Who is your favorite movie critic?

Who is your favorite movie critic?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=X1nnNz_Tewk
youtube.com/watch?v=12wOUMNoncQ
youtube.com/watch?v=F8HQ918HFz4
youtube.com/watch?v=747cvo8Lkjw
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Certanly not Your Movie Sucks who likes to fuck dogs.

RalphTheMovieMaker is a solid one.

>"critic"
There's no good youtube critics.

The best you can do is video essayists, because they care enough about films to actually watch shit from before the 90s, read books on the subject and study it.

me

Video is inherently superior to written text as a means to criticism and review a movie.
Youtube is the most popular video sharing service.

1+1=fuckyourself.

Kermode

What do you not get from "read books on the subject"?

And most YT "critics" are just 20some year old hypocrites who think they're "cinephiles" after watching a couple Hanekes and some shitty convoluted and overrated piece of trash like The Holy Mountain, leaving everything that came out before the 80s and 90s untouched because "it's too old for today's standards and people only pretend to like old movies".

YMS is definitely not a critic, and neither are most youtubers. They're just average vloggers who want to tell you how smart they are. The only big youtuber who seems to actually know stuff about film is Jay from RLM, but I guess that doesn't bring in viewers, so they talk about Suicide Squad instead.

>Youtube is the most popular video sharing service.
What? How is that relevant?

>The only big youtuber who seems to actually know stuff about film is Jay from RLM

The guy who only watches Sharknado tier movies, except made 30 years ago?

Faraci is best. fight me irl, regressives.

Quit shilling this shrill voiced furry animal fucking piece of shit.

His taste in movie is shit, and his fanbase is even worse.

What? Did you completely miss the point of BOTW? They just watch them to make fun at how bad they are. It's a means of entertainment. Personally I'm a huge fan of bad old comedy horror flicks, but that doesn't stop me from enjoying actually good movies.

As for Jay, he sometimes mentions underrated or non-mainstream great films on the show or his twitter, and it's especially obvious if you watch their videogame streams.

abatap

This

This lad

>who validates my opinion by claiming to be an authority on a subject
>the thread

Reminder that -

A.) This is his favorite movie ever made

B.) He likes to fuck dogs

youtube.com/watch?v=X1nnNz_Tewk

Doesn't that guy have sex with dogs or something?

>muh old films
>muhindie films
>if you don't like these then you just don't understand film
This is cancer, also film critics are also cancer

nothing wrong with that movie

>your deconstruction of Cool Cat Saves The Kids is irrelevant because you haven't watched some obscure french flique from the 60s that's probably mediocre in the first place

this fetishization of the old has to stop

Yeah, nothing wrong with fucking dogs either

Angry Joe is based as fuck.

You sound very insecure, very insecure. Lots of projecting, lots of impotent anger. Sad!

Isn't that Adam Johnston from YourMovieSucks.org(yms)? I heard he's a dog rapist and that he enjoys bestiality.

I didn't say that. Synecdoche is objectively a great movie and there's nothing wrong with having it as your favourite film.

Jay probably doesn't watch many movies before the 1960s, so he can't really talk about films in general.

Who's this guy? He looks like a real dogfucker

Here's your (you)

>watch his top 10 movies of the year thus far
Haven't seen any of them, hadn't heard of half.
>watch his worst 10 movies of the year thus far
Seen all of them, liked half.

So yeah, this guy is an artsy tryhard fag.

Source?

Cinematic Excrement is pretty comfy to watch desu

no, you're just a disgusting pleb

Yeah man, I love turkish films about children sex trafficking, really pulls my heart strings. Bonus points for bad ambient music, foreign language, all the debut performances and reminding me how good I have it and that I should donate clothes to Africa.

I enjoy reading some of his reviews, but he's clearly a jumped up contrarian.
He thinks he's doing something more important than he does.

stick to Marvel films kiddo

kek
It's "almost" as if you didn't even read what I said. I literally said you can enjoy both schlocky and good films.
Sorry for offending you though, I didn't know you were such huge fanboy of a retarded zoophile man-child.

>Cool Cat
That's not criticism. That's making fun of. His comedy stuff is alright. Whenever he talks like he's a pro connoisseur about art films, that's when he's terrible and pathetic.

And stop samefagging. It's really obvious and embarrassing.

Excellent. I was hoping I wouldn't have to be the one to post him.

>clearly a jumped up contrarian
If it's clear then you should have no problem proving it to me. And don't include the word 'contrarian' in your answer. Logic doesn't work that way.

Well he's got a point, but I am vegan so I can still think he's a sick fuck. Fucking an animal has never been acceptable in any society I know of, yeah it has happened throughout history but so has all types of crazy shit. Let's dispense with the wave of revulsion that hit's most people at the idea of fucking an animal and think about it for a second, there's so much subtle nuance and body language to the human courting process you really think anyone can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that you're not raping that animal? Adam obviously just wants to fuck animals and has collected information to suit his feelings.

>my mental illness cancels out his mental illness

youtube.com/watch?v=12wOUMNoncQ

Two of his criticisms were "straight white male privileged life first world problems aren't worth making a movie about" and "the creator was clearly a nerd fanboy who spent too much time in his bedroom and needs to grow up and go outside".

I am sorry that I will never be that patrician.

Well, he riddles his reviews with jargon, and references academic work loosely in order to develop a politicized take on pretty much whatever he watches. Most reviewers don't do this. He's like Pauline Kael taken to her radical conclusion.
He consistently "surprises" by providing scathing critiques of films that were generally well received, and vice versa.
Now, what you're thinking is that he can't be a "contrarian" if his reviews are in fact correct. You're thinking he's an underappreciated saint of insight, who cuts through the bullshit of hollywood cronyism.
He is and he isn't.
I made a judgement call.just like Armond does for a living Do I think that to some degree he deliberately goes against consensus in his reviews, molding his insight around a contrarian presumption? Yes.
Am I saying his reviews are worthless and we should all always agree with the tomato meter? No.

Get a hold of yourself you partisan loser.

Fuck off.

two of the posts praise a critic, the other proclaims them all to be cancer
>it's as if you didn't even read them

ed

>he riddles his reviews with jargon, and references academic work loosely in order to develop a politicized take on pretty much whatever he watches
I could say the same thing about Roger Ebert but that wouldn't make it true. Where are proofs? All movies are politicised because they were made by people who live in society. They don't spring into existence out of a vacuum. Nothing that White says ever really stretches credulity I think. There's no such thing as a movie completely untouched by culture and politics.

And I think that the politics is worked into his reviews quite naturally, he's not going off and citing obscure academic theories that nobody but him has read to shoehorn that shit it. He refers to what's happening in the world right now.

>He consistently "surprises" by providing scathing critiques of films that were generally well received, and vice versa.
Just because you put it in quotes that doesn't mean anything. He doesn't operate on a sliding 'good to bad' scale like most critics. He judges a films worth. Nothing that comes out of Hollywood is ever really technically incompetent anymore so he measures them by what they're saying above anything else, which I think is not only reasonable, but the only worthwhile way to be a film critic anymore.

>the whole second half of this thing
What are you trying to say here?
>'He is and he isn't.'
Which ways is he and which ways isn't he? At the moment you sound like a middle-grounding pussy with nothing to say using detachment as a shield from criticism.

>well maybe he is but maybe he isn't :D

Say something substantial

add to that he loved the sjw bullcrap of zootopia

If you mean the shit I said about Jay, that's not praising a critic. the "critic" is RLM as a whole, more specifically Half in the bag, which is pretty terrible and pointless. It's obvious that Jay knows his shit, but he never says anything relevant about it on the show so who cares.
Please think about the things that you're reading before commenting on them.

Okay yeah you're right I change my mind

As of this year I discovered RLM and started to really like them. Mainly because not every episode starts off with "HEY WASSUP NUKETUBERS ITZ YA BOY MIKE AND JAY". Also I can appreciate their commentson movies because they're filmmakers themselves, they're familiar with movies and aren't 16 year old who play videos all day that decide to review a movie.

A show called Kino+

Just came to say I agree with you.

>kino +
>there are figurines and toys on the table
fuck off with this man child bullshit

Fuck you if you're actually that user. You can't get out this easily.

Are the macbooks really necessary? I fucking hate those things.

Nice deflection faggot
>still disregarded the fact that you were wrong
>Hothead detected

Wrong about what?

Damn well said. I'm sure the guy you're arguing with is so delusional he'll assume this post is you samefagging.

But this Armond guy is the definition of contrarian. Even when he as valid point, it's still to be shocking and to either praise or disapprove of what ever the opposite consensus is.

there's lots of truth in this, but it will get discarded along with the b8
most youtube reviewers are failed film schoolers in their mid20s to early 30s

Is there some older good movie reviewer on YT?

That's the First pic I found, they normally don't use them

There's no argument. You're partisan. Whatever I say, you'll just rationalize in the opposite direction.
Even this comment is a waste of my time.
It's a favour to you though, you should meditate on it.

Think about what it is you're actually looking for in the exchange? Think about all the your presumptions regarding what I think, and how I should think.

There is no commerce to be had. So, no. Fuck you.

Partisan fool

Thirded my friends. The above post is an absolute font of wisdom. As inarguable as it is substantial. One can only hope that one day the vulgar masses tire of squatting in their own filth and come to the light, as it is it appears that nothing can be done for the poor wretches.

Contrarian indeed, Armond White hasn't had a sincere thought in his life and the frustration of true films lovers is the power behind his pen.

God damn I love you user. You're actually really intelligent.

No sarcasm intended. If more posters were on your intellectual level this board would be a place for actual discussion and not just a meme dump.

>meditate on it
Okay faggot

>what is it you're actually looking for in the exchange
to see if a valid criticism of Armond White exists

>think about all the your presumptions regarding what I think
I started with none, but now I think you're shitposting

>and how I should think
you should praise allah three times a day

>there is no commerce to be had
are either of us salesmen?

>partisan fool
empty-headed knave

MovieBob is god tier.

True cancer.

I don't (and probably most of their audience too) watch RLM for their knowledge of classic film, I watch it for Mike's and Jay's knowledge of comfy b-movies

I'm sorry your IQ only reaches the double digits.

I watch it for the bad jokes. I take nothing else from it, its comedy. Never seen any movie after they "reviewed" it that I wouldn't have anyway.

Is that guy still alive and working?

That user's posts probably contain the least actual discussion out of all of those in the entire thread. In fact he's actively working to stifle discussion.

112 but okay

Thats funny, usually its Sup Forums who brings up IQ.
A cuck that enjoys an SJW movie reviewer bringing up IQ? What's next, you gonna admit that niggers actually have a lower IQ than the average of whites? (btw they do)

yeah I'm pretty sure Mike and Jay don't even think of themselves as critics, they make comedy shows

nah man, discussion and flinging rationalisations at each other are not the same thing. A discussion includes some give and take.
that's his point.

He gave his argument, it was solid.
The other posters responds by saying "you're wrong"
So the only thing left to do is ask the poster to be more self aware and ask himself why he has such a bias to defend this man.

I'm sorry that you're wrong. No need to be embarrassed.

Are you real? His Red State review was ALL I needed to see to know he's WAY too cucked to ever give a credible review.

Damn, even the mildest anti-racist message is now "SJW"? You Sup Forumstards are tightening your definitions these days.

youtube.com/watch?v=F8HQ918HFz4

How about this guy? He is an industry insider after all.

so there is no good movie critic?

yms is still in his edgy "I'm 20 and I just watchd Oldboy dude Hollywood sucks lmao" phase everybody goes through, he could be good when he grows up. Reminder that he's like 20 years younger than Mike and Jay, if they had made Hitb when they were 20 it probably would've been way worse. Jay has talked in pre rec bunch of times how in the 90's he went through a phase where he hated all big movies and didn't watch any and thanks to that missed movies like Starsship Troopers originally in theaters.

not that I want to defend YMS lol. it's crazy to see comment online saying "YMS should be a quest on BOTW" when it would be fucking awful and it would never happen. He's like 20 and Mike and Jay are like 40 and his enjoyment for b-movies doesn't feel sincere, he does it ironically to get views and it feels mean spirited, like his Neil Breen review. YMS would be a better video game review than movies, movies are about emotion and he doesn't understand it

bait

RLM. They don't take themselves seriously at all like other retards like Kermode or Moviebob. And sometimes Jay has something genuinely insightful to say.

yms is still in his edgy "i fuck dogs" phase

>bait

How is it bait? He is a popular screenwriter, gets a lot of work, produces some TV as well.
He is an industry insider, and does reviews on Youtube, and critiques productions and trends.

What is it that seems "baity" to you?

Probably Adam Johnston from YourMovieSucksDOTorg (yms), the dog rapist who enjoys bestiality

You know this country is fucked when you can openly admit to being okay beastiality and still have a fan base. That should have been the end of his youtube career, but nope. Degeneracy is IN these days.

>His taste in movie is shit, and his fanbase is even worse.
He also thinks dogfucking is AOK.

who?

But he doesn't fuck dogs. He gives dogs handjobs and blowjobs. Fucking them would be harmful because of penis size issues, and that would be animal cruelty, which he opposes.
At worse he will put some honey on his dick to have the dog lick it.

Basically no "fucking" and no harm will come to the dog.

>this fetishization of the old has to stop
this fetishization of dog cock has to stop

but there is something wrong with blowing other species

>His comedy stuff is alright
his dogfucking is not alright

>posts arrive at the exact same time saying the exact same thing
Either this is one more than average committed shitposter specifically targeting me or the insanity is spreading.

>The other posters responds by saying "you're wrong"
>a discussion includes some give and take that's his point
Are you aware that I'm the one who wrote and got absolutely no points in response?

If you can look at that and understand the flow of this discussion and still say that I'm not contributing you're clearly here to shitpost.

I couldn't find the comment again to screenshot for you, but he's such a delusional SJW that he said "everything is mysognist and the more you start to notice it, the harder it is to ignore".

Being an insider in the industry doesn't give you credibility of the industry is corrupt in the first place... I trust audiences opinions more than manipulative nu males that make money off of pitching Peter Pan reboot ideas...

>Well he's got a point
no he doesn't. he has a bullshit rationalization

This seems true enough. He's younger and immature, but he also has some analytical skills that go beyond the scope of RLM.
He sometimes analyses himself into a corner, and the reviews teeter on the edge of solipsism.
RLM, besides the rudimentary "movie making101" of the Plinkett reviews, which had the advantage of the low hanging fruit of the prequels, RLM have pretty conservative and unadventurous reaction to film.

Both are fine in certain respects, and it seems like apples and oranges to me.
They both treat film like a completely different medium.

i too dislike yms, but you got both your statements wrong.

youtube.com/watch?v=747cvo8Lkjw

Here is a "SJW rant" of his, that I randomly looked up.
He is making a good point and really makes me think.

oh, OK, that's fine. Adam Johnston from YourMovieSucksDOTorg (yms), the dog rapist who enjoys bestiality

here's a correct statement: Adam Johnston from YourMovieSucksDOTorg (yms), the dog rapist who enjoys bestiality

>dog rapist

Rape is a social construct and a juridical term. You can't rape dogs, by the definition of rape. Dogs can't be citizens.

>He is making a good point and really makes me think
Please don't proceed to pretend this isn't bait. I'm weak and honestly you'll probably get me to respond again. I'm so easy to troll... It's sad.

rekt

Neat. Sounds like a great justification to impose your sexual will in a lower creature. Adam Johnston from YourMovieSucksDOTorg (yms) is a dog rapist who enjoys bestiality