"Only stupid people obsess over plot" is code for "Shut up and enjoy my bad writing, capisce?" Why improve your product to suit the audience when you can instead dumb down the audience to suit your product?
So sick of being told to turn my brain off and enjoy. “It’s made for kids, why are you using your brain?” Because children are obviously stupid and don’t understand logic, who cares about them. Even tho the movie is supposedly made FOR them… shows how much they care about children and the stories they consume. But they’re the same type of people to tell me that I’m the asshole for wanting better stories, for both children AND myself. It’s such a terrible deflection. It’s just a straight up concession most of the time, “Yeah, you may be _technically_ right, but who cares?” (the answer is me, I care, obviously) Caring about things is simultaneously righteous and evil, depending on if you’re being positive or negative. You’re only allowed to care if you have positive things to say, bigot. And that’s not to mention that the things they always say are ‘for kids’ are almost never strictly for kids. The whole point of the argument is that they try to draw equivalencies between something like Star Wars and Paw Patrol, and that’s not a strawman, I’ve had arguments where I’ve made direct reference to shows like Paw Patrol and how they are different ‘kids content’ than Star Wars. The person came back with The Wiggles trying to make the same point, “so you think The Wiggles should be completely logical?” Both Star Wars and The Wiggles are for kids, so they’re pretty much the exact same thing with the exact same standards, that’s how these people see it. I then asked if something like The Lord of the Rings was ‘made for children’ despite being heavily violent and hard to follow for young children. Tolkien wanted children to be able to enjoy his story, but I wouldn’t call it anywhere near ‘content for kids’, _especially_ the books. But there are elves and dwarves and magic? So it has to be basically the same thing as The Wiggles… same with Star Wars. Violence, political, and religious themes, but nah, it’s basically Paw Patrol. They think ANY fantasy setting is automatically a fairy tale that adults aren’t meant to be consuming. Surprisingly, the person stopped answering after I asked those questions.
"Your movies are shit dude" Ruin Johnson: _"LOL I don't care it was meant to be divisive but if u don't like it u r an idiot in fact I wanted to make u mad but u have no right to be mad at me because u don't understand my genuis..."_ Hack Snyder: _"I didn't have creative control!! You'll see that the 5h hour director's cut will address one insignificant detail with over 2 hours of slop!! Believe me that wasn't my vision they were meddling and interfering with my limited creativity!!!"_ Michael Bay: "Yeah lol"
@@williamshelton4318 literally every "critic" counting tropes/cliches has no originality nor good ideas. "I hate orphaned characters" yeah, me too, but if your character has a family the plot must account for it: why aren't his parents helping him if he is risking his life?
Anthony saw In Praise of Shadows awful, miserable "takedown" of Wendigoon and how he was laughed off the internet, and promptly decided imitation was the sincerest form of flattery.
I love how the in praise of shadows guy went full horseshoe and was just being a racist to wendigoon and speaking behalf of native Americans without a understanding the absolute irony
“Why have films really? Why waste our time? Just tell me what you want me to think.” Careful, Rags, that’s sounds like exactly what certain people want lmao.
“Sometimes when you win, you really lose. And sometimes when you lose, you really win. And sometimes when you win or lose, you actually tie, and sometimes when you tie, you actually win or lose. Winning or losing is all one organic mechanism, from which one extracts what one needs.” Gloria Clemente the Wise (not really).😂
@@WaifuWielder it be like that sometimes. I have a best friend like that as well. But hey, the friendship didn't exist because I wanted a clone of myself, even if said friend can have some PAINFUL takes. It existed because said friend has qualities that are endearing, as well as common interests where he isn't cringe. In my case, it is mainly a shared autistic love for Game Design, and being equally on the same wavelength for calling most game design trash, even if we have totally different preferences in games. I assume your friendship is kinda similar. So I relate.
I love this guy, he’s such a baffling little creature. - He says that the events that happen in a film are ultimately not important, yet he gets angry at the theatrical version of Bladerunner for having a thing in the film that actively harms the experience, which contradicts the main point of his video. “The technical details, who cares?”, yet he’s angry when the theatrical release just says what the characters are feeling, which is all his own review of the movie boils down to, anyways. - He assumes his audience has never even heard of Bladerunner, and gives the most dispassionate summary of its events ever, yet he assumes that his audience HAS seen half a dozen random reviews which is why he just throws up out-of-context clips from those videos, but at the same time, he clearly believes that his audience already agrees that all of these people suck, so why would they be familiar with those reviews??
Describing the summary as being dispassionate is absolutely right. I have a friend that likes to browse TV/movie memes on 4chan, but had not seen Blade Runner until I had him watch it with me. He spouted those memes for a movie he had not yet watched with more passion than this man trying to convince us that the themes were all that mattered.
Blade Runner theatrical cut: [on the nose internal monologuing] Anthony: [angry soyjak] Ruin Johnson's The Last Jedi: [has multiple characters blatantly preach the theme of the movie/ Ruin's iconoclast philosophy] Anthony: [CalArts smile soyjak]
AG: *spends his entire video being a self-righteous smug ass constantly demeaning and lying about those he doesn’t like not for their criticisms, but their politics* AG on Twitter: *whining and getting advice from all his buds about how to handle the totally unwarranted “hate” he’s about to be receiving*
But as ShoeOnHead once said, they don’t really have friends. They only have enemies and temporary allies. They have people they despise and people they’ll throw under the bus the minute they’re not longer useful
Without plot there are no themes. Imagine the perfect movie. **Movie starts** _we see a man standing in his living room with a newspaper in his hand_ Man: I think I will sit in the chair today when reading the newspaper. _man grabs a chair and reads the newspaper_ **Movie ends** You can't now go on about the theme of the movie being about loss and overcoming the emotional distress in order to go on with life. The theme exists within the plot, or it does not exist.
I agree and disagree to an extent. Movies are also a visual medium so even in your example, despite how limited, you could still tell a story about loss even if it all stayed the same based off of environmental storytelling. We could discover his name through some kind of decoration in the room and the newspaper could be flipped to the mortuary section where it displays a dead wife or family member or whatever. Maybe through his acting we can tell what it means to sit down in one chair in particular. I know it’s a little silly, but it is still possible to tell a heavy story with an incredibly simplistic plot as long as you’re not making arguments like “why does that even matter dude???” Like a doofus. The point is intentionality and communication for the audience.
@@NarcolepticEwe One could argue that the visual storytelling itself constitutes plot and narrative . The theme needs something to convey it to the audience. Some kind of delivery device.
@@soulsearcher9620 Fair point! Kinda circles back to what the EFAP crew were saying about how hard it is to completely divorce plot from characters, design, dialogue etc.
@@NarcolepticEweAt one point you'd be writing the plot for the director, and not even getting paid for it. There's a blurry line between subtle and implicit storytelling and mere interpretation.
@@NarcolepticEwe It's not hard, it's impossible. Unless it's some kind of weird experimental novel where things just happen for no discernible reason, every single plot ever written is driven by characters and their choices. A plot, in essence, is an emergent phenomena we use to describe events in a story, and it emerges from the interplay between the different characters' needs, wants, and actions.
Anthony GraSmuglia is one of the few ‘people’ to ever construct a straw man, drench it with gasoline, and lit themselves on fire instead. This was one of the most unsuccessful attempts at straw manning ever recorded in the history of man.
The EFAP rule of video essays cannot be made. The only thing that can tie these dregs together would be a competition of "PEAK IRONY AWARD" and the judges have a preference for lacking self-awareness
@@voidking9597 dude, it has 78 likes. That’s a lot of people who think it makes sense and like the comment. People seem to think it makes sense. What’s your deal?
@@bigideasthescholar My "deal" is that the original comment is very unclear as is your comment. I would like some additional explanation. Also, just because people respond to your comment by nodding does not mean they understand it or agree with it.
@lordofthepizzapie9319 it's bizarre. I got a friend I play Halo with on Infinite. We both love and hate the game but it's something we both play to spend time. He passively got me into reading the novels recently cus his love for the Chief and Blue Team as well as The Fall of Reach got me wanting to read it cus I feel like I am missing out on keener details and he's all about the Spartans while I'm an ODST fan. So I wanna get into more media pre-343 to understand and appreciate what I couldn't catch up on. Ant and Stuckman makes it seem like they're into said media cus all the cool kids are or it's "well if you're gonna talk media you GOT to see these otherwise X or Y". It comes off as a unwanted required reading and a half-a$$ed "do it and turn your paper in and you get your grade." Level of seeing something rather than doing so out of passion, curiosity or some other inspiration.
MauLer should do a “Bladerunner: Unbridled Praise” video as strike back against these sorts of disingenuous shills. Personally, I’d recommend he do both the Theatrical and Director’s Cut of this work of cinematic artistry.
I can’t stand people like this, the ‘I’m so more informed than you’ I would never listen to this guy I am glad you highlighted his lack of knowledge & imagination. It’s so lame.
I hate how disingenuously, manipulatively he made this video and it gave me the feeling the reason he made it is just to hate on the peoples he actively dislike.
14:24 "...some of these replicants don't even realize they're human." ⁉️ UM, WHAT?! 😮😮😮 He didn't have time to proofread his script before doing the video? That was a crucial error, AND IT WAS SO EASY TO AVOID. 😬😠🤬
I keep hearing about the Twitter war this guy got into after the EFAP dropped, but I couldn't see any of it because I don't have a Twitter. It'd be nice if a future highlight had a best of compilation to summarise what was happening on Twitter at the time.
"it's so long and they keep lying about me and what I said" did you watch it? "No of course not it's really long and they lied about me and what I said." ..... This is basically the summary of any conversation about it.
Wasnt the plot with Bladerunner that Decker is checking for replicas and investigating them while also the movie raises the possibility that Decker is a replicant himself?
Yes to the first part, no to the second. The central concept of Rick Deckard's internal conflict is that he's a man tasked to kill androids, who as a result of his job has lost his humanity. At the core of Blade Runner is a question: what does it mean to be human? The "Rick is a robit" concept was BS thrown in by Ridley Scott because he thought he was being clever, and because he wasn't interested in making a philosophical film. Philip K. Dick, author of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, the book Blade Runner was based on, made the replicants to be sociopathic monsters because of their complete lack of empathy; they, and the entire book in fact, were inspired by the journals of SS officers Dick had come across while researching for Man in the High Castle, and concluded that the thing which wrote said journal was so evil that it could not have been human. Scott, however, sees replicants as ubermensches, superior to humans in every way. Script writers Hampton Fancher and David Peoples, and Harrison Ford all vehemently disagree with Scott on this. Frank Darabont has so artfully explained, "Blade Runner only works if Deckard is human. It's about a man who's lost his humanity, but over the course of the film, rediscovers it again. It's a brilliant character arc, but if Deckard is a replicant, all that is gone." Scott says "Rick is a robot" because he thinks it's cool, like Hack Snyder would. All of Ridley Scott's good films are good in spite of his input, not because if it.
@@DaMaster012I'm so glad you posted this because I was about to boot up razor fist's vid about bladerunner so I could brush up on my behind the scenes knowledge and make this exact comment lol.
Alright, let's take Roy's statements from both directions: 1) No interstellar travel, so Roy is talking about imagining seeing things off the shoulders of Orion, a thing Replicants aren't built to do, yeah? or 2) Interstellar travel is available, so Roy has been to Orion... somehow, and has seen that there is so much more in the universe than the petty little squabbles that make up most peoples day to day. And he just wanted to become something greater than a Replicant. Whether or not interstellar travel is a thing in universe, doesn't matter, the situation can be read that Batty either was looking to grow, or had already grown beyond his programming.
Orion is also a constellation - I always took the line "Attack ships on fire off the shoulders of Orion" as him witnessing a battle in space with the stars that make up Orion hanging in the background. You don't need interstellar travel then - in fact, it makes more sense if the battle was still in the Sol system, so the relative position of the stars that make up the constellation isn't too dissimilar from what you'd see in the night sky.
@@uummmnocoolnames Yeah, that's how I took it, a fight in local space. You don't even *need* space travel to see something there, in fact. Right now, as long as you had the place and time right, you could sit outside and watch the lights of a commuter plane blinking off the shoulder of Orion. It's funny, the most "scifi" part of that phrase is the attack ships, not the reference to the stars.
Interstellar Travel is clearly available as the plot is that the replicants escaped from Mars. And there is no mention of if Orion meant the Constellation or something else. Which was the point. You aren’t supposed to know the experiences he has because they are going to die with him.
@@emberfist8347 First, to be hyper pedantic, traveling to and from Mars is an example of _interplanetary_ travel, not interstellar travel; interstellar travel typically refers to traveling between different star systems(usually via FTL travel, if you want to get there anytime soon). Second, I'll fully admit "Orion" being a reference to the constellation is an assumption on my part. That being said, considering neither galaxies, nebulae, nor planets can really be described as having shoulders, while the Orion constellation specifically has two stars (Betelgeuse and Bellatrix) that represent Orion's _shoulders_, I'll maintain it's a fairly safe logical assumption.
I have a theory as to why this guys clips and text are so disjointed: I think he is using them like figures and captions in a text book. They are auxiliary to his main point instead of directly contributing to them. Obviously, the concept has not translated into video well, and his poor editing and arguments make it difficult to figure out his intentions, but I feel confident in saying he's using clips wrong thanks to trying to replicate something that doesn't work in this medium.
He's preaching to the choir and he knows it. He made this video for people who are already on the same page and agree with everything he's going to say, the clips are just there to reinforce his point, because "haha look at these silly, silly people who lack media literacy, not like us true media literates who Understand™ things." The main thing you always have to remember with people like Anthony is that they don't want to meaningfully engage with you in any way, if you're one of the perceived others then they've already dismissed your position, regardless of how much effort you put into wording it.
I know a couple UA-camrs who use this idea of auxiliary text, but they do it in a sane way - rather than random text that is so slap-dash that you can't even tell whether it is part of a clip or a criticism of said clip. For example, TIK History has a little box at the bottom of the screen which shows the relevant citations for the current statement being made in his historical videos and he often has little satirical lines that come from portraits of generals as he describes events in his battlestorm videos. Someone like C3 Sabertooth often has a lot of ancillary details left over from his research process. They are irrelevant to the main point and not worth dedicating parts of the video to, so he has text boxes that pop up at relevant times and last for a few seconds for those interested. There are ways to combine text and video in a way that compliment each other, but whatever Anthony is doing is definitely not it.
I never get the grifting accusations. For all the gripes you can have with others, is it really imagine they actually believe the thoughts they espouse? They'll complain Mauler claims his opinions are fact, while consistently ascribing and dictating what everybody else truly thinks. I'd say Candace Owens is the only person I have reason to believe is only in it for the money. Vaush is upfront about his willingness to lie for optics and messaging but I'd wager it's centered on political change over securing the bag. JustPearlyThings also says some ridiculous stuff about women in society and won't practice what she preaches, I'd still wager thats rooted in pathological issues more than anything else. For every genuine con artist, there's 50 people whose intentions are earnest even if they'd take the money and run if it got hard. The rigid reinforcement of constraining echo chambers really leaves one unable to grasp the reasoning and motivations of individuals.
@@cdubsb3831 It's because calling people Nazis didn't work. Instead of just not throwing stones, they found a new rock quarry. But this is also pretty juicy if this is their new buzzword because it's technically a libelist claim if anybody they use it on wanted to lawyer up.
This is the sort of guy who thinks The Last Jedi is a good movie because it has that shot that rips off the silent film Wings. But he only knows that because he saw it on film Twitter.
"The focus of the scene is Batty has seen things and all these moment will be lost in time like tears in the rain. And that's compelling." Holy, shit! All you managed to glean from that scene was the explicit? That's pathetic.
sorry, I'm not a native english speaker and this might be causing some confusion: the summarized description the guy does to Blade Runner, is not that what we refer to as premise?
Plot, story, and logical consistency does matter to everyone. What if a movie has a world war 2 character pull out a energy weapon. In order for him to beat an entire army. If the plot doesn't involve time travel or an alien species. Everyone will complain about that ending.
Imagine a world where Taken 1 is the exact same except it has 5 seconds extra at the end where Liam Neeson kills his daughter without a word then the credits roll. Would that be a problem? Would that contradict everything the movie was doing up until that point ? I've asked this dozens of times and never gotten a reply. Nobody ever tries to say "No it's not a problem" . They avoid answering it. That says everything I need to know about them.
@@Fauwkes "ripped off" is such an unfair phrase. Did Philip K Dick rip off Sturgeon who's work inspired the og 'Do Androids dream of electric sheep"? Did Ridley Scott rip off Moebius' imagery? Even with their similarities, each of those movies are so different in their own context.
This, ladies and gentleman, is the leftie "media literacy" argument. The only thing that matters is the themes or messages and freaking politics of a work, and the structure that binds all of that together doesn't matter at all. This people don't care at all about art; they don't care about the craft, the structure of a work or all the effort, technique and creativity that goes into build It, all is just lip service. If that's the case, why even bother with the story part at all? Write a damn essay, and stop wasting everyone's time.
I see the first three volumes of Eva on his shelf and I shudder to think how badly he butchers understanding the plot to that if Blade Runner is giving him problems.
Yeah, these assholes seem to hold MovieBob up in good spirits. Y’know, the same guy who wishes to commit mass genocide and impose Nazi-style eugenics on anybody who disagrees with them. Even people who dislike Trump don’t possess the same amount of hate Diabeto has for the orange man
On the Orion plothole comment: I never assumed "the shoulder of Orion" was meant to be another galaxy, it could be related to some other place called Orion. But more to the point, it wouldn't be a plothole regardless because of the significant theme of real and fake memories. That memory might have been a creation (like Decker's unicorn) but does that make it any less real or impactful on Batty's character?
I just assumed we aren’t meant to know the answer. Like how the Batman comics consistently say The Joker’s real name is backstory is not important or how Star Wars is similarly mum about Yoda’s origins. We aren’t meant to have answers sometimes. After all it isn’t the point of those stories.
I need to know who this video is directed at. I don’t like Blade Runner at all, but I’m confident not a single soul I’ve ever seen discuss it doesn’t notice the things the entire story is about that he’s saying critics don’t notice
Its the same as modern art: dont focus on whats actually on the canvas because i have a pretentious spiel about the human condotion and leftist politics thats what the canvas ACTUALLY means and thats all that matters
Clearly Ant and his circlejerk of friends are never gonna actually read, watch, or play the media they claim to be “passionate” about, thinking that their smug charisma nonsense can mask their pseudo-intellectualism who are way too confident over the fact that they don’t want to hear any opinions other than their own
A stories plot is like a buildings foundation and framework. Without a solid foundation and framework, it's going to collapse, and all the decorations in the world will mean less than a small freshly excreted mound of steamy canine faeces.
I actually watched Blade Runner (1982) for the very first time last month and the film deeply touched me in a very profound way, 10/10 masterpiece and those who say otherwise are clearly media illiterate, this includes you Jay Bauman.. no matter how much I cherish and respect you.
Roy Batty ~ ‘You have not seen, what I have seen’ Deckard ~ ‘I have seen my share’ Roy Batty ~ ‘You have not seen, what I have seen’ This man ^ would probably seal clap this dialogue.
From now on, whenever someone tells me that the theme is more important, I’ll just ask “And how do you know what the theme is? How did you come to the conclusion that is the theme of the story? Was there a series of events that showed you the theme? Perhaps a casual chain? A PLOT even?”
I think it’s stupid of him to consider the “shoulder of Orion” thing a plot hole even *IF* there’s no faster than light travel in blade runner. Because it’s possible the replicant is lying to make a point and that changes some of the context of the scene, which would frankly be more interesting than “it doesn’t matter”
It isn’t even plot hole just because we don’t know what he means when he says it. Is it referencing the constellation of Orion? Maybe it is, maybe it isn’t. We don’t know the answer but that doesn’t make it a plot hole. Another example, the film The Empire Strikes Back has Han mention to Chewbacca that he thinks Lando forgot about something. We don’t learn in the film what it is but it does establish that Han did something that Lando would possibly hold against him. The fact we don’t know what it is exactly isn’t a plot hole as it is only there to foreshadow the double-cross later in the film by implying Lando would already less than noble reasons to do it.
Ok. I knew people who use profile pics of nerd adjusting glasses is like the internet equivalent of the wilds version of bright colors signal danger or poisonous takes. I knew ant had hilarious bad takes with his cenobites one being the monument of being up his colon he could drink fluids from the intestines. But this was eye opening how devoid of insight and how vacuous he actually is. And he thinks he's smarter for it!?
Media illiteracy be like: "Wasn't the Prydwen in Fallout New Vegas? I can't remember, anyways here's why the Fallout show is really good and loves and respects the lore of Fallout."
After seeing this guy on Twitter, I'm convinced that the majority of his contradictions were done purposely to infuriate EFAP in order to draw the anti-EFAP fandom into his audience.
And no matter how much you may apologize, they’ll still never forgive you. Your suffering is their entertainment. They’ll ignore anything that exposes their worldview to be wrong and claim they’re morally superior to “own the chuds”
I think this person doesn’t understand that the “theme/meaning” & Plot are NOT independent from one another? The plot is typically what establishes the meaning. Take “A Christmas Carol” for example, the meaning/theme would be something like “Altruism is better than greed”, or “people make your life more rewarding than wealth”, or “be more generous at Christmas time”, etc. The PLOT of the story is what leads our main character to make those realization by being visited by 3 ghosts and what the ghosts tell him about himself and how he has lived. If you screw up the plot, you don’t arrive at that conclusion. The world building doesn’t matter as much as the events(ie. plot) leads our character to that realization, whether it’s in Victorian London, modern day New York or Doctor Who on another Planet, as long as the Plot, even if altered some, leads our main character to realize, by being shown he’s squandered his life for greed, the suffering of others and what his future holds, that it’s not too late for him to make a change and use his wealth to help others and bring them and himself happiness in the process.
Good old Ant, telling the Japanese why they are wrong with Creed:Shadow and the only pathetic nobodies who agree with him are the sad twitter accounts like LoZza and UnderdogBT who whole existence is to destroy the evil youtubers and failing at it. His twitter avatar a joke aswell.
Literal white knights is what they are. Speaking on behalf of the minorities they so desperately want to oppress and use as shields when it benefits them bc they think that those minorities are so stupid they need the rich white people who benefit from racial privilege to tell them what to think
Context: ". . . will be lost . . . like tears in the rain" To which Rags adds the thought: "Rain doesn't disappear when it falls." That is indeed an interesting point. The matter that makes up our bodies will continue on in the world. The actions we took in life will continue to have a chain reaction of sorts. And it raises questions about the human soul and the possibility of our spirit continuing on in some way after death. "Tears lost in the rain" doesn't mean you never existed or won't continue to exist, but it suggests that in death, your personal memories, things only you have seen, will vanish from the world. Individual moments of human experience, unique to you will be lost. Are those experiences what make you up as a person? Will you be forever lost in death. Or is your essence something that can transcend death and exist into eternity? I'm glad you caught that random Rags comment @ProjectRedfoot.
I don’t think this guy gets “CinemaSins”? It’s similar to “Honest Trailers” or “Pitch Meeting”. The point is, you can pick apart any film and they’re going for comedy, however, they also know the difference between a “Good” film you can have fun nitpicking & a “Complete Mess” of a film that probably shouldn’t have been made and it typically comes across in the video. Watch the CinemaSins video for “The Shining”, if you’re confused. It begins with the “Sin Counter” going away because it didn’t want to take part in sinning a Stanley Kubrick film and the only thing they could find willing to do the job was the “HAL9000”. It’s pretty obvious, while they’re sinning it, that they think the film is a masterpiece. The irony, if they’re criticizing CinemaSins for not being able to understand meaning, nuance & context.
I always thought Roy Batty was looking at the constellation of Orion and saw attack ships on fire there, not that he was actually at that star. Otherwise he would have named that star specifically. He didn't because, from his perspective, he wasn't at that star, just looking at it in context to the rest that make up Orion.
Apparently, this guy unironically thinks that Final Fantasy II is a great game, so you can just tell he has no media literacy when it comes to video games either.
Orion’s not even a star system, it’s a constellation visible from our solar system. Most other places in the galaxy would make the constellation impossible to view, and the idea of a star having a shoulder is nonsensical. To make the line actually work, Batty would have to be IN our solar system, looking in the direction of Orion, seeing the burning ships - close to him - off the shoulder.
At this point I'm assuming all these "defenders" and "anti-critics" are from the "consume the product" crowd. "Just turn off your brain." "Don't think about it." "It's just a line in the movie." "But the effects were cool." "But the dude did the thing and I clapped."
I define 'access media' as 'I (the reviewer) do the things you want me to do ie react to a trailer, review a show, and in exchange, I get to go your fancy parties, get exclusive swag I wear on my videos, you'll sit down with my channel for an 'exclusive' interview in the hopes my channel will be better'. For instance, I'll give you some recent examples, 'press' got to be flown out to Orange County, California, for a media event for Star Wars Outlaws, which looks to be a pretty bad game, with bad graphics, bad AI, weird gameplay, and it needs absolutely monstrous and pricey specs to play at least on PC. Consoles, I don't know how well they'll run them. 'Journalists' and UA-cam channels got flown out their and some folks in the UK specifically got for free allegedly - to go on a whale watching tour paid for by Ubisoft the day before, they got Star Wars Disneyland park merch, a VIP tour of Disneyland which can run 300-500 dollars per hour per person, nice dinners, and 4 hours spent with the game. All of those things in exchange for the 'reviewer' saying nice things, due to the company's generosity using the free stuff as a marketing/compliance tactic, regardless of quality of their product. Another Disney one because I know this too - Disney World re-did Splash Mountain because their silly people, any press who showed up to ride the ride on previews day got a swag bag worth about $500 retail if you were to buy each piece for free. Again, they give those hoping to blow smoke over people even if a ride is bad. These tactics work for most reviewers/things you see from major outlets, most don't go to the specificity of 'here's what I got in exchange for a preview/review' which is kinda crappy.
"Only stupid people obsess over plot" is code for "Shut up and enjoy my bad writing, capisce?"
Why improve your product to suit the audience when you can instead dumb down the audience to suit your product?
So sick of being told to turn my brain off and enjoy. “It’s made for kids, why are you using your brain?”
Because children are obviously stupid and don’t understand logic, who cares about them. Even tho the movie is supposedly made FOR them… shows how much they care about children and the stories they consume. But they’re the same type of people to tell me that I’m the asshole for wanting better stories, for both children AND myself. It’s such a terrible deflection. It’s just a straight up concession most of the time, “Yeah, you may be _technically_ right, but who cares?” (the answer is me, I care, obviously)
Caring about things is simultaneously righteous and evil, depending on if you’re being positive or negative. You’re only allowed to care if you have positive things to say, bigot.
And that’s not to mention that the things they always say are ‘for kids’ are almost never strictly for kids. The whole point of the argument is that they try to draw equivalencies between something like Star Wars and Paw Patrol, and that’s not a strawman, I’ve had arguments where I’ve made direct reference to shows like Paw Patrol and how they are different ‘kids content’ than Star Wars. The person came back with The Wiggles trying to make the same point, “so you think The Wiggles should be completely logical?” Both Star Wars and The Wiggles are for kids, so they’re pretty much the exact same thing with the exact same standards, that’s how these people see it. I then asked if something like The Lord of the Rings was ‘made for children’ despite being heavily violent and hard to follow for young children. Tolkien wanted children to be able to enjoy his story, but I wouldn’t call it anywhere near ‘content for kids’, _especially_ the books. But there are elves and dwarves and magic? So it has to be basically the same thing as The Wiggles… same with Star Wars. Violence, political, and religious themes, but nah, it’s basically Paw Patrol. They think ANY fantasy setting is automatically a fairy tale that adults aren’t meant to be consuming. Surprisingly, the person stopped answering after I asked those questions.
A good writer would think "oh shit did I screw up? hold up, let me double check this and see if this is right"
"Your movies are shit dude"
Ruin Johnson: _"LOL I don't care it was meant to be divisive but if u don't like it u r an idiot in fact I wanted to make u mad but u have no right to be mad at me because u don't understand my genuis..."_
Hack Snyder: _"I didn't have creative control!! You'll see that the 5h hour director's cut will address one insignificant detail with over 2 hours of slop!! Believe me that wasn't my vision they were meddling and interfering with my limited creativity!!!"_
Michael Bay: "Yeah lol"
I swear liberals are allergic to rationale
@@williamshelton4318 literally every "critic" counting tropes/cliches has no originality nor good ideas. "I hate orphaned characters" yeah, me too, but if your character has a family the plot must account for it: why aren't his parents helping him if he is risking his life?
Anthony saw In Praise of Shadows awful, miserable "takedown" of Wendigoon and how he was laughed off the internet, and promptly decided imitation was the sincerest form of flattery.
I love how the in praise of shadows guy went full horseshoe and was just being a racist to wendigoon and speaking behalf of native Americans without a understanding the absolute irony
I like how even without that section, his video still showcased that he was a spoiled, entitled, whining, disingenuous brat. XD
The only crime Wendigoon is guilty of is being incredibly boring
@@trequorthis your first time around the block of efap?
@@lloydishly no why do you ask oh great and wise master
"Did you know that if you oversimplify the plot of a film it sounds really boring and derivative?" Simply immaculate.
“Why have films really? Why waste our time? Just tell me what you want me to think.”
Careful, Rags, that’s sounds like exactly what certain people want lmao.
we can save everyone's time if we adopt that approach, though.
"You should think like I do."
"Why?"
"Because I'm right."
"OK. Bye."
Hahaha, that is exactly how untalented people make movies. Characters in those just tell the viewer everything
Careful Wolf, we all know, according to his twitter, when you respond to Anthony, he wins.
this one weird trick to escape all criticism! Critics HATE this man!!!
“Sometimes when you win, you really lose. And sometimes when you lose, you really win. And sometimes when you win or lose, you actually tie, and sometimes when you tie, you actually win or lose. Winning or losing is all one organic mechanism, from which one extracts what one needs.”
Gloria Clemente the Wise (not really).😂
How utterly convenient for him…
Say it with me now
“People who throw around ‘media literacy’ are never media literate”
Reminds me of my friend that calls people media illiterate but called the fallout show better than Arcane.
@@WaifuWielder I'm so sorry you have a friend like that
@@wolfiewoo3371 He’s my best friend but Jesus Christ that was the worst take ever.
“Any man who must say ‘media literacy’ in their video essay is no true media literate…”
- Tywin Lannister, Apex Homo
@@WaifuWielder it be like that sometimes.
I have a best friend like that as well.
But hey, the friendship didn't exist because I wanted a clone of myself, even if said friend can have some PAINFUL takes.
It existed because said friend has qualities that are endearing, as well as common interests where he isn't cringe.
In my case, it is mainly a shared autistic love for Game Design, and being equally on the same wavelength for calling most game design trash, even if we have totally different preferences in games.
I assume your friendship is kinda similar. So I relate.
On paper, this comment doesn't actually exist.
Because it's pixels.
@@arklaw8306 On paper, it's actually squares.
duh you didn't write it on paper.
🤔…😧…🤯
On paper, the universe isn't real and your mom is gay.
Oh no, Anthony will get another aneurysm on Twitter when he sees this.
My thoughts exactly.
He'll misinterpret everything here to his advantage, somehow.
Incoming several hour screed tweeting about how he's actually more media literate than everyone ever.
@@arklaw8306no, he's just going to screenshot the thumbnail and then whine about it.
“You responded to me so I win.” Somehow
"Consider Bladerunner-"
"Uh-oh."
Beautiful opening.
"Consider Bladerunner"
"Honey, close the curtains. Maybe if we pretend we're not home he'll leave."
Now I want the EFAP crew to do Bladerunner, Bladerunner the Director’s Cut, along with Scanner Darkly for a Phillip K Dick inspired movie fest.
I love this guy, he’s such a baffling little creature.
- He says that the events that happen in a film are ultimately not important, yet he gets angry at the theatrical version of Bladerunner for having a thing in the film that actively harms the experience, which contradicts the main point of his video. “The technical details, who cares?”, yet he’s angry when the theatrical release just says what the characters are feeling, which is all his own review of the movie boils down to, anyways.
- He assumes his audience has never even heard of Bladerunner, and gives the most dispassionate summary of its events ever, yet he assumes that his audience HAS seen half a dozen random reviews which is why he just throws up out-of-context clips from those videos, but at the same time, he clearly believes that his audience already agrees that all of these people suck, so why would they be familiar with those reviews??
Describing the summary as being dispassionate is absolutely right. I have a friend that likes to browse TV/movie memes on 4chan, but had not seen Blade Runner until I had him watch it with me.
He spouted those memes for a movie he had not yet watched with more passion than this man trying to convince us that the themes were all that mattered.
@@LordIsrafel Did your friend enjoy Blade Runner, at least?
@@gurmyigoll3535 He did.
He also simped hard for Pris for a while.
Blade Runner theatrical cut: [on the nose internal monologuing]
Anthony: [angry soyjak]
Ruin Johnson's The Last Jedi: [has multiple characters blatantly preach the theme of the movie/ Ruin's iconoclast philosophy]
Anthony: [CalArts smile soyjak]
@@LordIsrafel "He also simped hard for Pris for a while."
Best girl in Blade Runner imo
This was one of the worst videos they've covered. Which is saying a lot. I hate this guys smug face.
his presence puts me in a foul mood.
very few people do this.
Amusingly, the pic he uses for his Twitter profile has the same amount of unwarranted smugness.
everything about him genuinely sickens me, no hyperbole, I had to stop eating.
AG: *spends his entire video being a self-righteous smug ass constantly demeaning and lying about those he doesn’t like not for their criticisms, but their politics*
AG on Twitter: *whining and getting advice from all his buds about how to handle the totally unwarranted “hate” he’s about to be receiving*
But as ShoeOnHead once said, they don’t really have friends. They only have enemies and temporary allies. They have people they despise and people they’ll throw under the bus the minute they’re not longer useful
Tell me you spent a lot of money on a worthless college degree without telling me you spent a lot of money on a worthless college degree...
Why do all video essayists have the same condescending, pretentious cadence? It's like nails on a chalkboard.
Without plot there are no themes. Imagine the perfect movie.
**Movie starts**
_we see a man standing in his living room with a newspaper in his hand_
Man: I think I will sit in the chair today when reading the newspaper.
_man grabs a chair and reads the newspaper_
**Movie ends**
You can't now go on about the theme of the movie being about loss and overcoming the emotional distress in order to go on with life.
The theme exists within the plot, or it does not exist.
I agree and disagree to an extent. Movies are also a visual medium so even in your example, despite how limited, you could still tell a story about loss even if it all stayed the same based off of environmental storytelling.
We could discover his name through some kind of decoration in the room and the newspaper could be flipped to the mortuary section where it displays a dead wife or family member or whatever.
Maybe through his acting we can tell what it means to sit down in one chair in particular.
I know it’s a little silly, but it is still possible to tell a heavy story with an incredibly simplistic plot as long as you’re not making arguments like “why does that even matter dude???” Like a doofus. The point is intentionality and communication for the audience.
@@NarcolepticEwe One could argue that the visual storytelling itself constitutes plot and narrative .
The theme needs something to convey it to the audience. Some kind of delivery device.
@@soulsearcher9620 Fair point! Kinda circles back to what the EFAP crew were saying about how hard it is to completely divorce plot from characters, design, dialogue etc.
@@NarcolepticEweAt one point you'd be writing the plot for the director, and not even getting paid for it.
There's a blurry line between subtle and implicit storytelling and mere interpretation.
@@NarcolepticEwe It's not hard, it's impossible. Unless it's some kind of weird experimental novel where things just happen for no discernible reason, every single plot ever written is driven by characters and their choices. A plot, in essence, is an emergent phenomena we use to describe events in a story, and it emerges from the interplay between the different characters' needs, wants, and actions.
Anthony Gramuglia and Grace Randolf are the two film and tv critics you can always rely on to have the worst takes in history,
it's useful to have people who can only make poor decisions. we need examples so the rest of us can learn.
his last name sounds like something you'd name a troll
How dare you defame Clamydia Burns!
I just cringed , facepalmed and groaned at the same time. Anyone who has at least two functional brian cells know that's not true. @Rotom0479
Especially on Sailor Moon recently
"This guy dissed John Carpenter's 'The Thing'"
You could have just started with that
Anthony GraSmuglia is one of the few ‘people’ to ever construct a straw man, drench it with gasoline, and lit themselves on fire instead. This was one of the most unsuccessful attempts at straw manning ever recorded in the history of man.
Him dissing Blade Runner as cliche shows he has chosen death multiple times. Besides it highlights the issue that Blade Runner codified many tropes.
I'm actually one who haven't watched Blade Runner, but even I knew that "replicants don't know they're human" is just the wrong way around lmao
The third coming of the GDELB Man
Was the second one synthetic man
@@HectorLopez0217
NeverKnowsBest
The EFAP rule of video essays cannot be made. The only thing that can tie these dregs together would be a competition of "PEAK IRONY AWARD" and the judges have a preference for lacking self-awareness
What exactly do you think you have said with this comment?
EFAP should have that competition😂
@@bigideasthescholar you could have a competition with persun where we find out which one of you can manage to make a comment that makes sense.
@@voidking9597 dude, it has 78 likes. That’s a lot of people who think it makes sense and like the comment. People seem to think it makes sense. What’s your deal?
@@bigideasthescholar My "deal" is that the original comment is very unclear as is your comment. I would like some additional explanation. Also, just because people respond to your comment by nodding does not mean they understand it or agree with it.
"these ethereal strawmen that exist out in the fields we've never seen them but they are out there."
gotta love a good mooler rant.
"One of the essential sci-fi films of the 80's" feels like the "The best martial artist Detroit has to offer" line from Team America.
Im convinced this guy never actually saw Blade Runner
And if he did he only did so cus everyone else saw it and he couldn't fathom why.
@@TonyTama The ol' Stuckman special.
@lordofthepizzapie9319 it's bizarre. I got a friend I play Halo with on Infinite. We both love and hate the game but it's something we both play to spend time.
He passively got me into reading the novels recently cus his love for the Chief and Blue Team as well as The Fall of Reach got me wanting to read it cus I feel like I am missing out on keener details and he's all about the Spartans while I'm an ODST fan. So I wanna get into more media pre-343 to understand and appreciate what I couldn't catch up on.
Ant and Stuckman makes it seem like they're into said media cus all the cool kids are or it's "well if you're gonna talk media you GOT to see these otherwise X or Y".
It comes off as a unwanted required reading and a half-a$$ed "do it and turn your paper in and you get your grade." Level of seeing something rather than doing so out of passion, curiosity or some other inspiration.
He probably read the TvTropes page and called it a day. The Wikipedia plot summary is too difficult to understand.
MauLer should do a “Bladerunner: Unbridled Praise” video as strike back against these sorts of disingenuous shills. Personally, I’d recommend he do both the Theatrical and Director’s Cut of this work of cinematic artistry.
I can’t stand people like this, the ‘I’m so more informed than you’ I would never listen to this guy I am glad you highlighted his lack of knowledge & imagination. It’s so lame.
My imagination is busy making nightmares.
I hate how disingenuously, manipulatively he made this video and it gave me the feeling the reason he made it is just to hate on the peoples he actively dislike.
Just a feeling?
In summary, don't take Anthony Gramuglia seriously. He's a pathetic journalist looking for relevancy.
P.S. He wrote articles for The Mary Sue.
And polygon don't forget polygon.
@@antoniojosetorrente559 Oh yeah, I forgot that website existed.
14:24 "...some of these replicants don't even realize they're human." ⁉️
UM, WHAT?! 😮😮😮
He didn't have time to proofread his script before doing the video? That was a crucial error, AND IT WAS SO EASY TO AVOID. 😬😠🤬
"What does 'take pride in your work' mean?" is my favorite Freudian slip.
@@Wyzai it's a classic.
Common. Anthony is smug both personality wise and action wise.
I keep hearing about the Twitter war this guy got into after the EFAP dropped, but I couldn't see any of it because I don't have a Twitter. It'd be nice if a future highlight had a best of compilation to summarise what was happening on Twitter at the time.
"Ree, ree, ree" most likely. I don't expect to see anything of substance on twitter.
"it's so long and they keep lying about me and what I said"
did you watch it?
"No of course not it's really long and they lied about me and what I said."
.....
This is basically the summary of any conversation about it.
@@soulsearcher9620 Ah yes, the EFAP special.
@@soulsearcher9620 That's like the reptile brainstem reaction to the long.
And also “They made an 11 hour VIDEO about Jenny Nicholson!”
It’s like Mooper escaped through the fourth wall to make his own channel after Mauler stopped releasing GDELBs.
God help us all...
Somehow Mooper returned...
@@lordofthepizzapie9319 and he really let himself go
Wasnt the plot with Bladerunner that Decker is checking for replicas and investigating them while also the movie raises the possibility that Decker is a replicant himself?
It was actually about how when a guy sheds tears and it's also raining that sad and symbolism.
It was about cool jackets and guns and CGI Noir LA and stuff and things
if decker is a replicant then the whole point of replicants wanting to be human is wasted, roy batty saves him to have the life he himself never could
Yes to the first part, no to the second.
The central concept of Rick Deckard's internal conflict is that he's a man tasked to kill androids, who as a result of his job has lost his humanity. At the core of Blade Runner is a question: what does it mean to be human?
The "Rick is a robit" concept was BS thrown in by Ridley Scott because he thought he was being clever, and because he wasn't interested in making a philosophical film. Philip K. Dick, author of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, the book Blade Runner was based on, made the replicants to be sociopathic monsters because of their complete lack of empathy; they, and the entire book in fact, were inspired by the journals of SS officers Dick had come across while researching for Man in the High Castle, and concluded that the thing which wrote said journal was so evil that it could not have been human. Scott, however, sees replicants as ubermensches, superior to humans in every way.
Script writers Hampton Fancher and David Peoples, and Harrison Ford all vehemently disagree with Scott on this. Frank Darabont has so artfully explained, "Blade Runner only works if Deckard is human. It's about a man who's lost his humanity, but over the course of the film, rediscovers it again. It's a brilliant character arc, but if Deckard is a replicant, all that is gone."
Scott says "Rick is a robot" because he thinks it's cool, like Hack Snyder would.
All of Ridley Scott's good films are good in spite of his input, not because if it.
@@DaMaster012I'm so glad you posted this because I was about to boot up razor fist's vid about bladerunner so I could brush up on my behind the scenes knowledge and make this exact comment lol.
Alright, let's take Roy's statements from both directions: 1) No interstellar travel, so Roy is talking about imagining seeing things off the shoulders of Orion, a thing Replicants aren't built to do, yeah? or 2) Interstellar travel is available, so Roy has been to Orion... somehow, and has seen that there is so much more in the universe than the petty little squabbles that make up most peoples day to day. And he just wanted to become something greater than a Replicant. Whether or not interstellar travel is a thing in universe, doesn't matter, the situation can be read that Batty either was looking to grow, or had already grown beyond his programming.
Yeah, replicants have implanted memories. So either way it works.
Orion is also a constellation - I always took the line "Attack ships on fire off the shoulders of Orion" as him witnessing a battle in space with the stars that make up Orion hanging in the background. You don't need interstellar travel then - in fact, it makes more sense if the battle was still in the Sol system, so the relative position of the stars that make up the constellation isn't too dissimilar from what you'd see in the night sky.
@@uummmnocoolnames Yeah, that's how I took it, a fight in local space.
You don't even *need* space travel to see something there, in fact. Right now, as long as you had the place and time right, you could sit outside and watch the lights of a commuter plane blinking off the shoulder of Orion. It's funny, the most "scifi" part of that phrase is the attack ships, not the reference to the stars.
Interstellar Travel is clearly available as the plot is that the replicants escaped from Mars. And there is no mention of if Orion meant the Constellation or something else. Which was the point. You aren’t supposed to know the experiences he has because they are going to die with him.
@@emberfist8347 First, to be hyper pedantic, traveling to and from Mars is an example of _interplanetary_ travel, not interstellar travel; interstellar travel typically refers to traveling between different star systems(usually via FTL travel, if you want to get there anytime soon).
Second, I'll fully admit "Orion" being a reference to the constellation is an assumption on my part. That being said, considering neither galaxies, nebulae, nor planets can really be described as having shoulders, while the Orion constellation specifically has two stars (Betelgeuse and Bellatrix) that represent Orion's _shoulders_, I'll maintain it's a fairly safe logical assumption.
I have a theory as to why this guys clips and text are so disjointed: I think he is using them like figures and captions in a text book. They are auxiliary to his main point instead of directly contributing to them. Obviously, the concept has not translated into video well, and his poor editing and arguments make it difficult to figure out his intentions, but I feel confident in saying he's using clips wrong thanks to trying to replicate something that doesn't work in this medium.
He's preaching to the choir and he knows it.
He made this video for people who are already on the same page and agree with everything he's going to say, the clips are just there to reinforce his point, because "haha look at these silly, silly people who lack media literacy, not like us true media literates who Understand™ things."
The main thing you always have to remember with people like Anthony is that they don't want to meaningfully engage with you in any way, if you're one of the perceived others then they've already dismissed your position, regardless of how much effort you put into wording it.
I know a couple UA-camrs who use this idea of auxiliary text, but they do it in a sane way - rather than random text that is so slap-dash that you can't even tell whether it is part of a clip or a criticism of said clip.
For example, TIK History has a little box at the bottom of the screen which shows the relevant citations for the current statement being made in his historical videos and he often has little satirical lines that come from portraits of generals as he describes events in his battlestorm videos. Someone like C3 Sabertooth often has a lot of ancillary details left over from his research process. They are irrelevant to the main point and not worth dedicating parts of the video to, so he has text boxes that pop up at relevant times and last for a few seconds for those interested.
There are ways to combine text and video in a way that compliment each other, but whatever Anthony is doing is definitely not it.
Wait, that actually makes sense if he used to be a gaming journalist. Might be a habit he carried over.
If Anthony stubbed his toe on his table, he'd call his table a grifter.
I never get the grifting accusations. For all the gripes you can have with others, is it really imagine they actually believe the thoughts they espouse? They'll complain Mauler claims his opinions are fact, while consistently ascribing and dictating what everybody else truly thinks.
I'd say Candace Owens is the only person I have reason to believe is only in it for the money. Vaush is upfront about his willingness to lie for optics and messaging but I'd wager it's centered on political change over securing the bag.
JustPearlyThings also says some ridiculous stuff about women in society and won't practice what she preaches, I'd still wager thats rooted in pathological issues more than anything else.
For every genuine con artist, there's 50 people whose intentions are earnest even if they'd take the money and run if it got hard.
The rigid reinforcement of constraining echo chambers really leaves one unable to grasp the reasoning and motivations of individuals.
@@cdubsb3831 It's because calling people Nazis didn't work. Instead of just not throwing stones, they found a new rock quarry. But this is also pretty juicy if this is their new buzzword because it's technically a libelist claim if anybody they use it on wanted to lawyer up.
@@cdubsb3831 Short answer: They think they know what grifter means but really don't + delusional narcissistic personality disorder.
5:19 couldn't agree more. I've often thought to myself that real modern art isn't the painting, it's the plaque next to it.
It's always the ones who shout the loudest that are the most projecting.
This is the sort of guy who thinks The Last Jedi is a good movie because it has that shot that rips off the silent film Wings. But he only knows that because he saw it on film Twitter.
Imagine if he makes a response video that resuscitates GDELB to enshrine his bad takes. He could be the next Only Joy.
Mauler stopped making GDELB but other people were there to make it for us.... the only downside is they aren't doing it as parody.
"The focus of the scene is Batty has seen things and all these moment will be lost in time like tears in the rain. And that's compelling."
Holy, shit! All you managed to glean from that scene was the explicit? That's pathetic.
Captain America: Winter Soldier -
Cap suspects he’s about to be ambushed in part because he noticed the very tense and nervous expression of one guy.
Im just a regular guy that hasn't watched blade runner and this anthony was bothering me in a very primal way
sorry, I'm not a native english speaker and this might be causing some confusion: the summarized description the guy does to Blade Runner, is not that what we refer to as premise?
You would be right, my good man
It’s the same as plot which is ironic considering he says plot doesn’t matter
Plot, story, and logical consistency does matter to everyone. What if a movie has a world war 2 character pull out a energy weapon. In order for him to beat an entire army. If the plot doesn't involve time travel or an alien species. Everyone will complain about that ending.
but what if it was made by a massive corporation and it has themes?
Imagine a world where Taken 1 is the exact same except it has 5 seconds extra at the end where Liam Neeson kills his daughter without a word then the credits roll.
Would that be a problem? Would that contradict everything the movie was doing up until that point ?
I've asked this dozens of times and never gotten a reply.
Nobody ever tries to say "No it's not a problem" . They avoid answering it.
That says everything I need to know about them.
"But how does that make you FEEL????"
@@DonVigaDeFierro
Just answer honestly. “Insulted. Because my time has been wasted.”
Blade runner, Akira, Ghost in the Shell and Battle Angel Alita ( manga) are the Quintessential cyberpunk series.
And the latter 3 ripped off their plot points, themes, and aesthetic from blade runner.
@@Fauwkes they each took the premise. I do remember Alita tackled the whole artificial things more when she had to deal with her memory clones.
@@barrybend7189 and the visual aesthetic.
@@Fauwkes Alita is more Judge dredd in the early parts..... Mixed with Berserk.
@@Fauwkes "ripped off" is such an unfair phrase.
Did Philip K Dick rip off Sturgeon who's work inspired the og 'Do Androids dream of electric sheep"?
Did Ridley Scott rip off Moebius' imagery?
Even with their similarities, each of those movies are so different in their own context.
This, ladies and gentleman, is the leftie "media literacy" argument. The only thing that matters is the themes or messages and freaking politics of a work, and the structure that binds all of that together doesn't matter at all. This people don't care at all about art; they don't care about the craft, the structure of a work or all the effort, technique and creativity that goes into build It, all is just lip service. If that's the case, why even bother with the story part at all? Write a damn essay, and stop wasting everyone's time.
I see the first three volumes of Eva on his shelf and I shudder to think how badly he butchers understanding the plot to that if Blade Runner is giving him problems.
This guy is literally the living embodiment of what I think is a parody of video essayists...
Anthony GraSmuglia not only tried to disparage the achievements of Bladerunner, he also doesn’t like John Carpenter’s “The Thing.”
By the way Bob Diabeto sided with him. Shouldn't be a surprise at this point.
Yeah, these assholes seem to hold MovieBob up in good spirits. Y’know, the same guy who wishes to commit mass genocide and impose Nazi-style eugenics on anybody who disagrees with them. Even people who dislike Trump don’t possess the same amount of hate Diabeto has for the orange man
On the Orion plothole comment: I never assumed "the shoulder of Orion" was meant to be another galaxy, it could be related to some other place called Orion. But more to the point, it wouldn't be a plothole regardless because of the significant theme of real and fake memories. That memory might have been a creation (like Decker's unicorn) but does that make it any less real or impactful on Batty's character?
I just assumed that the society of Bladerunner had warp or skip-drive technologies, or put the Replicants into stasis while in transit.
I just assumed we aren’t meant to know the answer. Like how the Batman comics consistently say The Joker’s real name is backstory is not important or how Star Wars is similarly mum about Yoda’s origins. We aren’t meant to have answers sometimes. After all it isn’t the point of those stories.
I need to know who this video is directed at. I don’t like Blade Runner at all, but I’m confident not a single soul I’ve ever seen discuss it doesn’t notice the things the entire story is about that he’s saying critics don’t notice
27:50 - that image they paused on looks like it would make a great new soyjack template..."Actually, have you heard [insert widely known thing here]"
Video starts
Mauler: “Uh oh”
Yeah that sums it up
Will the soyjak actually watch the video? Pressing x to doubt.
X
X
X
Have they ever?
X
X
Anthony GraSMUGlia
Gramuglia is a name that definitely gets you bullied in school.
@@soulsearcher9620 Or the day-care center.
The guy's mum taped oven mitts on him growing up.....
The biggest plot hole in Blade Runner is the replicants, because indistinguishable self-aware robots aren't a thing that people can build.
Watching this video has caused Anthony Gramuglia to appear in my suggestions! Uughh!
I didnt know there was such thing as a groucho marx mask without the moustache but there it is
Without a mustache and without talent
Its the same as modern art: dont focus on whats actually on the canvas because i have a pretentious spiel about the human condotion and leftist politics thats what the canvas ACTUALLY means and thats all that matters
"A cautionary tale in self-awareness" might be the most poetic accurate EFAP title so far.
I highly recommend the book that blade runner is based off of. It's called "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep"
Clearly Ant and his circlejerk of friends are never gonna actually read, watch, or play the media they claim to be “passionate” about, thinking that their smug charisma nonsense can mask their pseudo-intellectualism who are way too confident over the fact that they don’t want to hear any opinions other than their own
Did this dude actually watch Blade Runner? It's a movie-noir, not an action-adventure
Theres no such thing as movie noir. It’s a noir.
A stories plot is like a buildings foundation and framework.
Without a solid foundation and framework, it's going to collapse, and all the decorations in the world will mean less than a small freshly excreted mound of steamy canine faeces.
You're watching movies wrong 2: Electric Boogaloo
On paper, this film is on paper.
This paper is stretched thin over too much film. - Biltony Gramgins.
I actually watched Blade Runner (1982) for the very first time last month and the film deeply touched me in a very profound way, 10/10 masterpiece and those who say otherwise are clearly media illiterate, this includes you Jay Bauman.. no matter how much I cherish and respect you.
Please tell me he's only talking about the version with Harrison Ford's cringe voiceover.
Some comments don't even realize that they are, in fact, not comments.
Jealousy can make people really stupid ❤
Roy Batty ~ ‘You have not seen, what I have seen’
Deckard ~ ‘I have seen my share’
Roy Batty ~ ‘You have not seen, what I have seen’
This man ^ would probably seal clap this dialogue.
From now on, whenever someone tells me that the theme is more important, I’ll just ask “And how do you know what the theme is? How did you come to the conclusion that is the theme of the story? Was there a series of events that showed you the theme? Perhaps a casual chain? A PLOT even?”
I think it’s stupid of him to consider the “shoulder of Orion” thing a plot hole even *IF* there’s no faster than light travel in blade runner. Because it’s possible the replicant is lying to make a point and that changes some of the context of the scene, which would frankly be more interesting than “it doesn’t matter”
It isn’t even plot hole just because we don’t know what he means when he says it. Is it referencing the constellation of Orion? Maybe it is, maybe it isn’t. We don’t know the answer but that doesn’t make it a plot hole. Another example, the film The Empire Strikes Back has Han mention to Chewbacca that he thinks Lando forgot about something. We don’t learn in the film what it is but it does establish that Han did something that Lando would possibly hold against him. The fact we don’t know what it is exactly isn’t a plot hole as it is only there to foreshadow the double-cross later in the film by implying Lando would already less than noble reasons to do it.
I hate how people use Cliché when it comes to old movies. Like dude they were the FIRST how can it be a cliché if its the FIRST
Ok. I knew people who use profile pics of nerd adjusting glasses is like the internet equivalent of the wilds version of bright colors signal danger or poisonous takes.
I knew ant had hilarious bad takes with his cenobites one being the monument of being up his colon he could drink fluids from the intestines. But this was eye opening how devoid of insight and how vacuous he actually is.
And he thinks he's smarter for it!?
yeah basically like 1 tier below pride flag or islamic-extremism flag in bio.
This guy is a real piece of work - in and outside this video.
CinemaSins is low hanging fruit. Having him represent your views of ‘UA-cam critics’ is just dishonest.
I have missed these types of video essays videos.
So completely lacking in anything to say. It is frustrating, and awe-inspiring
"on paper..."
Ant's brain is smooth and his skull is soft.
Anthony Gramuglia is just illiterate, in general. You'd have to be to do the things he does.
Anthony GraSMUGlia. ;D
What Rags is describing sounds like the Family Guy joke of Bigger Jaws. XD
Media illiteracy be like: "Wasn't the Prydwen in Fallout New Vegas? I can't remember, anyways here's why the Fallout show is really good and loves and respects the lore of Fallout."
Yeah if he played Fallout he would know the answer why.
After seeing this guy on Twitter, I'm convinced that the majority of his contradictions were done purposely to infuriate EFAP in order to draw the anti-EFAP fandom into his audience.
And no matter how much you may apologize, they’ll still never forgive you. Your suffering is their entertainment. They’ll ignore anything that exposes their worldview to be wrong and claim they’re morally superior to “own the chuds”
My brain cells are now assassinated when hearing Anthony’s voice and presentation of an unholy video of no self-awareness.
Hi Wolf!
Robot finds out they are human:
“My life is a lieeeeeeeeee”
😂😂😂
I think this person doesn’t understand that the “theme/meaning” & Plot are NOT independent from one another?
The plot is typically what establishes the meaning.
Take “A Christmas Carol” for example, the meaning/theme would be something like “Altruism is better than greed”, or “people make your life more rewarding than wealth”, or “be more generous at Christmas time”, etc.
The PLOT of the story is what leads our main character to make those realization by being visited by 3 ghosts and what the ghosts tell him about himself and how he has lived.
If you screw up the plot, you don’t arrive at that conclusion.
The world building doesn’t matter as much as the events(ie. plot) leads our character to that realization, whether it’s in Victorian London, modern day New York or Doctor Who on another Planet, as long as the Plot, even if altered some, leads our main character to realize, by being shown he’s squandered his life for greed, the suffering of others and what his future holds, that it’s not too late for him to make a change and use his wealth to help others and bring them and himself happiness in the process.
Good old Ant, telling the Japanese why they are wrong with Creed:Shadow and the only pathetic nobodies who agree with him are the sad twitter accounts like LoZza and UnderdogBT who whole existence is to destroy the evil youtubers and failing at it. His twitter avatar a joke aswell.
Literal white knights is what they are. Speaking on behalf of the minorities they so desperately want to oppress and use as shields when it benefits them bc they think that those minorities are so stupid they need the rich white people who benefit from racial privilege to tell them what to think
38:05 That is a great point, Rags
Context: ". . . will be lost . . . like tears in the rain"
To which Rags adds the thought:
"Rain doesn't disappear when it falls."
That is indeed an interesting point. The matter that makes up our bodies will continue on in the world. The actions we took in life will continue to have a chain reaction of sorts. And it raises questions about the human soul and the possibility of our spirit continuing on in some way after death. "Tears lost in the rain" doesn't mean you never existed or won't continue to exist, but it suggests that in death, your personal memories, things only you have seen, will vanish from the world. Individual moments of human experience, unique to you will be lost. Are those experiences what make you up as a person? Will you be forever lost in death. Or is your essence something that can transcend death and exist into eternity?
I'm glad you caught that random Rags comment @ProjectRedfoot.
Why were the replicants built to feel fear if they were built to be slaves?
Because they weren’t. It is a side effect of their ability to grow from experiences.
@@emberfist8347why make machines that can develop feelings?
@@Fauwkes Because you can’t avoid it. It is why they have a lifespan of four years as a fail safe to keep that little flaw in check.
I don’t think this guy gets “CinemaSins”?
It’s similar to “Honest Trailers” or “Pitch Meeting”.
The point is, you can pick apart any film and they’re going for comedy, however, they also know the difference between a “Good” film you can have fun nitpicking & a “Complete Mess” of a film that probably shouldn’t have been made and it typically comes across in the video.
Watch the CinemaSins video for “The Shining”, if you’re confused.
It begins with the “Sin Counter” going away because it didn’t want to take part in sinning a Stanley Kubrick film and the only thing they could find willing to do the job was the “HAL9000”.
It’s pretty obvious, while they’re sinning it, that they think the film is a masterpiece.
The irony, if they’re criticizing CinemaSins for not being able to understand meaning, nuance & context.
Part of me feels like we have taken this poor guy wrong and his brain has been permanently stuckmanised in some form of brain damage/stuckman loop.
I always thought Roy Batty was looking at the constellation of Orion and saw attack ships on fire there, not that he was actually at that star. Otherwise he would have named that star specifically. He didn't because, from his perspective, he wasn't at that star, just looking at it in context to the rest that make up Orion.
Rutger Haurs finall lines where not written at all, he improvised it on the spot.
Well they were written. But it was much much longer. He decided after several takes to give a cliff notes version that we see in the final cut.
Apparently, this guy unironically thinks that Final Fantasy II is a great game, so you can just tell he has no media literacy when it comes to video games either.
Orion’s not even a star system, it’s a constellation visible from our solar system. Most other places in the galaxy would make the constellation impossible to view, and the idea of a star having a shoulder is nonsensical. To make the line actually work, Batty would have to be IN our solar system, looking in the direction of Orion, seeing the burning ships - close to him - off the shoulder.
Gramuglia doesn't seem like a real world
either it's real, or he changed to it from something worse
I had to watch this video 15 times before I finally enjoyed it.
People who _talk like this_ well, they... they're just the fucking worst.
this poseur probably defends Breathless (1960) too..
At this point I'm assuming all these "defenders" and "anti-critics" are from the "consume the product" crowd.
"Just turn off your brain."
"Don't think about it."
"It's just a line in the movie."
"But the effects were cool."
"But the dude did the thing and I clapped."
Is access media just modern language for yellow journalism? They seem alike, what do they get for “access”
I define 'access media' as 'I (the reviewer) do the things you want me to do ie react to a trailer, review a show, and in exchange, I get to go your fancy parties, get exclusive swag I wear on my videos, you'll sit down with my channel for an 'exclusive' interview in the hopes my channel will be better'.
For instance, I'll give you some recent examples, 'press' got to be flown out to Orange County, California, for a media event for Star Wars Outlaws, which looks to be a pretty bad game, with bad graphics, bad AI, weird gameplay, and it needs absolutely monstrous and pricey specs to play at least on PC. Consoles, I don't know how well they'll run them. 'Journalists' and UA-cam channels got flown out their and some folks in the UK specifically got for free allegedly - to go on a whale watching tour paid for by Ubisoft the day before, they got Star Wars Disneyland park merch, a VIP tour of Disneyland which can run 300-500 dollars per hour per person, nice dinners, and 4 hours spent with the game. All of those things in exchange for the 'reviewer' saying nice things, due to the company's generosity using the free stuff as a marketing/compliance tactic, regardless of quality of their product.
Another Disney one because I know this too - Disney World re-did Splash Mountain because their silly people, any press who showed up to ride the ride on previews day got a swag bag worth about $500 retail if you were to buy each piece for free. Again, they give those hoping to blow smoke over people even if a ride is bad.
These tactics work for most reviewers/things you see from major outlets, most don't go to the specificity of 'here's what I got in exchange for a preview/review' which is kinda crappy.