjoys doing but they should be dialed back a little since the review should be about the topic at hand then the reviewer. I will give him this that at least he is handling the skits a lot better then Linkara, at least you don't have to be a regular viewer to understand what is going on. (unless things have changed).

Doug strikes me as being more sensitive then a douche in that he has trouble accepting criticism even as he dishes it out and he does not have a good support team. He has the passion for the job but he and the rest of the team are throwing away opportunity for growth as a professionally and personally. Their business is suffering for this reason. Passion alone is not enough, especially when your ego is getting in the way of self-reflection. The fault is not completely on Doug there is plenty of others on the fail train as well.

TL/DR I am in agreement with the rest of you guys here. Doug and the gang are Douchy McNitpick.
 
To give him some small amount of credit, since the post-Demo Reel relaunch Doug does seem to put more effort into explaining why a movie does or doesn't work. Back when he was still doing it weekly, his summary of most of the stuff he reviewed was basically just "This movie is stupid, stupid, STOOOOPID!" with more detailed opinions being the exception rather than the rule.
 
Looking back on it, I think the reason I watched his videos originally was because of the clips from the movies themselves. Take his Batman & Robin video. That movie has more funny clips in it than almost any actual comedy released in the last century, so nobody needs to laugh at anything Doug himself does to have a good time watching the video. Batman & Robin on its own is the good time.

Half in the Bag doesn't have that luxury. The only clips they have are from trailers. If Jay and Mike weren't funny on their own, their show would've died. In fact, it would've died much in the same way as Demo Reel.

This isn't to say that there aren't many, many ways to use extensive clips of other peoples movies to create actual art. The MST3K guys do it better than anyone, but they're both funny on their own and aren't just yelling as loud as they can to attempt replicating humor.
 
*Asterisk* said:
This isn't to say that there aren't many, many ways to use extensive clips of other peoples movies to create actual art. The MST3K guys do it better than anyone, but they're both funny on their own and aren't just yelling as loud as they can to attempt replicating humor.
Click to expand...

They also don't do the "angry" schtick. If there is any joke or humor value left to that, it's that it's ridiculous getting actually angry about stupid shit.
 
Red_Rager said:
Douchy McNitpick is supposed to represent the superfans who complain and Nitpick about every aspect of his show.
Click to expand...
That's just the tip of the iceberg.

From what I see, Doug clearly hates his fans, but wanted to disguise his hatred as a way to show how humble he is. So every now and then he puts this fucking guy in his videos so he can both insult his fans, and get them to shut up about both blatant mistakes he made and opinions he has that a significant number of the fans disagree with. Sometimes he's in cameos, but Doug actually devoted three fucking videos to banter between him and an audience surrogate less sympathetic and more despised by their creator than Shinji Ikari. At least Anno had the decency to show the character and audience he hated that they were capable of having their semen land on a woman.

I totally get why he hates Doug fans. They're spergs, speds, pussies, and furries: but my sympathy's non existent since he's the strongest reason why the site fostered such a toxic tard culture. If he stopped pandering to them at any point, he wouldn't be stuck in nearly as terrible a quagmire.
 
Kind of ridiculous to hate your fans for being autists when the only reason they're autists is because you're the biggest autist of them all.
 
*Asterisk* said:
That's just the tip of the iceberg.

From what I see, Doug clearly hates his fans, but wanted to disguise his hatred as a way to show how humble he is. So every now and then he puts this fucking guy in his videos so he can both insult his fans, and get them to shut up about both blatant mistakes he made and opinions he has that a significant number of the fans disagree with.
Click to expand...

this wouldn't be a problem if the NC stayed what he was
NC was a separate character, who is overly critical
problem is.. he's basically doug now.
so when the critic acts like a jerk, doug is acting like a jerk.
 
ZehnBoat said:
this wouldn't be a problem if the NC stayed what he was
NC was a separate character, who is overly critical
problem is.. he's basically doug now.
so when the critic acts like a jerk, doug is acting like a jerk.
Click to expand...
The NC was never a separate character.

Sometimes that line is valid. The AVGN, the Cinema Snob, and Plinkett are all examples of guys who are both Internet critics and separate characters. But most of the time, it's just a line people throw out to attempt keeping their audience from taking things too personally, and allow plausible deniability when they talk about how much they'd like to rape Hope Chapman.

Doug isn't even kind of an actor. He "plays" the same character every time: a screechy, unstable, hair-trigger, nerdy sociopath. Go back and look at his stuff. Is there really any significant difference between Doug and the Critic? Hell, even Melvin, brother of the Joker and Chester A. Bum? It's the same fucking routine every time.
 
*Asterisk* said:
The NC was never a separate character.

Sometimes that line is valid. The AVGN, the Cinema Snob, and Plinkett are all examples of guys who are both Internet critics and separate characters. But most of the time, it's just a line people throw out to attempt keeping their audience from taking things too personally, and allow plausible deniability when they talk about how much they'd like to rape Hope Chapman.

Doug isn't even kind of an actor. He "plays" the same character every time: a screechy, unstable, hair-trigger, nerdy sociopath. Go back and look at his stuff. Is there really any significant difference between Doug and the Critic? Hell, even Melvin, brother of the Joker and Chester A. Bum? It's the same fucking routine every time.
Click to expand...
This is actually something I have to credit Spoony with since at the very least when he played a "character" it usually wasn't a "reviewer". Like I remember when he played Dr. Insano it was usually just to make a joke and not to actually do the review.
 
Cuddlebug said:
This is actually something I have to credit Spoony with since at the very least when he played a "character" it usually wasn't a "reviewer". Like I remember when he played Dr. Insano it was usually just to make a joke and not to actually do the review.
Click to expand...
Oh, no question. Noah's a better actor than Doug, a better writer, more knowledgable about the topics he covers, more charismatic, and a significantly better comedian. It's just a shame he's spent the past half decade squandering his talents and every stroke of fortune he's ever blessed with.

If Noah played his cards right, he could've wound up like Yahtzee. Now he doesn't even care that his Patreon's gonna dry up before the next President's sworn in.
 
*Asterisk* said:
Oh, no question. Noah's a better actor than Doug, a better writer, more knowledgable about the topics he covers, more charismatic, and a significantly better comedian. It's just a shame he's spent the past half decade squandering his talents and every stroke of fortune he's ever blessed with.

If Noah played his cards right, he could've wound up like Yahtzee. Now he doesn't even care that his Patreon's gonna dry up before the next President's sworn in.
Click to expand...

Well, for all his faults, Yahtzee actually understood the concept of being professional. Getting his stuff in time, working with colleagues, leaving (most) of his personal problems outside his videos, not getting as salty when his stuff was not that hot anymore.
 
*Asterisk* said:
Oh, no question. Noah's a better actor than Doug, a better writer, more knowledgable about the topics he covers, more charismatic, and a significantly better comedian. It's just a shame he's spent the past half decade squandering his talents and every stroke of fortune he's ever blessed with.

If Noah played his cards right, he could've wound up like Yahtzee. Now he doesn't even care that his Patreon's gonna dry up before the next President's sworn in.
Click to expand...
Haven't he lost around 30 % of his pateron this year or something?
 
MiloWuCollusion said:
Well, for all his faults, Yahtzee actually understood the concept of being professional. Getting his stuff in time, working with colleagues, leaving (most) of his personal problems outside his videos, not getting as salty when his stuff was not that hot anymore.
Click to expand...
Yahtzee also did a much better job diversifying. He sells novels, writes columns for a wide variety of publications, and has two shows with low overhead cost produced in a timely manner. Hell, even with both Mana Bars closing, he probably made it out okay after he and his buddies sold the liquor licenses.

Noah doesn't even put enough effort in to work on one project, let alone branch out.

Foltest said:
Haven't he lost around 30 % of his pateron this year or something?
Click to expand...
Probably. I know for a fact he's down $1500 from his peak, and I don't see the decline stopping.
 
Don't forget that Yahtzee also made a few games too; he's very much a renaissance man when it comes to media.

And Noah's hemorrhaging because he can't muster up the fucks to give about making reviews or anything really. He's even slow when it comes to his informal stuff, because he's essentially decided to say "fuck it".
 
*Asterisk* said:
Looking back on it, I think the reason I watched his videos originally was because of the clips from the movies themselves. Take his Batman & Robin video. That movie has more funny clips in it than almost any actual comedy released in the last century, so nobody needs to laugh at anything Doug himself does to have a good time watching the video. Batman & Robin on its own is the good time.
Click to expand...
I actually found his Batman and Robin really funny - it's one I still laugh at today. Partly because I like the jokes and partly because it's from a time before Doug became horribly pretentious and egotistical when it felt like he was still doing it for fun.

So obviously he considers it one of his lesser reviews. Not enough crossovers or skits obviously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom