Quick question for those who might know. Since I don't have cable, does BBC stream the episodes after airing so I can keep up on this series?

Doctor Submarine wrote:

BigDamnArtist wrote:

But's that's their entire schtick "No movie is without sin."

A large part of Cinemas Sins does is go, alright this is a movie everyone loves, let's see how many of our "sins" we can find. And on that aspect I find it kind of interesting, because it's actually leveling the playing field a bit, "Every movie has these, but some of them are good and some of them are bad."

Which hey, the optimist in me says maybe a few people in the audience will wonder why some movies are considered bad and some are good even though they all have these "sins", and go look deeper.

/Not sure how much it actually adds to the discussion at hand, but that's just something that occured to me.

The pessimistic view is that people will see the video and say, "Hey, look at all these things that are wrong with this movie! It totally sucks!" And 100% of viewers aren't going to have either reaction.

And that makes the creators wrong for people's reactions? Again, after the Intermission, it certainly felt like this was a middle of the road issue, with some people for and some against. I still don't see the harm of things like CS, but I don't take them seriously either and I don't believe they are intended to be serious criticism, beyond the surface level variety. Which, just to point out, IMDB has a Goof's page, Movie Mistakes is a website devoted to nitpicky little points, problems or errors, and I have no doubt there are many more.

Also, something that I meant to articulate earlier, but kind of lost, was the fact that this feels, to me, like a play on the typical fan-forum critic. And what I mean is the type of critics who are not just going after the story, but will use hyperbolic language, name-calling, or other knee-jerk level criticism at a movie they don't like, and (by extension), supporters of the film they don't like.

Ok, I'm going to spoiler this because it is going to be very long, and give several examples based upon my own personal experience. This is not meant to target any specific fan or group but just comments about a film that I have encountered.

  Show

Still here? Ok, good. I mentioned many moons ago, that I hesitated to see Star Trek Into Darkness due to comments and reviews on some fan boards. Being of the internet variety, they were not pleasant. Sorry if this is rehashing old terrain, but this was my experience and it relates to many of the nitpicks that CS and others will find in many of their films:

"Abrams is a racist."

"Real people do not behave like that"

"The action flashes so much I don't know what's going on."

"Fuck this movie."

The list goes on. And so, after encountering this, and other comments of the like on various films, I pretty much take any such comments as knee-jerk butt hurt and don't take it seriously. Mostly because there is not really any reasoning with those arguments.

I will concede that this is film criticism, but that it isn't made to be taken seriously. Beyond that, I don't see this as detracting from RLM, WAYDM, SFDebris or others, because there are those who still want serious analysis. But some people don't want the steak dinner and don't care. They want a hamburger, are satisfied by it and move on.

I prefer steak dinner, but sometimes just a quick hamburger will do the trick. Same thing this. Would I prefer WAYDM analysis? Sure. Do I have the time to devote 2+ hours to each movie? Not always. So, I go with something that will make me laugh and move on, and save the analysis for later.

I just don't see anything wrong with that. But, hey, that's just me.

Doctor Submarine wrote:

Alright, I'm gonna peace out of this convo for now. It's less about wishing that CinemaSins would go away forever and more about wishing that more people were willing to resign it to a tiny portion of the criticism (and it IS criticism, there's no counter-argument) they consume. It makes me sad to see such shamelessly vapid imitations of something I really love get so popular. That's where I'm coming from on this. But I'm not changing any minds, so forget it.

Ok, late to the party (dang it all, don't post all the fun stuff while I'm at work!!!). I know Doc has stepped away so I want to play nice and all that.

I was thinking on this a bit today and I think that I am beginning to understand the counter to CS and all the other types that are up for discussion tomorrow. The idea is that this type of criticism does nothing to ADD to the field of film criticism, and detracts from other film critics who have something to say.

Yes, that was a summary. I am trying to make sure I understand it, because I really didn't for the longest time.

My main point is two fold. First of all, I do not regard CS or HT or whathaveyou as film criticism. Maybe I'm narrow in my definition, maybe I'm just ignorant of film critics in general, or maybe I don't have the energy to keep up. I don't know. What I do know is how I treat a critic/reviewer and how I treat comedians.

Comedians I watch to entertain me and to get a good laugh. It is enjoyable, but really nothing to terribly deep or hard thinking-depending on the comedian; there are exceptions, of course.

Reviewers and critics are someone who challenge me to look at the art (in this case film or TV) in a different way or a critical way. I've posted again and again my like of many movies that FIYH didn't care for and my disinterest in ones that people love. That doesn't mean I don't appreciate their point of view-I just don't share it.

For me, CS, HT, Literal Trailers, Confused Matthew, are entertaining. They are poking fun at a film or being angry at it, or swearing at it, or behaving like sports fans yelling at officials on the TV. It's comedy, and comedy is subjective and I get that.

While I can understand the concern of their style cheapening film criticism, I don't see them that way, and I don't think they seem themselves that way. I mean, YouTube comments can hardly be a measure of a fandom's state of mind simply because many of them turn in to a hate-fest in of themselves.

Here's a thought that I just had, for what it is worth. To those who are concerned about the impact of these types of videos, perhaps you should contact them and let them know. Not YouTube comment but a legitimate connection.

Maybe I'm crazy, but one of the things that I love about here and SFDebris is the fact that I can send a message and give feedback and get a response. There is a dialog there that should be nurtured among the film criticism community. Letting them know an alternative point of view might help them learn something too.

Finally, I really don't see evidence that this is harmful to the film criticism community. I am with BDA here in that the general movie going audience is going to see what they want, regardless of things like this. Also, they are not going to partake of other film critics (any more than they already were) simply because those videos are not there.

Beyond that, I really don't know. I'm doing my best to understand but I guess I don't get it

johnpavlich wrote:

Who decides for everyone what is and isn't of value and when does this cross over into book burning territory, if ever?

Invid wrote:

As the saying goes, freedom of speech is only needed for the stuff you personally don't like. It's fine for you to promote the type of criticism you enjoy, point out the flaws in the other stuff. Both have a right to exist, though.

Oh for god's sake. He's not advocating for a Congressional ban on this crap. Let's not get so melodramatic that we start actually, without irony, arguing that we're on a slippery slope to Hitler for thinking CinemaSins are trash. ("book burning"? Come on.)

Doctor Submarine wrote:

Boter wrote:

Picking nits here, but Olive Garden has slowly been losing market share. And plenty of Italian places near me are doing great.

Not saying it invalidates your entire argument. Just noting. I'll go back to staying out of it for now.

Haha, fair enough.

Maybe a better example (to go back to the point of the thread) is the Transformers series. Plenty of people will choose to see Trans4mers this weekend instead of Edge of Tomorrow.

You're losing me here. Are you saying plot hole criticism is the reason people flock to see movies riddled with faulty logic (like Transformers) and shy away from well-made, tightly-written movies (like Edge of Tomorrow)?

It seems to me that the movies that CS and HT tear apart the worst tend to be the worst movies. Not just because of their logic issues, but because they're truly pissed at those movies for lots of reasons and they really want to rip into them.

Sorry, my brain is still just getting caught up on the whole "Shut them down cause they don't believe what I do thing". That just seems remarkably drastic for a comedy show on the internet

1) And that's fine, you can think that all you want. I'll still don't believe it, and outside of a few anecdotal pieces about annoying memebers of the vocal fanbase, I have yet to see any proof of it.

2) See answer number 1. But further, as far as do I think it's okay to say something false/wrong to an audience. That's a very slippery line that has way to many nuances for here, but as a rule, fuck yes I think anyone should be allowed to say whatever they damn well please. That doesn't mean I as a consumer am going to believe whatever you tell me. It's part of being a grown-up type person to actually do your research and not trust the first thing you read in the morning. If you have an issue with that, that's an issue you have with society at large, not CS or HT.

3) A. See my remark at the top. B. Because the most proactive thing to do when encouraging free thought and a society built on critical thinking is to limit public access to only the things you believe in.

4) When it comes to this, I am actually referring to the literal interpretation of it. Clearly all media can be used to coerce or change minds (but see my point in #2), but unless it's something malevolent and conscious on part of the content creators, you have no right to get angry AT THEM about it. They are simply producing content that they think people will watch/enjoy, the fans are the ones that get attracted to it and become vocal. And again if that's your issue, you have a problem with society, not CS or HT, as that happens EVERYWHERE.

EDIT: Couple posts in the time it took me to write this. Teague, I am...now... pumping the breaks. Leaving this here cause *ehh* I wrote it, might as well.

I 'm wondering. If a filmmaker ever used the excuse "I didn't do X because my fans would hate me/think less of me/riot/do something." I know for a fact most y'all wouldn't hesitate to throw them on the fire in a heartbeat.

I'm wondering why you think this is a different circumstance, where how the fans act SHOULD dictate the content creators?

Doctor Submarine wrote:

They are absolutely taking eyes off serious film critics, for the same reason Olive Garden is more popular then authentic Italian food. Most people just want something that tastes good, but you can understand that real chefs might be upset that their hard work doesn't get nearly as much exposure. Or maybe Mcdonalds is a better example. I dunno. You get the picture.  I don't know how to explain this any clearer. Popularizing a shallow method of film analysis is bad for the film community. Does that make sense?

I understand what you're getting at, I just don't agree.

Some people don't have the time, money, or inclination to go to an authentic Italian restaurant, and others just prefer their food soft and bland. Some people thought the trailers for Edge of Tomorrow made the movie look like a snoozefest, and others have been chomping at the bit for the chance to watch more giant robots hitting each other.

And honestly, of the people who went to see Trans4mers, how many do you think listened to or read any sort of review, in-depth or shallow, before making up their minds about how they were going to spend their money?