"angry" gamers/critics

  • 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
Cringe videos of The Nostalgia Critic are some of the most redundant things I've ever seen.
 
BrunoMattei said:
It's funny that James and Doug have reviewed something that had already been reviewed ages ago by people inspired by them. And their current reviews suck by comparison.

For those who don't know: RebelTaxi did Rapsittie Street Kids and JonTron did Charlie's Angels.
Click to expand...

I liked both AVGN's and Jontron's reviews of Charlie's Angels, But I agree that Jontron's review kicks the living shit out of AVGN's (for the record, I'll say I still like AVGN despite him putting out mediocre reviews nowadays. I'm easy to entertain I guess).
 
Doug always had a tendency towards getting obnoxious even in his older videos but he at least was kind of funny.As a reviewer he was never good acceptable at best.Compared to other online reviewers he's pretty bad and his attempts at comedy have gotten increasingly lame.
On the other hand he probably knows his audience quite well and knows what they want,recap the entire movie insert rapid fire jokes and skits endless repeat.He needs the money and how else is he gonna get them unless 'dumb' fans donate it.Because at this point only die hard fans can actually stand Doug and his brand of 'comedy'(????),reviewing(???) whatever it is.There are far better reviewers online than Doug ever was who know what the concept of toning it down means and at least try to research the subject matter so they don't come across as morons.
 
Don't be fooled, the title is just clickbait - too bad this guy and his many, many overly long reviews for NuPPG kinda leaves me skeptic of him being a bit hypocritical on things to bash, despite his otherwise positive opinion on TTG!.

Either way, I'd keep an eye on this guy... In case he needs a lolcow page.

Also, anyone who defends Enter and/or PhantomStrider is a fool, honestly.
 
Last edited:
Well with it being Christmas time, Doug is going around with all his usual Christmas memes.

Including Santa Christ, and its been like 5 years or so, and I still don't see what the fuck is so "Christ" about him.
 
friedshrimp said:
So, to change the subject, for people who were originally into Doug Walker's stuff, what was the video that broke the illusion for you, and saw him for the hack that he is?

For me it was Scooby Doo where I began noticing problems, but the Man of Steel and King and I were also strong contenders. The Old vs New Spiderman vid is what officially killed him for me. (But even before that, his Thief and the Cobbler review was the first video where I didn't end up either liking or agreeing with him).
Click to expand...

Late to the party, but when I decided to watch Drop Dead Fred to see if it was as bad as he said it was, because I had a feeling he was getting some things wrong. And I was right. Yeah, Fred can be obnoxious, but he accuses Phoebe Cates's character of being insane (she's the product of years of abuse/repression which he never touches on), misconstrues the scene where Fred interacts with other imaginary friends (he makes it seem like the movie is trying to be deep and pretentious. It's not, it's a cute scene with Fred interacting with his fellow buds) and tries to make the film fit his own narrative, cutting out some plot details and some twists/reveals that are kind of important, so he can give it a bad review, which is a shitty thing to do because it misleads the audience and creates people who will spout off his opinions without getting any of their own. I know, I'm being spergy, but, hey, Doug's review was double spergy.

Although something good came out of it--I fell in love with Rik Mayall. WOOF!!!
 
darkhorse816 said:
Late to the party, but when I decided to watch Drop Dead Fred to see if it was as bad as he said it was, because I had a feeling he was getting some things wrong. And I was right. Yeah, Fred can be obnoxious, but he accuses Phoebe Cates's character of being insane (she's the product of years of abuse/repression which he never touches on), misconstrues the scene where Fred interacts with other imaginary friends (he makes it seem like the movie is trying to be deep and pretentious. It's not, it's a cute scene with Fred interacting with his fellow buds) and tries to make the film fit his own narrative, cutting out some plot details and some twists/reveals that are kind of important, so he can give it a bad review, which is a shitty thing to do because it misleads the audience and creates people who will spout off his opinions without getting any of their own. I know, I'm being spergy, but, hey, Doug's review was double spergy.

Although something good came out of it--I fell in love with Rik Mayall. WOOF!!!
Click to expand...

Confirmed - Doug is a liar trying to make movies ONLY HE thinks are bad look worse in the eyes of people who can't form opinions for shite. Thank you - now I definitely ain't ever revisiting any of his old work... Knowing that all he's doing is lying to me - and himself, just to get people on his side... Something only a coward does.

Doug is a coward. Even if just IMHO, too.
 
^What you say it's true tho. Time and time again he's either lied or ignored important plot elements explained in the movies in order to make the movie seem "worse" to the audience who hasn't seen the film.
 
friedshrimp said:
^What you say it's true tho. Time and time again he's either lied or ignored important plot elements explained in the movies in order to make the movie seem "worse" to the audience who hasn't seen the film.
Click to expand...

What's sadder is that his fans eat it all up without a second thought.
 
darkhorse816 said:
Late to the party, but when I decided to watch Drop Dead Fred to see if it was as bad as he said it was, because I had a feeling he was getting some things wrong. And I was right. Yeah, Fred can be obnoxious, but he accuses Phoebe Cates's character of being insane (she's the product of years of abuse/repression which he never touches on), misconstrues the scene where Fred interacts with other imaginary friends (he makes it seem like the movie is trying to be deep and pretentious. It's not, it's a cute scene with Fred interacting with his fellow buds) and tries to make the film fit his own narrative, cutting out some plot details and some twists/reveals that are kind of important, so he can give it a bad review, which is a shitty thing to do because it misleads the audience and creates people who will spout off his opinions without getting any of their own. I know, I'm being spergy, but, hey, Doug's review was double spergy.

Although something good came out of it--I fell in love with Rik Mayall. WOOF!!!
Click to expand...
Not at all surprised that Doug's been pulling that shit for years.
 
I remember another thing that annoys me about Doug is that he takes lame and petty shots at talent that far exceeds his own for no reason. For example, in his Les Mis review he took a shot at the original Broadway Valjean Colm Wilkinson and made fun of his voice. Or look at how many times he rants about Phil Collins or Randy Newman.
It's fine to have likes and dislikes. That's all well and good. But Doug naggingly harps on the tiniest detail of something he dislikes and refuses to let go of it, even if it's something that the general public likes. He's not in any position to pick on anyone, especially considering that he can't do better than them.
 
Alto said:
It's fine to have likes and dislikes. That's all well and good. But Doug naggingly harps on the tiniest detail of something he dislikes and refuses to let go of it, even if it's something that the general public likes. He's not in any position to pick on anyone, especially considering that he can't do better than them.
Click to expand...
Didn't he rag on The Matrix films because he thought Tom was a dumb name for a messiah? It's not like Doug's any better at naming shit (Peter Soulless as the strawman for example).

I never actually watched the whole Matrix review because he stated in the past he didn't care for them, and I stopped when he used this one line in the movie to prove the movies weren't deep (it was when a guy called Neo his personal Jesus Christ). It bugged me because one clunky piece of dialogue doesn't discredit the rest of the movie's themes, and I figured the rest of the review was going to be pointless bitching about how he's right for not liking the movies.
 
Also I don't get the hate boner Doug has for Liam Neilson? I can understand he doesn't like stoic performances, but at least it is better than acting like an autistic man-child for the camera.
 
That's why his reviews have become so boring--the moment he selects a piece of work to review where you know there's people or aspects in it that he's ranted about in the past, you know 100% he's not going to be fair or unbiased about what he's examining. He's just going to autistically poke holes and act superior.
 
Alto said:
That's why his reviews have become so boring--the moment he selects a piece of work to review where you know there's people or aspects in it that he's ranted about in the past, you know 100% he's not going to be fair or unbiased about what he's examining. He's just going to autistically poke holes and act superior.
Click to expand...

It is sad because perhaps instead of doing the obvious thing and going to try to get a cheap laugh, perhaps he could have reworked his formula to perhaps talk about the reasons why a movie failed with the backstory as generally for especially bad films like Fant4stic have amazing production stories.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom