Red Letter Media

  • 🏰 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

Favorite recurring character? (Select 4)

  • Jack / AIDSMobdy

    Votes: 257 24.0%
  • Josh / the Wizard

    Votes: 77 7.2%
  • Colin (Canadian #1)

    Votes: 460 42.9%
  • Jim (Canadian #2)

    Votes: 230 21.4%
  • Tim

    Votes: 386 36.0%
  • Len Kabasinski

    Votes: 208 19.4%
  • Freddie Williams

    Votes: 274 25.5%
  • Patton Oswalt

    Votes: 27 2.5%
  • Macaulay Culkin

    Votes: 541 50.4%
  • Max Landis

    Votes: 64 6.0%

  • Total voters
    1,073
Does YouTube even pay out that well these days, enough to make chasing clicks worthwhile, especially considering that they have a healthy Patreon? Always seemed stupid to do videos for stuff they clearly have little interest in when their fans will still pay them to pump out videos that RLM actually want to do.

As for their recommendations, the indies they recommend tend to be pretentious crap, but their recs for older stuff is usually decent. Jay recommended Sorcerer in their HitB for Suicide Squad and I ended up loving that film, enough to watch the movie it was based on (Wages of Fear, which also was great).
 
Karen is just another way for fags to virtue signal against White women; it's like how Scott Greer never mentions jews [even jews talk about jews in politics more] but instead blames Affluent White Female Liberals -- AWFLs aren't bible-thumpers.
They're annoying and they clamp down on fun. They are the same.
 
i agree, their popeye video deserve more than that, i found it way more interesting than any of their new movie talk. but with something as big as star wars it makes sense they would make a video on it, they would be dumb to pass up on those clicks. but when it comes to things other than star wars, as my previous post pointed out, they could easily save their time for content that their fans actually want.
I think their Popeye video has as much views as they deserve. While better than most of their Half in the Bags, it has the same failings as those videos: lack of research and general apathy for the movie.

I highly recommend Hats Off Entertainment's video instead who covered it almost a year ago at this point.


I recommend the entire channel overall. As another RLM connection, the guy who runs the channel has been on Colin from Canada's podcast several times.
 
I think their Popeye video has as much views as they deserve. While better than most of their Half in the Bags, it has the same failings as those videos: lack of research and general apathy for the movie.

I highly recommend Hats Off Entertainment's video instead who covered it almost a year ago at this point.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=lLnIlP7kbdA
I recommend the entire channel overall. As another RLM connection, the guy who runs the channel has been on Colin from Canada's podcast several times.
Seconded. HOE is right up there with GoodBadFlicks for great background and examinations of films.
 
it has the same failings as those videos: lack of research and general apathy for the movie.

while i would like to see them do more research than none for their re:reviews, i dont really mind. when i watch these videos im not really looking for an in depth video essay on the movie; i just want to see the rlm guys have fun talking and joking about a particular movie which is either interesting, good, or bizarre in some way. i just enjoy their discussion on it, i dont really find it is hurt much by no research.

Seconded. HOE is right up there with GoodBadFlicks for great background and examinations of films.
if two kiwis in a row recommend the channel then ill check it out. thanks.
 
why wasnt mike protesting against the iraq war instead of making the plinkett videos. i dont really follow the acylote or star was but im incredibly sympathetic to it because at least star wars is something people can control, their feedback does get listened to outside of politics. it doesnt mean im on their side more than mike's but i think mike just relates to those kind of people TOO hard. deadwingdork tho is just a shallow "i dont want to do too much wrongthink so better defend disney on this one thing" kind of guy. theyre not consoomers but theyre almost as bad, theyre marketers who arent getting paid to do it and dont even like the thing theyre marketing so theyre just doing it to be contrarian to some percieved massive social movement. which like doesnt even matter, sure critical drinker is popular but he's not actively causing things to flop and he owns zero journo sites. youd think he was CNN (Cynical about Niggers Network)
How embarrassing
didnt she literally star in some nazi romance porn
 
I think their Popeye video has as much views as they deserve. While better than most of their Half in the Bags, it has the same failings as those videos: lack of research and general apathy for the movie.

I highly recommend Hats Off Entertainment's video instead who covered it almost a year ago at this point.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=lLnIlP7kbdA
I recommend the entire channel overall. As another RLM connection, the guy who runs the channel has been on Colin from Canada's podcast several times.
I love Hat's Off Entertainment.

Great channel.
 
well RLM are out of touch boomers whenever it comes to modern day politics. they have the same understanding as some left leaning boomer on facebook. to left leaning boomers there is only right wing censorship, there is the hays code and there is the McCarthy hearing, there is the religious right saying you can swear on tv. but they close their eyes to any sort of censorship coming from the left.

RLM still mostly buys into the mainstream view of american politics which is dominated by aging (and their young acolytes) leftist who still view America through a left leaning tinted lens of america 50 years ago. to the left it is perpetually 50 years ago, the right is censoring over fears of communism and to protect religion, women are oppressed housewives, and the left are the free speech underdogs fighting against the machine.

edit: spelling.
I agree that RLM are today what would have been considered radical progressives 50 years ago. I disagree that they're out of touch. They just know that wokism is a third rail issue, and that if they want to make it in Hollywood, they can't under any circumstances, blame the Wokeness as the reason that today's movies are bad. They have to lay the blame on poor pacing, bad acting, mediocre scripts, or anything other than the giant pink lesbian elephant in the room.
 
I agree that RLM are today what would have been considered radical progressives 50 years ago. I disagree that they're out of touch. They just know that wokism is a third rail issue, and that if they want to make it in Hollywood, they can't under any circumstances, blame the Wokeness as the reason that today's movies are bad. They have to lay the blame on poor pacing, bad acting, mediocre scripts, or anything other than the giant pink lesbian elephant in the room.
Being complicit is always worse than being ignorant.
 
I agree that RLM are today what would have been considered radical progressives 50 years ago. I disagree that they're out of touch. They just know that wokism is a third rail issue, and that if they want to make it in Hollywood, they can't under any circumstances, blame the Wokeness as the reason that today's movies are bad. They have to lay the blame on poor pacing, bad acting, mediocre scripts, or anything other than the giant pink lesbian elephant in the room.
If they really think they can cozy up to Hollywood after all they've already done, they're dumber than I thought. Mike's most iconic moment was the time he played an elderly misogynist that strangles hookers and picks apart Star Trek. His second most iconic moment was the time he clowned on GB 2016 for its woke marketing. At this point if he wants to make nice with Hollywood types, his only option is to hard-disavow virtually everything in his pre-2020 catalog. And if he did that, he'd run the risk of cheesing off 90% of his fanbase.
 
oes YouTube even pay out that well these days, enough to make chasing clicks worthwhile, especially considering that they have a healthy Patreon?
I don't know if they are monetized, but RLM is just 3 people so whatever they make off youtube is just icing ontop of the patreon pie.

I turned off adblock and they are sponsored by joe biden.
1719939311534.png
 
I noped out before most of the Acolyte review talk (which wasn’t hard to do since they needed to discuss it so much, it was shoved into the last corner of the video), but my friend texted me and asked “wtf is Rich’s problem with the Jedi?’.

He’s a causal watcher since I suggested some BOTW to him. I don’t really have an answer, but I’m assuming his beef is the Jedi are spiritual? Is this that atheism lens he uses for fiction we talked about before?
 
I noped out before most of the Acolyte review talk (which wasn’t hard to do since they needed to discuss it so much, it was shoved into the last corner of the video), but my friend texted me and asked “wtf is Rich’s problem with the Jedi?’.

He’s a causal watcher since I suggested some BOTW to him. I don’t really have an answer, but I’m assuming his beef is the Jedi are spiritual? Is this that atheism lens he uses for fiction we talked about before?
See here for a possible explanation:

 
He’s a causal watcher since I suggested some BOTW to him. I don’t really have an answer, but I’m assuming his beef is the Jedi are spiritual? Is this that atheism lens he uses for fiction we talked about before?
No. It's because the Jedi, when they're made the focus of a story, are not interesting. They're like Hannibal Lecter in that sense: great when used sparingly in a story.

Think about the Jedi in the original 3 films. There was an intriguing air of mysticism around them. You rarely saw a lightsaber, and almost every time one was turned on, something amazing happened or someone got hurt or killed. The power of that imagery had to do with how little you saw Jedi stuff in terms of overall screen time. They were cool because they were a mysteriously powerful relic of an earlier age.

Now think about the prequels. You have guys in robes (note that, until the prequels, the robes were not so much a space monk thing but a desert planet thing) literally running in groups across battlefields deflecting laser blasts like it's an afterthought. That stuff is all over the prequels. Nothing about it is special anymore, and you could even say it feels more cartoonish. Could a really well-trained guy deflect a bullet with his sword? Maybe... some people are able to do unexplainable things. But dozens of guys acting like they're on green screens (because they are) running around in broad daylight and using their super-kill-everyone-magic is a lot less compelling because it has no meaningful connection to the real world, and there's no air of mystery or mysticism.

(There's also the implication in the original films that a powerful Jedi would not even need a saber. Look at Yoda pre-prequels. Where the fuck did that go? Into the trash because lightsabers are so cool.)

The Jedi are kind of like Superman in that they're so powerful it's hard to write a good story about them. You can't treat them like other characters. But there are plenty of ordinary people in the Star Wars universe that you could write interesting stories about. Rich hates Jedi because nobody will write stories about anyone but the Jedi.

And, yeah, he's a weird militant atheist, so maybe that has something to do with it,
too.
 
The Jedi are kind of like Superman in that they're so powerful it's hard to write a good story about them. You can't treat them like other characters. But there are plenty of ordinary people in the Star Wars universe that you could write interesting stories about. Rich hates Jedi because nobody will write stories about anyone but the Jedi.
It is possible but difficult. Too many people get absorbed with the idea of "what I could do with all that power" instead of thinking about the implications or how horrifying it would be to others.

And yeah, old SW media did depict the lightsaber as something for knights, but masters were beyond that. I still have an encyclopedia claiming that.

In some ways Rich is right, the Jedi have the same problem as the Joker: everyone wants to write them, but very few have the talent to do it well.
 
(There's also the implication in the original films that a powerful Jedi would not even need a saber. Look at Yoda pre-prequels. Where the fuck did that go? Into the trash because lightsabers are so cool.)
I agree with this reasoning, but I don't think Rich could come up with it on his own, as I see him as a malleable people-pleaser. He might debate something for the camera, but he's really just a squishy, spongey, marshmallow who will regurgitate the latest input. I see him as someone who seems more like he has an opinion only due to long relationships and many conversations working as prep for the shows.
Here is an example of him backing down all too easily, found on a forum I would not otherwise visit:
image_2024-07-02_144348034.png
[...] Apu documentary [...] In the next stream, Rich comes out and apologizes. He says he watched the documentary and understands how ignorant he was.
I was looking for anything anywhere w/r/t Rich and "jedi," and I found a whole lotta nothin', but apparently he grinds the gears of left-leaners to a degree that requires its own kind of retardation. They will apparently forgive him if he comes to Krishna by watching that shitty Apu doc however.
I may have posted this before:
RLM.unter.rich.png
 
I agree with this reasoning, but I don't think Rich could come up with it on his own, as I see him as a malleable people-pleaser. He might debate something for the camera, but he's really just a squishy, spongey, marshmallow who will regurgitate the latest input. I see him as someone who seems more like he has an opinion only due to long relationships and many conversations working as prep for the shows.
Here is an example of him backing down all too easily, found on a forum I would not otherwise visit:
View attachment 6147862
I don't know what's worse, the idea that Rich is spineless enough to compromise so easily or that he's pudding-brained enough for that dogshit "documentary" to have actually changed his opinion.
 
I don't know what's worse, the idea that Rich is spineless enough to compromise so easily or that he's pudding-brained enough for that dogshit "documentary" to have actually changed his opinion.
I wonder if one of the many reasons the guys don't stream (in a time when YouTube rewards livestreaming over standard videos) is that they have to deal with awful audience bullshit like that instead of just making their videos and going about their days.

Not that they've escaped the Culture Wars, as we can see...
 
I don't know what's worse, the idea that Rich is spineless enough to compromise so easily or that he's pudding-brained enough for that dogshit "documentary" to have actually changed his opinion.
Well you know the AIDS are eating at his brain.
 
Back
Top Bottom