What's /tv/'s consensus on YT movie critics?

Most of them are bad

>>87572503
Power rankings:
HitB >> Stuckmann > Jahns >> Everyone else.

When future generations sift through the smoldering rubble of postmodern America, they would do well to locate a hard drive with RedLetterMedia content on it. They could study Mike and Jay and, with that thin slice of information, fully understand what it is that killed western civilization.
Those two are bitter, cynical nihilists. They have devoted their lives, the prime years of productivity, to pithily lampooning cultural ephemera and implying "we could do better than these idiot filmmakers, but we're too cool to actually try."
They are every strain of societal AIDS melded together into a super AIDS of cultural death...
Well into middle age, they're still obsessively analyzing adventure stories for children. They're childless, unmarried, stubbornly avoiding an actual profession, opting instead to beg for Patreon donations. They are subsisting on the patronage of even more embittered, more lonely, more cynical losers who need virtual friends to swim in their vast Petri dish of misery with them.
Look in their fucking eyes, man. It's a joyless, pointless existence they're living.
They are so afraid of sincerity or honest artistic effort that they'll leave behind hours of footage of them chuckling about Tommy Wiseau. They are artistic cowards and abject failures in every respect.
Each time you catch a glimpse of them, you're reminded that we peaked as a civilization a long time ago. We're done creating. We're done feeling real emotions. All we can do now is analyze, criticize, and ironically pick through the dessicated corpse of our once great nation.

>internet critics

Even real critics don't mean shit and now we have these fake faggots.

>>87572503
The amount of normies I hear parroting these guys' nonsense opinions like fucking mindless sheep makes me hate them.

Why are people such followers?

>>87572503
There are two types, the ones that review movies that just came out in a 5-10 minute video or the type that nitpick a movie to death in 30-60 minutes. Both type have shit taste

My opinion is that you should get some real friends

File: 038.png (593KB, 853x436px) Image search: [Google]

593KB, 853x436px

>>87572756
This is sadly incredibly spot on.

That they keep meming about Tommy Wiseau should tell you all you need to know. They are fucking reddit-tier memers for the Family Guy crowd.

File: 21829693-AA5A-4F3B-8683-3F819B96715E-864-000001637D87E1D9.png (57KB, 327x337px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 327x337px

Jesus you drama queens.

2 men reviewing movies is not the heat death of the universe.
I'd take you more seriously if you weren't a ball of hyperbole.

File: wttb.jpg (118KB, 1438x809px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 1438x809px

>>87572503
They don't do new movies though.

File: jenny nicholson.jpg (123KB, 900x1200px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 900x1200px

>>87572503
I WANT TO MARRY JENNY!

>>87572503
All e-celebs are cancer. Quarantine board when?

>>87572756
Then I hear Rick laugh and know there is still some joy in this world.

File: 1495397312436.png (4KB, 312x268px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 312x268px

so many layers of hack

Youve got the hacks making the movies. Then youve got the hacks reviewing/shilling said hack movies. Then you've got the tertiary panel shows that talk about the safe opinions that they stole from the hack reviewers and shills q
who reviewed the hack movie made by hacks. Then on top of that you have mike and jay, who are hacks making a parody of the hack panel shows which steal their ideas from hack reviewers who subsist off of reviewing hack movies made by hacks.
Its a process that will continue until 99% of jobs are hacks hacking off of hacks hacking off of hacks and so on and so forth for eternity. This is the future we chose.

Most are bad, some are good. I like RamboRaph.

I think they are funny

>>87573896
I think the biggest hack in this equation is you, the viewer

1. Grace Randolph
2. Chris Stuckmann

All time superior film critic: Georg Rockall-Schmidt

>>87573983
youre just a hack poster hacking off my hack post which hacked off of the general hack vibe of this board which hacks its humor off of mike and jay who hack their money out of hack pop cultire panels that hack opinions off of hack reviewers that hacked their opinions off of earlier reviewers who hacked up a hack article about a hack movie made by hacks in a hack industry.

YMS > RLM > Old NC > Stuckman >>> New NC >>>>> Jahns

>>87574130
>YMS
Are you 12

>>87574099
>Georg Rockall-Schmidt
Looks interesting... thanks for the tip.

>>87572503
I genuinely enjoy the content of redlettermedia, but I don't watch many others.
Capn Cummings and Diversity and Comics are good, too.

>>87572503
I grew up with /tv/ threads about YT movie critics!

File: Screenshot_20170910-135333_1.jpg (42KB, 950x478px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 950x478px

I love Ralphthewikimaker, especially his thesis paper on Mike Stoklasa

>>87574099
>Georg Rockall-Schmidt
Wow. I thought I was the only one here who watches him

>>87574164
The only reason YMS gets hate is because he's a furfag. Otherwise, he's a pretty good reviewer who can make both serious and comedic reviews.
Stuckman is closer to a beginner's movie critic, to be honest. He's the reviewer I go to when I want to see a movie with my pleb friends.

>>87574720
>The only reason YMS gets hate is because he's a furfag
No he gets hate because he sucks at actual criticisms. He nitpicks the shit out of the most minor aspects of a movie.

>>87574720
no he's a typical millenial faggot who screams a lot and overreacts to everything. and he has the most annoying nasal voice in the world

>>87574720
>only reason YMS gets hate is because he's a furfag.
Wrong.
>Pretentiousness, the person
>Shit taste
>Grating personality and voice
>Nitpicking isn't for everyone
I watch all of his videos

Are the people saying Stuckmann being ironic? He's absolute horse shit.

All shit. RLM is only good as entertainment

>>87574720
YMS can't critique a film an anything other than a purely technical level. I think he might legitimately have autism

>>87574852
I've found he's actually the best for when I want a quick rundown on whether or not a movie is worth watching in theaters.
He's like a newspaper blurb with embarrassing tattoos.

>>87574823

lol what? see now you;re just making shit up and its obvious you are dissing him because you have a problem with him

point me to the review where he "yells alot" i've seen most of his stuff, and i cant recall any yelling.

you're just a bandwagoning hating faggot trying to fit in.

>>87572503
New BOTW fucking when?

>>87575294
They generally do about one a month. The last one was only two weeks ago.

>>87575277
>the review where he "yells alot"
Any "YMS". He yells his points (rhetorical questions) in a monotone voice. Nice spacing, btw

>>87574798
Nitpicking comes with the territory. Sure, he's focused on trivial things before, but he's never been unfair
>>87574823
>typical millennial faggot
Don't hurt yourself with those buzzwords, grandpa
>screams a lot
I don't think I've ever known him to scream during a review
>>87575062
>Can't critique a film anything other than a technical level
How is this a flaw? Critics shouldn't tell you how to feel about a movie, they should focus on what makes the film objectively good and let their audience make it's own decisions.

>>87574720
He's an unfunny idiot.

>>87575336
>yells
>monotone
You're pretty fucking dumb, huh?

>>87575348
>Critics shouldn't tell you how to feel about a movie
I never said they should. They should, however, tell you how they feel about a movie. A decent critique is ultimately subjective. Critics are not there to espouse an objective measurement of quality, they're there to give their opinion of a film as a piece of art. Treating a film as a set of criterion to be autistically measured on a technical level is anti-art. It's painfully obvious that your experience with film critics amounts to shitty YouTube reviewers.

>>87575384
Those aren't contradictory

>>87575384
Not everyone screams like a girl, anon. Or are you just illiterate?

>>87572756
Redlettermedia just doesn't have the budget for a big film.

>>87574720
No, it's because he's a mongoloid. He said films before 1970 aren't worth watching because the "production value isn't as good as now"