"angry" gamers/critics

  • ⚙️ Performance issue identified and being addressed.
  • 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
Yeah James is old enough at this point to have two kids. No surprise I suppose.
 
vertexwindi said:
Yeah James is old enough at this point to have two kids. No surprise I suppose.
Click to expand...
I've said it before, but it's interesting how James actually has his life together to the point he's got a wife and kids while everyone else remains unmarried and with no children. I mean, Doug has a wife but could you imagine him with children? It's always fascinated me how the man credited with creating the angry reviewer genre is a more balanced individual than practically everyone else copying his shtick.
 
Baldur's Gait said:
I've said it before, but it's interesting how James actually has his life together to the point he's got a wife and kids while everyone else remains unmarried and with no children. I mean, Doug has a wife but could you imagine him with children? It's always fascinated me how the man credited with creating the angry reviewer genre is a more balanced individual than practically everyone else copying his shtick.
Click to expand...
James began the trend just uploading some old joke videos online made for friends, he was just some shy film student at the time and didn't expect any Internet popularity. Doug and friends just jumped on an Internet fad hoping to get shekels, of course they wouldn't have their shit together.
 
Baldur's Gait said:
I've said it before, but it's interesting how James actually has his life together to the point he's got a wife and kids while everyone else remains unmarried and with no children. I mean, Doug has a wife but could you imagine him with children? It's always fascinated me how the man credited with creating the angry reviewer genre is a more balanced individual than practically everyone else copying his shtick.
Click to expand...

nobody on Channel Awesome deserves reproduction rights
 
CWCissey said:
Well, rather Paw Dugan than the nasty cockslut!
Click to expand...
Rather Paw Dugan than most people affiliated with CA, tbh. He seems shockingly well adjusted, at least having the good sense to get out of the reviewer biz and start finding more legit A/V jobs when it came time to support a family. I can't imagine many of the other contributors having that good sense - including Paw's wife, for that matter.
 
Last edited:
vertexwindi said:
Yeah James is old enough at this point to have two kids. No surprise I suppose.
Click to expand...

I wonder what kind of job his wife has, supporting two kids solely on a web series is kind of risky. Any Patreon money must go straight to episode production.


Alto said:
To be fair, that's still way more hair than Doug had. And I think James is older than him too.
Click to expand...

Genetics and stress plays a part as well.
 
China and Crystal said:
I wonder what kind of job his wife has, supporting two kids solely on a web series is kind of risky.
Click to expand...
Nah, James does work outside of Cinemassacre. At least, I'm pretty sure he did some special effects work in the past for one.
 
vertexwindi said:
Nah, James does work outside of Cinemassacre. At least, I'm pretty sure he did some special effects work in the past for one.
Click to expand...
If I remember correctly, he still works as a video editor in real life, though it's mostly on wedding videos and other things like that.
 
I just noticed something, since I had a few days ago the misfortune of reading another of these angry "snarky" critics.

Why is it that when they review stuff they consider "bad", they always feel the need to lie, exaggerate or cover elements of the show/movie they don't like, in order to make it seem worse? They complain about continuity of one scene or how "it doesn't make sense", despite the scene in question actually discussing the elements in question the critic finds confusing.

I dunno, it just feels like a cheap trick.
 
friedshrimp said:
I just noticed something, since I had a few days ago the misfortune of reading another of these angry "snarky" critics.

Why is it that when they review stuff they consider "bad", they always feel the need to lie, exaggerate or cover elements of the show/movie they don't like, in order to make it seem worse? They complain about continuity of one scene or how "it doesn't make sense", despite the scene in question actually discussing the elements in question the critic finds confusing.

I dunno, it just feels like a cheap trick.
Click to expand...
Maybe because it is a cheap trick.
They know most of their viewers didn't even see/remember the movie in question, and will base their whole experience with it from the critic's video.
And if the inconsistency is pointed out? Get outed as a "troll", "Douchebag McNitpick" or a "fanboy".
 
Hatoful Dandy said:
I worry about their son. IIRC she referred to him as 'biologically male"...which is never a good sign.
Click to expand...
Paw's wife was on Queer Kid's Stuff which is a youtube show run by a woman who worries too much about toddlers not realizing they're gay and aims to fix that by making toddlers feel bad for being born white or by making them confused about their genders at age 4 and trying to teach children other weird social justice concepts and politics
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom