Pissed Off by RedLetterMedia?

[TedShatner10]

While RedLetterMedia has created a storm with his tearing apart of The Phantom Menace, does anybody else think he's not really all that? And not just with his deconstruction of movies and opinions, but with his presentation? Which has progressively moved into abject tastelessness (mock imprisoning of young women, etc).

Like the Nostalgia Critic, Linkara, and Spoony, he's successful enough to have his own website. I haven't seen his review of Attack of the Clones, but I have seen all the way through his critque of The Phantom Menace, which was bang on the money in some instances, but didn't really make sense in others.

I actually think his reviews of TNG movies are better (Insurrection and Nemesis are dreadful) but even then my bullshit-o-meter pinged ture from time to time.

 

[Broccoli]

No. I'm not pissed off at RLM in any way, shape, or form. Why should I be? They never attacked me personally. They are just critiquing a film. Why should that piss me off?

The thing about RLM is that if you agree or disagree with their viewpoints, they make valid arguments and explain why they didn't like something. This is, of course, in contrast to many other "online reviewers" who just go "This sucks!" without explaining why they think it sucks.

Beyond that, the reviews are simply entertaining given the character they have giving the reviews.

Whether you like RLM's reviews or not, it is just a review and not gospel truth. If people are getting pissed off over it (like the so-called Star Wars Prequel Appreciation Society), then something is off-kilter.

 

[Smiley]

I haven't bothered to watch any of his reviews. I seriously doubt that any point he raised in his reviews of The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones have not already been made several times over on the official SW message boards. Even if he has come up with something a little bit different, it's not really worth 70 minutes of my time. If people are finding his reviews funny or offensive, good for them.

 

[The Evil Dead]

He's just giving his opinion about movies. He's being critical of art, it's impossible for him to be wrong and it's absurd to be upset about him having a differing opinion about a movie.

 

[firehawk12]

I think the only thing he's done that might be considered tasteless is the Star Trek Reboot review because he basically had the "movie" rape a woman and the woman sort of enjoying it.

That said, I think it was tasteless enough that I found it funny... mostly because people like to say George Lucas or JJ or Michael Bay or whomever raped their childhood.

 

[Broccoli]

I think the only thing he's done that might be considered tasteless is the Star Trek Reboot review because he basically had the "movie" rape a woman and the woman sort of enjoying it.

That said, I think it was tasteless enough that I found it funny... mostly because people like to say George Lucas or JJ or Michael Bay or whomever raped their childhood.

Which that was clearly going off of.

I kinda find the reaction to that ironic. People online throw the "[insert name] raped my childhood" so often that they probably don't fully get what they are actually referring to. However, that video said the same thing visually, and it causes the ire of the internet.

Perhaps that was the point.

 

[Anthony Sabre]

I enjoy the RLM reviews. Their take on the SW prequels are pretty much spot on. I also liked the reviews of the TNG movies. Granted the kidnapped women bits get old but even those had some laugh out loud moments.

 

[firehawk12]

I think the only thing he's done that might be considered tasteless is the Star Trek Reboot review because he basically had the "movie" rape a woman and the woman sort of enjoying it.

That said, I think it was tasteless enough that I found it funny... mostly because people like to say George Lucas or JJ or Michael Bay or whomever raped their childhood.

Which that was clearly going off of.

I kinda find the reaction to that ironic. People online throw the "[insert name] raped my childhood" so often that they probably don't fully get what they are actually referring to. However, that video said the same thing visually, and it causes the ire of the internet.

Perhaps that was the point.

The thing is, a couple of seasons ago South Park had either George Lucas or Steven Spielberg raping the town... it must have been when Indy 4 came out. I don't remember people having much of a cow because of that though.

 

[Canadave]

I'm not a fan, myself. I don't find him terribly entertaining, and his reviews really seem to plod along. I much prefer the Nostalgia Critic: he's wittier, the character is a little more likeable, and the 20–25 minute format works much better, IMO.

 

[Broccoli]

I think the only thing he's done that might be considered tasteless is the Star Trek Reboot review because he basically had the "movie" rape a woman and the woman sort of enjoying it.

That said, I think it was tasteless enough that I found it funny... mostly because people like to say George Lucas or JJ or Michael Bay or whomever raped their childhood.

Which that was clearly going off of.

I kinda find the reaction to that ironic. People online throw the "[insert name] raped my childhood" so often that they probably don't fully get what they are actually referring to. However, that video said the same thing visually, and it causes the ire of the internet.

Perhaps that was the point.

The thing is, a couple of seasons ago South Park had either George Lucas or Steven Spielberg raping the town... it must have been when Indy 4 came out. I don't remember people having much of a cow because of that though.

Well, that's because it's cool to bash Indy 4 because it was an easy mark. I'm not saying that's why Parker and Stone did it, but it was easier for fanboys to accept. If Parker and Stone did the same episode, but centered it around the new movie, I feel hell would have broken loose here. And this is coming from someone who liked both Indy 4 and the new Trek movie.

I'm not a fan, myself. I don't find him terribly entertaining, and his reviews really seem to plod along. I much prefer the Nostalgia Critic: he's wittier, the character is a little more likeable, and the 20–25 minute format works much better, IMO.

I like the Nostalgia Critic as well, but I feel that he doesn't nearly go in depth as RLM does. Most of NC's gags consist of dumbfounded looks or him screaming "arrg" and "what?!" Not that that's bad, but he just attacks the surface of a film. Then again, those are two different personalities with two different styles.

 

[Silent_Bob]

Not pissed off at all by RLM either. I doubt i'll be watching any more of their reviews after viewing their Attack of the Clones review, given that i found the way they chose to do it exceedingly tasteless, but i'm not angry about it at all.

 

[DarKush]

I thought his review of TPM was amazing. He did a good job, not as good though, with AOTC. And I thought he did a good job ripping apart Nemesis. Haven't seen the one for Insurrection, but I thought he was reaching a bit with First Contact. I also think he did a ROTS review that I thought he was grasping straws with, but I can't remember if that was someone else's link. I watched his reviews on youtube a while back.

 

[Tulin]

RLM has not done RoTS yet.

Personally I think he's a genius(he was SPOT ON for Avatard and I mean S P O T on)and youtube and the net could do with more original stuff like this.


VERY much looking forward to his RoTS review!

 

[Shazam!]

By 'storm' do you mean guys on the internet listening to his reviews?

: |

 

[Mike Farley]

I don't think the guy is funny or insightful. He's just another guy on the internet expressing his nerd rage.

But pissed at him? Why? He's just guy on the internet. His opinion doesn't matter one bit to me. He's irrelevant.

 

[TheBrew]

Nerd Rage is pretty pitiful nowadays.

 

[barnaclelapse]

He's just giving his opinion about movies. He's being critical of art, it's impossible for him to be wrong and it's absurd to be upset about him having a differing opinion about a movie.

Yeah but where would the internet be without contradiction and absurdity?

 

[Nardpuncher]

I like him and I think he's funny. Not the keeping women in the basement thing, I could give or take that, but his actual reviews are great.

 

[Argus Skyhawk]

I voted "Yes" because I enjoy his reviews (the Trek ones; I haven't seen the prequel ones), but not because I think he's the best online critic. You need to offer something a little less extreme as an option in the poll in between "Yes" and "A few good points".

Then again, I wonder how many people are voting "Yes" in answer to the subject line question. That is, they are voting "Yes" because they are pissed off by RedLetterMedia. I can't trust the poll results.

 

[Argus Skyhawk]

The thing is, a couple of seasons ago South Park had either George Lucas or Steven Spielberg raping the town... it must have been when Indy 4 came out. I don't remember people having much of a cow because of that though.

That's because it's South Park. If people had a cow every time that show did something outrageously offensive, they would have a cow after every episode.