That sounds alot like how I intend to do criticisms when I get to it on my channel, criticizing both positively and negatively things that I grew up with and/or really like, such as how to Train Your Dragon, Star Wars the Clone Wars, Halo, Minecraft, Lego Worlds, Ninjago, Lockwood and Co., Call of Duty and Agents of Shield.
it's helpful when the claim of 'its trash' can be corroborated with articulated thoughts and comments about the filmmaking craft in the work. That's what we're looking for generally from film criticism. However there is a crowd that just wants to hear someone say bad things about movies they don't like and maybe say the word 'woke' every 3rd word. it seems to be a trend, that's not film criticism that's just muckraking sensationalism.
It's not just youtube film critics. When Anthony Fantano puts out his yearly lists, the worst albums and songs lists get more views than the lists for the best ones
0:38 ugh i hate thumbnails like that, A kind i dislike more are the ones that shove a speach bubble and some quotation marks as if the actor or character actually said whatever is in the thumbnail
@@TeresaKinsley Same thing happened with the word ‘cuck’ a few years ago. It had a meaning, started getting used more loosely and now it’s just a generalised insult people use.
I mean I know you're not directly saying this but It seems like you're saying their are only 2 types of reviews, ones discussing themes versus clickbait WOKE reviews. I have enjoyed videos discussing the themes and proposing theories but sometimes I want an analysis of lore/consistency or a video duscussing the cinematogrophy and guess what? All of these can be negative reviews. The Themes can be contradictory, The lore can be violated, The plot nonsensical, The cinematogrophy poorly designed or inaccurate. And then you have a negative review.
I love the fact that you used the classic disclaimer "It's just my opinion." in case you'd say something baffling and people would get angry about it. Even if it's just your opinion, it can still be wrong; it can also be criticised. Subjectivity isn't a shield.
I kinda disagree, I feel like saying "it's my opinion" is to ease up tension cause people on the Internet can get unnecessary rowdy. Yeah you're right subjectivity isn't a shield but it's also not a sword, it's not like he's saying his opinion is right but rather giving out his own feelings in a matter
Fucking bullshit. “I like the color purple better than the color red” is an opinion. Opinions cannot be wrong. That’s subjective. That’s what subjectivity means
This video is very relatable. I have actually noticed that when talking to people on social media, people usually never respond to positivity, but ALWAYS respond to negativity. Almost feels like they're trying to say that being negative is correct and positive is wrong, which I find depressing.
I think this is true in most parts of life. Like, if someone has a perfectly fine experience at the grocery store, they carry on about their day. If what they wanted was out, an employee was brash, or the lines were a little long, they're going to complain to friends and family it was awful later despite the fact that everything else went right. The positive aspects of something are often just bundled with the negative. We risk losing those good aspects if we don't make the effort to be attentive and aware or defining them
You're more invested in negativity to push for change. If you're unsatisfied with a system, you actively oppose it. It's a lot more common to have rallies of protest rather rallies of support. Pride isn't mainly a celebration. It's a protest foremost.
Without at least a little bit of negativity, it would be really hard if not impossible to make constructive criticism; if we were to be just positive about everything, we'd let a lot of lesser or bigger problems slide and eventually people would just stop caring about quality of filmmaking... Resulting in a sea of movies resembling a tasteless, mushy, colorful blob, full of everything and nothing at the same time. Furthermore, negative critique doesn't have to be motivated by negative intentions. Many, if not most people, negatively criticise media because they care about them and want them to be improved, not destroyed. The more attention I pay to this video, the more nonsensical it becomes... Not only does it barely address the topic it's supposed to explore, but when it does, it's on the most surface level possible and with no nuance to speak of. The creator wanted to talk about one subject but in the end spoke about something completely different and I can't decide if this was done on purpose or by accident as a result of incompetence. If you pay at least a little bit of attention, you'll see how hypocritical and contradictory the premise and execution of this video is. Some could even say that it's "toxic" and damaging to the very concept of critique. Simply because you've made a disclaimer that this is "just your opinion" and acknowledged your hypocrisy in a way, doesn't mean that this is no longer a very poor attempt at exploration of the subject.
It goes far beyond just film-making and entertainment media. Can you imagine a world in which you are always fine however you presently are- nevermind the potential for you to be any kind of shitty person or even criminal monster? We would see terrible, self-destructive lifestyles and even lifestyles that actively harm other people be promoted as being okay, acceptable and even praise-worthy. There would be no growth, no improvement, nothing to strive for, no goal to achieve. Apathy is death. All things come to an end, but not like this. Not me. I'll keep being negative where I need to be, if only to use that as a means to improve myself and whatever is around me.
@@eyesfullofsky9776 I guess the creator just didn't realise how deep this topic really is and couldn't come up with good argumentation to back up his misguided position.
Before I begin my actual comment, I would like to apologize in advance for my inadequate level of English proficiency. I am not a native speaker of the world's current lingua franca which unfortunately leads to me making numerous embarrassing mistakes being made whenever I attempt to communicate using this language. Whenever I am reminded of how I lack the ability to convey my thoughts in an eloquent manner, I feel as though I have committed a cardinal sin, as though every English teacher in the world is simultaneously shaking their head and sighing due to how utterly disappointed they are at me. Although I know that saying sorry to those of you who are reading my comment will not change the fact that I fail miserably to write and speak perfect English, I am writing this as a way to deter a certain type of people who cannot stand poor English (Also known informally as Grammar Nazis) from mocking me by posting unwanted and unnecessary comments detailing my every blunder. In my humble opinion, making grammatical errors should be perfectly acceptable as native speakers should not expect non-native speakers to be able to communicate in their second or third languages eloquently. If you are able to completely understand what the other person wrote, is there really a problem with what they've written? No, because the entire concept of communication is the exchange of information between other intelligent beings, which means that no matter how the exchange of information is made, as long as the information is accurately shared there is not a fundamental issue with their ability to communicate. To see it in another way, remember that someone who isn't fluent in English is fluent in another language. When you think about it this way, isn't it impressive for someone to speak a second language in any capacity? Having empathy and respect are qualities that are sorely missing for far too many people these days, especially on the internet. That being said, I am aware that not all netizens who correct others are doing it to ridicule and shame. There are some who do so with the intent to help others improve and grow. However, displaying the failures of other people publicly will cause the person who is criticized to feel negative emotions such as shame and sadness due to the fact that their mistake has been made obvious which severely undermines the point they were trying to make in spite of their unfamiliarity with the English language. In most circumstances people are not looking for language help when they post anything online. Most people just want to enjoy themselves and have a good time on the internet which is why I would not encourage correcting other people regardless of your intentions. If you really do want to help others with their spelling or grammar, I would highly recommend you to help via messaging privately because not only will you not embarrass anyone, you can also go more in-depth with your explanation which I'm sure the other person will greatly appreciate if they want help, but I digress. I know that I've written a bit of an essay, but I hope I've made my points clear. Anyways, here is the comment I wanted to make: shid And coom,
i dont think the creator ever said that we shouldn't criticize, just that a lot of it tended to be skewed heavily towards negativity when critizism should and can encapsulate so much more, and that the way we engage with media is stilted becuase of this. There is as much value in analyzing why a scene works as there is in analyzing why a scene doesn't.
@@DecemberDaydreams But he ignorantly assumes that negative criticism comes from bad intentions and brushes it off as worthless and damaging. I have no idea how he came to that conclusion; vast majority of people expresses negative criticism because they care for something and they see it as the only way to have their voices heard and have a positive impact in the end. Sometimes giving someone a slap on the wrist is not enough and a slap straight in the face is what's really needed. Delicate, "positive" criticism won't always work, in fact it will probably rarely work, especially when it comes to big companies.
The YMS Lion King video does have catharsis, but there’s a lot in there about filmmaking. The original Lion King had care and craft, Adam addressed the beauty of the original. He also showed how the elements of the remake removed the quality from the original. I appreciate the original film more because of him. You say “Is this all criticism is?” in relation to that video, and I say “If so, we’re lucky”
1. How dare you reduce YMS's Lion King live action review to "is this all there is?". He literally spent half the video saying how the original is better, as a lens for why the "live action" failed. Funny how there's a space for both. You're literally saying he's doing criticism wrong. How about you do your own thing and let these people who are successful because their work resonates do the same, and see how that works out for you? 2. Toxic positivity makes bank on this platform too, and it can be just as annoying. P.S. Chris Stuckmann is literally trying to be a director, so if he keeps doing negativity, other directors and agents in the industry won't like him, and reputation is everything in showbiz. He's not "cleansing" criticism, it's a business/career decision.
YMS gives good criticism, it's his presentation that I personally dislike, he acts like a jerk then defends himself for acting like a jerk. He tried explaining why him calling things "for babies" isn't insulting and why people shouldn't take it as an insult and his defense was "if someone called something i liked for babies i wouldn't be offended" which I don't think I need to explain why that is a childish response that lacks understanding of the idea that others people feel differently than you. The guy just rubs me the wrong way.
@@CaterpillarFetus The idea that nuance means an even balance of positive and negative is blatantly naive. Not everything is half good, half bad as you imply. There's not really a balance to be had when a thing has more good aspects than bad, or vice versa. I might even go so far to say that a balance is nearly impossible, otherwise why evaluate anything, why praise or criticize if we can boil it down to a balance? Also no, it's a core example of his, and I'm simply pointing out why his example is bad at best, and disingenuous at worst. "Is this all there is?" Give me one "negative" channel, and I'll show you 500 corpo shills sucking Hollywood off, paid or for free. Games and film journalism is nearly all advertising anyway, so it takes balls to be an honest critic. Finally, the idea that I worship negativity is stupid. Where the hell did you get that? A lot of the people I watch have more to say than "thing good, thing bad, here's the percentage". Actual nuance is accepting that everything we consider good may have bad aspects and vice versa. I respect the opinion better when a person can give me a consistent take. Hell, I might not agree, but if you can articulate well, it's an pinion worth being out there. The fact is that positivity is less risky to project, especially for films is that there's an economic incentive. Negativity ragebait clicks are PEANUTS compared to what studios (for films and games) are willing to offer for critics to suck their dicks. Again using Chris Stuckmann as an example, he is not critical anymore precisely because of the financial motivation. Fact is, if someone is being critical, there is less chance that they have the studios' dicks down their throats. Also, the more critical reviewers are also often the first to readily give praise if there is anything praiseworthy. Look at YMS. Anyone who's all praise WITHOUT ELABORATION just makes them more likely to be a shill for corpos. tl;dr Miss me with that weakass, halfbaked, terrible fucking opinion.
I see a lot of UA-camrs who straight up refuse to criticize anything. The worst movies ever made these people will never say one bad thing about. I see way more videos like that than I do on people being negative
@@TheFAE_Plush Even considering for a second that it’s impossible for a creator to shill anything they consume is how shallow, uninformed videos like this are made.
@@WL1264 What? I just watched his new Indiana Jones review and he clearly didn't like it. Actually you can see a lot of his reviews of films and games with a text "Angry Review" on a thumbnail and that's how you know this is negative review.
I feel like the main thing to take from this video is that there's constructive criticism and destructive criticism. Use your words to help the field improve, not just tear it down. That includes naming what works and what doesn't✌️
Although you are right in pointing out some studios will release anything that will gain them quick buck, I still think making viewers expectations and understanding higher of film industry as a whole can lead to studios having to elevate their craft to meet them. (humongus copium but hey✌️) Anyone can say film bad, but I enjoy videos that inspire me to create better stuff as well. If anything those videos can actually give you something valuable, unlike the films they often discuss.
That is actually one of the points that make Ryan George's Pitch Meetings so entertaining for me. He points out actual plot holes or writing choices that don't make too much sense even in films I actually really like, and he does it in a humorous manner that feels more like a comedic roast than actual insult.
If said things need improvement, sure. But so much great stuff still gets criticized when it doesn’t need to be. I feel like no one can enjoy anything anymore because there’s no much constant negativity.
People have a right to critique something anyway they see fit,given it's all subjective and opinion driven. If I see something that's utter garbage I'm going to point out why I feel it's utter garbage
@@Siegfried5846 I disagree. Pointing out mistakes in a film helps producers figure out where they went wrong and helps them to grow in their work Calling everything wonderful keeps the trash coming
@@lindaeasley5606 No, it would be good if bad films weren't spoken about at all. Fans of Chris Stuckmann and Jeremy Jahns go to see those films to be armchair critics.
Sure are, but some people suck ass at criticizing or addressing their grivences, the "way you see fit" has many implications that you're doing it very sloppily.
Dont you think this is something that goes in both directions? There are loads of channels that will slap a "10/10", "PERFECT" or "MASTERPIECE" with big red arrows and pikachu face thumbnails on damn near every review that they do. Channels that like twice a month publish a "THIS MOVIE CHANGED MY LIFE". For every cinema sins on youtube there is a cinema wins and some of them are even good at their job
I get so tired of seeing "masterpiece" thrown around carelessly. That is a very strong word. There are movies I like, movies I think are better than the ones being called masterpieces, that I wouldn't necessarily call masterpieces.
A sad truth is that negativity is the backbone of interesting conversation. But it doesn’t have to be! In fact, some of my favorite video essays are about hope and positivity. We, as a team effort, could change the field of UA-cam Criticism forever
@@EpicDiscovery truth be told, I wrote this comment a while ago and I don’t entirely know what I’m referring to here. I think I was talking about how lots of movie reviews nowadays are just “movie bad and here’s a 15 minute long video telling you why.” Movies the critics deem as mediocre are even worse because, either for comedic intent or their snobby arthouse persona, they’ll say something along the lines of “this was definitely a movie” and “this movie made me feel nothing. There is nothing here” I used to like 24 Frames of Nick but he fell into the same critic trap with the Mario Movie and he and a lot of others made the very (in my opinion) flimsy claim that a movie HAS to have a story to be interesting and that this was what he called an “ad movie.” It’s true that the Mario Movie’s story is pretty underdeveloped and it’s true that it’s mostly references, but I thought that the references were hidden very tastefully and not in your face. There were the obvious ones that an average mario fan would get and then there are the ones for the die-hard fans of nintendo. So, yes, while I should probably refrain from making the blanket statement that “positivity good, negativity bad”, I do stick by my point that negativity can be annoying and sometimes it can even alienate people from your channel. Positivity should definitely be used in these videos in my opinion, whether it be in the form of suggestions of what the movie could have done better or just having a calmer demeanor rather than “THIS MOVIE SUCKS” y’know?
@@zogwort1522 It could be. If you balance it correctly. I didn’t, as this was a blanket statement, so allow me to rephrase: Film criticism should not be ENTIRELY negative. If someone has problems with a movie they can definitely express those. If their problems take up the majority of the movie, they should still try to find some kind of silver lining, just to be fair to it. It’s yin and yang, you need balance for a good critique. Maybe this is my personal taste, but I feel nitpicks should be their own section of the video seeing as they aren’t major and don’t contribute a lot the film being bad. They aren’t really valid “critiques” if you catch my drift.
@@zogwort1522 fair enough, but they should at least try to find one. If they can’t that’s okay, it’s probably a really horrible movie. Those would be the bottom of the barrel “January movies.” I think the biggest problem is that a lot of them are just pretentious. Google defines that word as and with those movies they deem “mediorce” they give such unnecessary nihilistic commentary about them. “This movie made me feel empty” “there is nothing to this movie” “this movie is soulless” etc. They do this for either comedic effect or because they want to sound superior and at first it’s kind of funny but my god does it get annoying quick. Movies are entertainment! They’re inconsequential to your life! They don’t need this. It’d be different if the film was blatant or disguised propaganda but it almost never is so the world wouldn’t be affected in any profoundly negative way
One of the things I've found the most frustrating is that over the past few years, as the cynicism and negativity have taken over the discourse, people in general have begun to actively hate conversation and nuance, and just want to be patronized. I’ve written comments on movie-related posts on YT/FB/other platforms that were just a few sentences… maybe a few short paragraphs at most. Something that would realistically take less than 60 seconds to read and understand, and took maybe 5 minutes out of my day (typically while I'm sitting on the toilet or having my morning coffee) to write. But rather than engage, people will just mindlessly dismiss them with sarcastic comments like _“Ugh, some loser doesn’t have a job, I guess”_ or _“Wow, good luck with that novel, nerd, hahaha”_ because I dared write something beyond the circle-jerk of single-sentence _“OMG, [MOVIE] SUCKS, LOL!”_ comments like everyone else. And this even happens in social-media groups I'm in specifically devoted to discussing movies, which blows my mind. And it's more depressing than annoying to read those comments, because it's telling me that people aren't engaging with cinema as art anymore, and that too many people just have nothing of value to add to the conversation, and just want to mindlessly tear down something. And that's unfortunately emblematic of a great deal of modern discourse when it comes to art and film.
have you ever considered thats because there is way more badly acted, shitty written tv shows and movies today ? When more people get frustrated, maybe dont dismiss it ?
I think we've had somewhat different experiences, youtube channels that mailny focus on film analysis has a lot of intresting comment threads with people taking the artform seriously along withthe videos themselves being super intresting. Off the top of my head i reccomend "hello future me", "Sage's rain" and "Savage books" they all make a variety og videos deconstructing characters and stories or giving advice on how to create good movies. I love all their channels. If you want indept discussions of film i higlhy recomend checking out ^^
If you go back and watch all the old Siskel and Ebert reviews here on YT, you'll see just how much of the good and bad things we say about movies coming out today were true of movies coming out in the 70s, 80s, and 90s.
- Saying it's just your opinion doesn't mean what you say shouldn't be criticized. - Admitting to your hypocrisy doesn't make you less hypocritical, or change the fact that it's bad to be a hypocrite. - A lot of bad movies have been made the last 5 years. They should be called out as bad movies.
a lot of bad movies have been made in the last 10 years, a lot of bad movies have been made in the last 20 years, SURPRISE BAD MOVIES HAVE ALWAYS EXISTED!
i think a lot of this new market for trashing movies is that hollywood has been shitting out trash for decades now its more enjoyable to watch the byproduct of new critics analyzing and deconstructing what theyre feeding us
I might agree the critic department has also been oversaturated but honestly I can't place blame on that because this might just be a chicken and the egg scenario
@@drstrangelove307 That's a stretch but I understand the intent. As much as I am inclined to agree even if there is a fire there's also people who didn't care about tossing leaves on that fire further fueling the issue. Is the alt right going to look for every excuse to be mad? Yes but that doesn't mean the carelessness of handling the issues and the damages from that all while not caring about feeding them more fuel isn't an issue. Would they probably have looked for non issues even without that fuel? Yes but the issue is they wouldn't have converted as many people and got as far as they did had they not been mad to feel righteous in their holy war. Personally I've seen terrible reviews from both political sides so I can't see it. Sure the right is a bigger part of that but they happen to be the side that keeps being given bad shows and movies that further enforce their mindset of victimhood they are seeking. The answer believe it or not is to just send these messages better and that would have incredible effects. Maybe it wouldn't fix the problem; but thats an unrealistic desire. It (these political messages or themes) is too often in media given little time to explore and often contradicting the material around it. Some part of the blame inevitably lays with the people who keep doing this.
I don't disagree that there is lots of negative reviews but there's also tons of overly positive reviews and a plethora of channels that never give criticism because they are scared of their audience getting mad at them. Toxic positive is real and just as bad.
The ironic thing about this video is that it'll probably get picked up by the UA-cam algorithm because of the reasons you listed in it. This video is, for the most part, negatively talking about the negativity in most video essays on UA-cam.
Fandom - mindlessly loving something Hatedom - mindlessly hating something Criticism - mindfully examining something The critic's opinion will obviously affect their work, but their work isn't about their opinion, their work is about the art.
Even then, fandom is not the same as mindlessly accepting everything you're given. You can be a fan of certain aspects of a work or certain works in a series without being barred from criticising the ones you think are flawed.
FINALLY someone talked about this. Film "criticism" on internet is so frustrating. You go expecting to have a fun time sharing and discussing different views, but instead you get people trying to PROVE why something is a masterpiece or a complete garbage. It seems like there's no middle term. That's why I've been trying to get more and more away from any conversation about movies that looks negative. I can't stand it anymore. Twitter banned me the other day for no reason and I got a little desperate. But now I see it was a blessing, because is one less thing getting on my nerves. Every time a new movie came out, there was always someone making polemic tweets about the script or the CGI to engage other people to hate on it too, as if script and CGI were the only things that could make a movie fun. It was that or the hallucinated fans hyping the fuck out of everything. And on UA-cam I just started blocking every channel the algorithm would recommend with this type of negativity content, because they mess real bad with my head and my expectations for new things. I miss when I didn't use social medias. It was lonely not talking to anyone about new movies and TV shows, but at least I could watch them and make my own mind in piece. Now I almost feel guilty for loving The Rings Of Power, for instance, because some people just adore to hate that show on every opportunity they get, and I get really pissed every time I see them using words like "woke" as an argument.
I feel the exact same. There's some movies out there that I've seen people overhype as the best thing ever or overhate as the worst film to exist and when I watch it to form my opinions on it, I think, "Well that was average. Not bad, not good, but kinda mid." And there's nothing inherently wrong about that either.
Completely agree! I think the best example of the yin-yang you described is RLM. They show that yes they can absolutely shit on some movies, but also show that they care about the art form by giving thoughtful reviews. ALSO, the most important point is that they have fun while doing so, which has sort of been left out of a lot of movie reviews in the past few years. Loved the video!
Yeah RLM compared to something like mauLer or Critical Drinker is a big difference to me. RLM always feel like they're having fun, goofing off, and generally treat their opinion as an opinion. A lot of these newer 4 hour essayists seem cynical and depressed to be talking about this stuff and treat movies like a weird math equation where there's a right and wrong answer to whether a movie is good.
@@Tribrachidiumheraldicum Which is interesting considering that I think MauLer and the Drinker were very influenced by RLM and the Plinkett reviews, but they're pretty lackluster compared to them.
@@Tribrachidiumheraldicum Have you seen any of Maulers critiques? He praises even tfa in the moments it shines. Also, he has a series of unbridled praises. Same with the Drinker, he has a series of the Drinker recommends, where he recommends good movies. Lets not forget that rlm is one of the most negative bunch. Even if they didnt start the George Lucas r*ped my childhood, they still contributed to it massively.
The point that we look back on previous eras of filmmaking and only look at the best and most significant films of said eras really resonated with me. There have always been bad, filler movies with nothing to say and no reason to talk about, but the thing is, they do fade with time. Even though it certainly does feel like Hollywood only makes good movies by mistake now, in 10, 20, 30 years, nobody will remember the fluff and garbage like Jurassic World Dominion and Rise of Skywalker outside of occasionally one off conversations that'll mostly boil down to "hey that movie existed." Whereas the good movies that really meant something to people. I imagine a film like Top Gun: Maverick will still have people talking about it well into the future just like the original one did. There will always be bad movies, but there will also always be good movies. We just need to remember that fact, and I think we will all be a lot more satisfied and content with the world of entertainment, even if it does seem hopeless at times.
You think people will forget TROS, or TLJ, or the Jurassic World trilogy, or Sark Fate, or any of these other movies that have taken beloved, classic properties and run them into the ground with terrible sequels? They should never be forgotten, they should (and will) forever stand as a testament to hubris.
If a response to something is "It sucks" and then proceed to argue with strangers who enjoy said thing , that person is the issue not the movie or the people who enjoy the film
We're all familiar with self-styled "critics" (amateur and pro) who feel compelled to declare everything either The Greatest Thing Ever or The Worst Thing Ever. They're the ones who don't have anything in particular to say about the movies themselves because they don't know (or care to know) how to observe and elucidate, only to opine. It's all about their feelings. (Like certain politicians...) That's why they're on UA-cam. It's a platform for self-promotion, not for reasoned analysis. Whether somebody "likes" or "doesn't like" something ought to be the least interesting thing they have to say about it. If not, who cares? Your opinion is worth nothing unless you can show how you arrived at it.
Great video! I really enjoyed it! I've definitely shared in your thoughts whenever consuming some of these reviews. (or even when making some of my own)
That algorithim is really the biggest problem for this whole thing, I know channels that should be much bigger that are mostly positive people but are'nt because they prefer not to get into rants and be overly negative. UA-cam rewards people who go overboard with it and it is real irritating. Combined with the anxiety of if you don't make a video consistently fast then you risk losing all your hard work and you have an algrathom that can be very hard to please.
If you cannot be negative, then you cannot be positive either. So you are clearly not capable be being a critic without having the full range of criticisms.
@@zogwort1522if you do nothing but give positive criticism, then you cannot properly review films because your opinion is worthless, because an honest review will point out the positive as well as the negative.
Did you even watch the video? He's not saying that film critics have to be positive. He's saying they have to be genuine, not overexaggerating their negative observations.
I definitely start out by watching and seeking out critiques of media I love, so you’re on the money with it being about validating and recognising art. However that same path lead me down a loophole of schadenfreude where I see the videos on notoriously bad shows and enjoy seeing what makes them as bad as they are. Unfortunately the lines are getting blurred more and more these days, sometimes even on purpose. Fantastic video as always, Meep!
How did you write the title for this video and not spot the inherent contradiction? "Criticism should not be negative". Clearly you take issue with negativity, likely because it makes people not feel good, but that's like saying fire should not be hot because it burns me, and who wants to be burned, amirite? Unfortunately, Fire is hot by definition, just like criticism is inherently negative. Fire and heat are the opposite of ice and cold, just like criticism and negativity are the opposite of praise and positivity. So, then, what even are you trying to get at? Do you just not want people to be negative ever? May as well have titled your video "People Should Not Criticize Film" if you're going at it from the purely positive angle. If your issue is that people are being too outrageous, hyperbolic, or vitriolic about film criticism, then you should have maybe titled your video "People Need to Chill TF Out" or something. Again, let me be clear, saying as robotically as possible that "Batman getting back into Gotham when the whole city is on lockdown, he's in the middle of nowhere, he has no money or gadgets, and is trying to save the city but takes time to make a likely-oil lit fire in the shape of a giant bat symbol for seemingly no reason is a major plot hole and a problem with the movie" is not outrageous, spiteful, or mean. It is criticism, it is negative, and it factually exists in the movie. Whether you accept it or not, like it or not, or understand it or not, it is there, it can be pointed out and criticized as a flaw in as spiteful, respectful, or comedic a manner as you want.
Consciousness of that negativity hits even harder when you actually start to work on film projects and see all the hard work that creators have to put even on the shittiest movie.
It becomes important to have critical voices. A lot of care goes into filmmaking, and criticism can be useful. Pointing out shortcomings in films can be for the love of film. These flaws prevented said film from being its best. Filmmakers can be wary of hurdles and resolve them, making their art better. Unfortunately that’s not all criticism.
This dangerously implies that critics who make negative reviews only do so because it’s popular and that people who would otherwise enjoy the film, now hate it because a UA-cam thumbnail and critic said it was trash. This completely negates the fact that the content may genuinely be trash in their subjective opinion, contrary to what the film’s or series’ popularity would suggest, or a viewer LOVED the film and simply WATCHED the critique to see if the negative points presented actually resonates with their experience or not. And walked away still loving the film after the video. Give people enough credit to know whether or not they like something. They’re entitled to say something sucks if they think it does. Your unreasonable fear that saying a movie is bad equates to killing the movie industry is naive and misplaced. It’s okay, the industry will survive and improve as this is nothing new. Edit: Inserted [naive].
I mean, most content is replacement level, and if you want people to pay extra for said content (ie go to a theater instead of just watching something streaming), then yeah, most stuff does not meet that standard and there is nothing wrong with pointing it out. Also, praise only has value based on how hard it is to attain (this particularly frustrated me in The Menu, if the critic never gives bad reviews, then her voice never would have had a chance to launch anyone’s career).
You have failed to support even the title of the video. Your audience should be ashamed of themselves, and your comment section makes me fear for the future of creativity
Good, thoughtful video. I appreciate in particular your nuanced take on the Plinkett videos, which often catch strays as being the nadir of bad UA-cam film criticism but are actually very articulate and detailed works of criticism, even with their flaws. Though I want to throw a quick shoutout to Shampoo, which is actually a beloved movie in cinephile circles and Hal Ashby something of an unsung hero of 70s Hollywood (or at least lesser sung). Your point about recency bias in that section still absolutely stands.
Same with Jeremy Jahns. Those two are easily way more level headed and constructive than basically 90-95% of all movie essayists and critics on UA-cam right now. Stuckmann even openly admitted he doesn't have as much fun ripping into movies anymore because he wanted a break from having to watch something he dislikes for internet views
@@icedcapplord710 as a diehard star wars fan Jeremy Jahns gets my respect for his "Sorry George Lucas" video He admitted he had a share in all the hate George Lucas got to the point Lucas gave up and sold Star wars to Disney Of course Chris and Red letter media stopped because it's not profitable anymore to shit on the star wars prequels because many GOOD videos on the prequels called out their hypocrisy and the prequel fans grew up and rightfully defended Lucas and his craft
@@jaeblack4752... so he still critiques movies... if you watch a movie and only talk about what works in the movies favor it is still a movie/ review or critique.
Love your take on the recency bias, and feel that is very true about music. Every time I hear someone say that ‘Rap isn’t what it used to be’ I wonder if they forgot about acts like 2 Live Crew or Vanilla Ice
Vanilla Ice was criticised and attacked often for not being a proper rapper! He even had his royalties stolen off him!!! So do you really know that much yaself!
@@crizzhutch1066 Yes Crizz, and that Death Row records sent a guy over who held him off of a balcony for more $$. I think the point you are missing here is that people who find that to be the Golden Age of Rap music conveniently forget the sub par artists of the time, while also overlooking the better artists of today in favor of the Vanilla Ice equivalents of 2022
@@eliasconnolly1973 I would say that those were the golden days, as with so much of the entertainment industry!!! These days, everything is produced too fast, so there is little thought or care put into it. Just get it out get the money in and on to the next one! As so much is just treated as the product! How many silly rappers, keep attacking Eminem, yet none have the rhyming ability of him! Not everything was better back in the 90's but the quality was higher and so were peoples standards!
You can name two terrible acts, but ignore the majoirty of rap at the time which was very good. Today it's quite literally the opposite. There is far more trash than there is good especially in rap.
@@TallicaMan1986 I can also name the Tag Team or Kid Rock or Too $hort or even Puff if you want me to keep going. The point I am making is that 20 Years from now I can point to artists like J. Cole, Denzel Curry, and Kendrick when making the same argument, and forget about Lil Pump or the Island Boys. That is the same point this video makes about recency bias and why I found it interesting
If you make a good film, you'll get a good review, including from YMS, RLM and other "comedic reviewers". There aren't swathes of great films being brought down by overly negative reviews. The review community is making more entertaining and often more insightful material than much of the stuff coming out of Hollywood or streaming generally. And it often has insights beyond the realm of film. I think this new artform should be celebrated. I'm sure there's a lot of off point, low quality reviews out there but every artform has it's share of dross so nothing new there. But there's plenty of great reviewers who aren't just entertainers but are actually very good at reviewing. There's more talent in this field than there ever has been. And there's plenty of fantastic films too. So have another drink and a bong and relax. It's not a problem.
Did you watch the video? Because he agrees with you (he literally said so of the stuff you said verbatim). His point wasn't "stop doing negative film criticism" it was "why is negative criticism so popular?" his problem with it isn't that negative reviews exist but that negative reviews are the biggest reviews even though the reason people watch and review films is because they like films as an artform and want them to get better, so why are the biggest reviews negative? When we know positive reinforcement works better and would help the movie industry improve more. meeptop articulates this way better than I ever could in a comment, so have another drink and a bong and actually watch the video before commenting
No, not at all, negative reviews is pouplar as ppl have a negative mindset and mental disorders who getting fueld by this shitty channels. RLM atleast have some purpose as they are damn funny and can argue for theyr take.
I absolutely _love_ negative reviews where much of the ire is directed at the directors/writers saying the stupidest things in interviews with a shit-eating grin on their face, as if they know what they're doing. Gotta be one of my favourite genders. But seriously, that's what I think makes a lot of this content. You don't see many people going after experimental directors whose new ideas don't land, or humble writers who are just doing their best and will address criticism in an agreeable manner. I think most of us will have a ton of respect for people like that, even if we don't like their work. Having someone wealthy with a nice punchable face who makes the most milquetoast shit imaginable, won't listen to reason and comes up with excuse after excuse for us to dog-pile onto is just... *chef's kiss*
YMS is great, he constantly talks about films he loves, like in his top ten lists, and he's constantly trying to get people to watch more underground films that they may not have heard of before.
Contradicts the point of his video - Check... Beneath the Mask plays in the background - Check... Refenreces to old authors and/or film makers - Check... "It's just my opinion please leave me alone" - Check... Criticising something is not inherently negative. If something is worth criticising then it means it can be improved. That thing can already be good but can be made better. Criticism is how you improve works.
I have stopped watching overly negative views specifically because I’m trying to avoid things that make me angry. We are all on a rock floating in a fucking void like why does it matter that the new Star Wars sucks ass? I can simply not like things.I don’t need UA-camrs to tell me I’m right about my opinion.
Same here, mental health is more important then to be right, after i stoped following all this Negativ shitty channels, i actualy turned around and like Star Wars for what it is now.
This is about as unnuanced as the average movie criticism video. The fact that we're on a rock floating in a fucking void doesn't mean we have to be apathetic or nihilistic. You can also simply not like things and not need UA-camrs to tell you you're right while deriving entertainment from their videos. It's great that you're avoiding things that make you angry but that doesn't mean you have to pretend you live in a vacuum or project whatever you have going on onto the rest of the human race.
The problem is that most new content is produced by an industrial system therefore most is actually trash and not art.. perfectly accepavle to me in this era that most art is ravaged because most art that is consumed by the mainstream is producer and money fueled and ends up dumbed down
It's never occurred to you that the art itself might merit positive or negative criticism based upon it's, you know, merits? It's not the job of a critic or reviewer to be nice or mean, unless they've chosen a character or persona that depends upon those limits. And this video belongs about five years ago at least. Criticism now isn't even in this format anymore, it's guys like Mauler and the EFAP crew, and you don't seem to be aware of the shift. Now there is a gradient of criticism that runs from hollow grifting and anger farming to highly logical and evidence based analysis, and every stop in-between. Consensus opinions are formed in multi hour crossover live streams connected to fan forums such as discord and reddit. There's a whole structure to this beast beyond simple video essays.
Idk. I guess I don't see the issue. How are you supposed to have a well defined understanding of quality if you don't have something to contrast it to? Tearing something apart is valuable because it allows you to look at the guts and mechanics. Movies are very complex things that require thousands of elements to work in cohesion. Perhaps some channels are too gleefy or vitriolic in their disparagement of media; however, film has always had its fair share of cynical cash grabs that aren't really deserving of the soft gloves with which you'd handle an art students final peice.
idk what's wrong with yall, I can appritiate art by its own merits and form my own opinions. I don't even think that xotiine is that negative. For example, YMS is featured in the thumbnail, and while he can be harsh, he is completely fair, and doesn't do any misleading stuff like you mentioned
Ironically enough, this video is probably the most doomer take I've seen on both the film industry and criticism. Like, legitimately dude, maybe you should take a break if you haven't already?
My ability to enjoy criticism here on UA-cam, especially film criticism, is waning. Creators have left nuance at the bus stop and go to the extremes almost always because that’s what gets views. The art of criticism, the writing, the perception, the sharing of a subjective experience, is left out as a result. It’s sad. We still have the written word thankfully. There are a lot of great writers out there who make a living from film criticism, people like Matt Zoller Seitz, Christy Lemire, Odie Henderson, and A.O. Scott. I dig these people and their work. First time viewer here. I really dig this video and I appreciate that you made it. Big Ups!
The whole “every critic on this website is low-quality” argument is just a massive self-report for people who don’t bother to put any effort into curating the content they watch. I’m not going to blame a fast food restaurant when someone who goes there every day complains that they’re now in poor health when there’s a healthy alternative across the street.
Maybe I’m watching the wrong channels.. but I never see much people critiquing themes, Author intent Vs Critic Intent, the meaning of the movie, and the nuances that one can really dig into. That’s personally what I love to do after reading or watching something. I just really never get that from UA-cam
Honestly, I think there's something to this. If criticism has been flanderized in this way who's to say films won't from moving to streaming? It is stupidly hard to find good critics on youtube.
I highly recommend Implicitly Pretentious and Hello Future World in this regard. The former focuses more on comic book media but he is very in depth and invested in thematic storytelling and drawing from the finer nuances a lot of video essayists tend to overlook or ignore. His Spider-Man and Batman videos are especially incredible dissections
I dont watch a lot of video essays anymore, for a lot of the reasons listed in this video. But this video was awesome, it articulated what I have been feeling about film criticism and discourse and I loved how you ended the video. Thank you for this!
There a dope video essay channel contrary to "Cinamasins" called "Cinamawins." I am all for positivity to be brought back into spaces as well as nuanced critique!
@@edgytypebeat781 l love CinemaWins , and another good channel is Natalie Gold, she does reactions but she doesn't trash any movies she watches she'll either say "It's well made but it's not something I'm a fan of" it's refreshing
I'm in a similar situation. Around 2020~2021 I realized so many of the videos about movies I was consuming on here were negative in one way or another, and usually about things I didn't even care about most of the time. As more time passed it clicked that I simply wasn't enjoying them anymore, they were actively making me feel like crap and it was just too much negativity I didn't need in my life. So I stopped watching most of my regular channels in replacement for more things that were bringing me joy and being more selective about the videos and channels I watch. The two comments above both mention great channels, and I wholeheartedly agree with them. Watching CinemaWins after watching a lot of CinemaSins years back was the exact type of thing I was looking for, and I can't sing their praises enough. After I started my UA-cam cleanse I also starting watching movies with my enjoyment in mind regardless of the general consensus online, and usually came away liking something way more than most. Finding a channel that actively goes out of it's way to shine a light on the positives in films that so many overlook, and not making anyone feel bad for enjoying something like so many others do was so refreshing to see. Reaction videos have been more of my cup of tea too because of the sheer amount of channels that have popped up recently and there's a lot more balance in the types of movies being reviewed imo. I've only seen a handful of Natalie Gold's vids, but her energy is infectious and I really need to watch more of her. Since everyone is giving suggestions I'll recommend The Movie Buds, they focus on more female lead movies and seeing stories that they aren't the target demographic for. They're really genuine, open minded, and no matter what make an effort to point out the bad a film may have without taking away from the things they liked and how they feel about it (wow this ended up being way longer than I meant for it to be lol)
I'm basically done with Classic Hollywood Purests. They constantly ignore the good that is happening now and just want what they had back then. They constantly scream at Rise of Skywalker and Captain Marvel but forget about films like Everything Everywhere All At Once and Nope. Change is the only constant in life and art reflects life.
Its a sad commentary on the state of people’s film taste that we’re considering EEAAO and Nope to be the “see, they still make good movies!!11!” of the year
Art reflects life hahahahahahaha. Not that trite crap! Most movies are not art, they're a commercial product, everything everywhere was not art! If you're main source of income is "art" then it's no longer art, just product. Very few true artists in Hollywood anymore
@@toons8744 er what? Elite for the elite!!! No, Hollywood is all about money, because it costs so much to make a movie. If the "artists" were left in charge, all movies would struggle to make a profit! As the majority have no idea bout running their own lives! You've burst no bubble here, what you've said is pretty much known by everyone! I think you're a little too impressed with yourself!
So what do you guys think makes a good review/critique? I think it has to be digestible, precise, consistent and most of all, what many critics on UA-cam often seem to forget, *constructive* All I see are people on a tirade, however.
I turn off "reviews" as soon as I sense they're just being "cool and edgy and quirky" and just trash the films and shows instead of providing constructive criticism. "This is trash" is not critiquing. "This is trash because this this and this and it would have been a lot better if they did this this and that" THAT'S critiquing.
I’m glad you actually curate your own content unlike a majority of people here who claim that this is the only type of negative content that exists and reject the genre entirely.
I think where I really have to disagree with you is on your YMS Lion King example. Like you, I also didn't grow up with Lion King as a holy grail, perfect and untouchable. But I love YMS's review of it (far better than his shorter reviews) because he very clearly put effort into dissecting the remake's decisions, and how they were almost all downgrades. He outlined quite indisputable faults and mistakes of the 2019 version, and even though he embellished the presentation with usual, dramatized outrage, it was laid out so you could tell YMS did his research, and the level-headed criticism balanced with the emotional takes. It was compelling even to me who, again, doesn't feel strongly about Lion King's story. If all you walked away with after watching that review was like... raw, sympathy-anger along with YMS, who *does* have strong attachments to the original Lion King, then I think you should just look closer at the work put into it and other similar reviews. Negativity, or energizing the review with hyperbolic reactions, is not mutually exclusive with making intelligent points about the media. The best reviews do both. I recognize that you had disclaimers both for all of this video being just your perspective (kind of a given), and that you don't directly blame a RedLetterMedia or a YMS for the consequences of their popular reviews. I agree with you that plenty of their viewers could've taken the wrong things away from their videos, but when you suddenly imply that you didn't get anything out of the YMS Lion King review except impermanent emotions.. then I'm afraid you also took "the wrong things" away from his work. Or at least, you didn't engage with the contents beyond the surface-level loud voices.
You are putting too much emphasis on a guy just because he sperged out overly simplistic, sentimental drivel for a movie that ripped of Kimba the white lion.
@@marshallw1902 Well, in that review I mentioned, YMS went into changes to Scar's presentation that serve to make him more shallow, and less intelligent. YMS noted points where there are just plainly mistakes in audio.. balancing? and notes in the musical numbers. He goes over how characters' expressions have been sacrificed for an uncanny-valley "realism". These are all observations that don't require YMS to be favoring the original Lion King, unquestioningly. He doesn't leave the conversation at "the new one is unnecessary", or "new one is ugly" with no qualifications. He makes arguments, removed from personal feelings, *then* he injects his personal displeasure at what happened to a film he holds so highly. Writing off everything YMS said there as "sentimental" is misguided.
Read Oscar Wilde's The Critic as Artist. I agree that critique is an artform and if you aren't careful your negative critique can be flanderized into cynicism. I hope for a higher level of critiques and films in the future, and that can only happen when critics and artists can hold each other to a higher standard. For me a lot of the channels you listed are flawed in that their positive criticism is not treated with the same effort or depth as their negative critiques. Like you said part of it can be chalked down to negativity bias, but Id also like to think that if creators made their positive criticisms with as much thought and value maybe more people would be interested in them. Lastly, you aren't being a hypocrite by criticizing an artform you take part in; you just want to see criticism get better, and, in a lot of ways, it does need to be better right now in order to substantiate legitimate concerns about how companies are handling switching over to streaming. Being irresponsible in critique could lead to an industry oversaturated by bad movies, not just mediocre ones.
loved your dahmer video not because it was negative but because it was dripping with care and nuance! I think the best 'negative' criticism comes from a place of true love and constructive criticism. don't get too caught up in the ouroboros of the 'worth' of what you're doing, you're smart and you have perspective and obviously you care deeply for nuance! the platform could definitely use more criticism like this and I hope you continue. sometimes you have to give the alg what it wants but also make it worth people's time, sometimes some nuanced perspective in a takedown video is like taking medicine with a spoonful of sugar lol. any cultural criticism that helps people with media literacy is a godsend in this our lords year 2022 even if you gotta stoop to some clickbait now and again.
I mean YMS' Lion King video came from a place of love for the original. It simultaneously explored what made that movie so good, while exploring the ways in which the remake just didn't do it justice. "is this what film criticism is?" I'd fucking hope so.
@@FlymanMS I agree. Normal/actual criticism is what you describe. I am just so annoyed by unnecessary hate nowadays that I rather watch overly positive stuff than that.
It just drives me nuts how the people molding an entire generations perception of "good cinema" consists mostly of individuals who really don't understand movies. They have opinions and can rant for hours on end therefore credibility... completely missing intent, execution, or the finer points of an entire artform to posture about their political or social positions and sound like intellectuals. It's all such nonsense.
Personally would retitle it as "absolutely negative" just so people understand it's the absolutist stance and emotions that are core to these criticism, but that is only mild criticism I have with this video, rest slaps.
The Star Wars prequel hate is a perfect example of "hate click" They literally parrot the same talking points and they get millions of views, they're not shy about it they hifive each other on the same tired "criticisms" "Anakin was an immature teenager"(uh because that's what he was, a boy who was told to repress being a teen) "Obi-Wan and QuiGon should of been the same character" "Who cares about politics"(In a new hope the first hour of the film , is extremely political as is return of the Jedi , this is more of a "selective outrage" mindset they have) "Anakin does evil things for no reason"(His mother was murdered by tusken raiders, his motivation of doing evil things was to keep loved ones from dying which was shown in all the prequel films ) And then the "prequel hating" fans parrot it and then argue with total strangers for years over a movie they didn't like It's really sad how easily people can be manipulated into hating something And in another comment section here I mentioned the John Kransiski's Reed Richards Photoshopped photos in alot of these big channels thumbnails, that's false advertisement, you'd think they're fans would be offended but nope they eat up and was mad he got killed off in Multiverse of madness
@@Chuck_EL I mean... let's not pretend the prequels are good movies, even if the hate they get is over the top. But I don't think a lot of people need to be manipulated into not liking them.
You put into words so many things I’ve been feeling lately but couldn’t quite articulate. Idk if the film *industry* is going down the tubes, but an open call for less negativity in film *discourse* feels pretty appropriate at this point. To put it mildly. Great video, super great channel, can’t wait for the next one
oh no, the industry is going downwheel.... quick , lets pretend everything is fine and fake positivity cuz that will sure help. i'd rather have honest negativity and valid criticsm over dishonest fake positivity for coping
My favorite part was when he failed to answer the premise of his video and then immediately contradicted it in the sentence where he attempted to. It’s kind of hilarious seeing so many people bemoaning negative critiques and then just accepting whatever anyone says so long as it’s intended to be a counter argument against said critiques:
This video is not only overly pretentious but it also falls flat with its own logic, you complain about reviewers only seeing the bad but then you claim that yms review of the lion king remake was nothing but negative when in his video he constantly praises and shows why the original lion kig got certain things right.
i liked film critics but they are so annoying and cynical most of the time, you can tell when a critic makes art because theyre more nuanced and thoughtful. yms for example, is so painfully cynical about everything that watching any content of his puts me in a bad mood. on the other hand, someone like the film drunk or anyone who actually likes movies, will critique with care and make u think about what went wrong or right.
Honestly as a passionate artist myself I understand how it can really hurt when people just completely shit on your work But also as a passionate Hater sometimes you gonna trash
Filmento is great for nitpicking an enjoyable movie for not being directed more..."smartly". Funny thing is his ideas, how he would've done it, are usually very good! I'm subscribed to and really like his channel. However, that click- baity aspect of how his criticisms and proposed fixes are presented has always bothered me. When he doesn't like a movie, he titles the video, "Anatomy of a Failure. How to ruin..." coupled with a thumbnail exactly how you described, a picture from the movie of someone looking tortured, angry or sad and usually with the word Failure written across. Lots of YTers are designing their thumbnails like this, even those who aren't particularly negative! Despite how tacky this thumbnail design looks, I guess if you've made UA-cam your job, you gotta go where the viewers and engagement are but it's just a solid shame we're silo-ing ourselves into camps that can barely see nuance in most things. That movie either "sucked ass!" or it was "perfection! How this type of movie should be made!" If Susan Sontag, Pauline Kael Gene Siskel, Roger Ebert, Armond White or J. Hoberman had been beholden to the algorithm, I wonder how that might have compromised their film review titles, the ways in which they criticizes things they didn't like about a movie and how flowery the praise would've been for movies they loved! Would they even be able to recognize the bag aspects of an otherwise praiseworthy film for the sake of being in the camp of "loved it!"? I'm just happy we have records of millions of examples of movie reviews from over a century of motion pictures from around the world, by everyone from your serious & high-minded film intellectuals to the critics who write for local papers whose job is just to tell you if this or that popcorn thriller, romantic comedy or action blockbuster is worth a few hours of you weekend on the 2 or 3 times a year you see a movie, or not.
I really enjoyed this video, largely because it is something I've been wrestling with myself. As one of the former contributors to a site briefly mentioned in the video, I definitely made my name on negative reviews, even if I did try to mention things also worth praising if I found them. But I also found myself naturally growing out of that format, at least on a regular basis, because I feel like that kind of thing can be poisonous. I have said things in those videos I'm not proud of or agree with now. But even in those negative reviews, I wanted them to be informative and useful; it is easier to understand how something works from a failure than something that does it well to the point of effortlessness. However, I know a lot of my audience don't really like this change. I still put out negative reviews, but under a different banner and as part of a more traditional review show. And I know my views have gone down because I hate clickbait titles and sensationalism (I tend ignore videos with such), but I am a row boat struggling against the edge of a waterfall. I wish there was a place for my criticism here, but I increasingly fear there isn't. Anyway, great video, first of yours I've seen, that I think articulated these feelings very well.
I just want to say I have noticed your changes and I appreciate them. I've watched your stuff for years, and I'm one of the people who doesn't want you to feel stuck doing the same shtick.
I wouldn't be too hash on yourself for your earlier stuff as that was the culture of the time. Even in the early videos you went into the 'behind the scenes' aspects and mentioned positive aspects unlike a lot of reviewers. I wish more people were like your reviews where you go into detail about your feelings rather than just look for views [like you I avoid the sensationalist stuff like the plague]. Keep doing what your doing as your fans appreciate it.
It seems like you followed this video’s main point of “negative criticism is bad, not to say that it is bad” pretty closely. What an abomination of critical thinking.
@@user-NameName No, I give plenty of pans. But I shouldn't do them all the time because it gets old, and it was making me miserable, feeling like all I was contributing was a toxic mindset.
I hope this video connects with people, I'm not so much concerned about movie or TV show criticisms these days, but it's still important to inform people about nuance. Whatever it is you're critiquing usually is met with nuance. Whether it be art, food, politics, religion etc not everything is black and white like most people tend to believe. With a few rare exceptions you can find something at least neutral if not positive out of something that you may have an extreme objection to
Ya know, I've been thinking of this for a while now. Especially the recency effect when I point out to people that there's just as much mixed quality as there is now. People only think that modern movies suck now since they've only seen the good stuff of the past without really thinking about it. I've been trying to make my videos overall positive about the things I enjoy or at least highlight things I like in something I don't. There's also a trend I've noticed of really any positive reviews of anything being attacked as "shills". Your opinions are now put into little boxes of whether not they can be engaged with good faith or not. It's funny that you mention Jurassic World Dominion since the extended cut was better in my opinion and it's a damn shame it wasn't released in theaters. You'd think the film killed the dog of every critic.
There's playing the "youtube game" which is where thumbnails feel like they need to be forced to grab from this very point of view. Then there' negativity vs postivity and for me when I tackle or have a negative thing to point out I always attempt to say how it could be improved and for postive I try to explain why it's good. There's an understanding of subjective vs objective as well that ties into this process and lots of time for some let the subjective thing fuel their arugements.
I disagree, criticism should be harsh and negative as possible. I VASTLY prefer people telling it as it is rather than the modern toxic positivity bullshit that everyone is enamoured with these days.
It's hard to want to be a writer, knowing that somebody will make a video pointing and laughing at whatever I make. Which I don't think should be the point of criticism.
@@newrudo I'm not. He's allowed to make whatever kind of video he wants to make. I'm just criticizing him for making poor arguments and not even answering the question in the title of his own video.
@@wolfiewoo3371 Poor arguments such as? He literally spells it out in the video, negatitve criticism is fine if it leads to actual improvement and discussion Rather than pandering to a "lul ur movie is woke" human centipede of fishing for cheap clicks through rage bait. Theres not a single second in the video (that you did not watch) where he claims anything that you are saying.
I think it's true that negative reviews are more popular than positive reviews. I think you make a good point about the algorithm, BUT I don't think you draw the line between the various sorts of negative criticism. You lump it all into one thing. Some critics seemly only care to rip movies a new one and have no passion for the medium, but for instance YMS's Lion King/Old Boy reviews aren't just about the flaws of the movie in question, they're also about the merits of the movie that preceded it. You speak about negative film criticism as if it's this toxic thing that's only about wallowing in misery, but too me many of my favorite negative critics help me build an appreciation for art and the things I like. YMS's channel has recommended me nearly all of my all time favorite movies, Linzi Ellis has helped me appreciate elements in films I used to not think about ect. In my opinion a lot of popular positive criticism is some of the worst critic related content. Lots of over narrativizing, with weird clickbaitey praises such as "How X redefined what it means to be a movie" or "why x is the best movie you shouldn't see". In my opinion what makes a good critic isn't whether or not their content is sufficiently positive or negative, but whether or not it deepens you lr understanding or appreciation of films. My favorite ever underrated critic is Mathewmatosis, he discusses games and every single one of his videos broadens my understanding and appreciation
I think what you're missing is that we kind of already have the ideal scenario you wanted. Audiences are both far more engaged in and far better at critically thinking about media than ever before. And, shock twist, the reason this is the case is because of all the people "dunking" on media. It may be the case that an average viewer just wanted to watch someone dunk on a movie they also thought wasn't good, but through doing so they will inevitably learn more about the medium. I can attest to this as I started watching videos like these because I wanted to see the funny youtube man talk about dark souls 2 and wound up interested in what he was saying while still being entertained. These videos of people tearing apart movies aren't them just pointing and laughing at the film, they're actually critiquing it. Even if that person is solely negative in their videos they are likely still bringing up valid points, and you don't need to specifically offer an alternative for that observation to be valuable. These people, both the video makers and the audience, very likely aren't dunking on these things because they hate media and just like ripping it to shreds, they do it because they like and remember good media. Taking House of the Dragon as an example, every critic (and viewer, really) on the planet hated what was done with season 8 of GoT, yet they recognized the value the new show had. If audiences just wanted to dunk then they would have, but the conclusion seems pretty unanimous that the show is actually good. Also, there is no arguing against the fact that the average quality of media has been trending downward. This is especially true of projects which are high budget and naturally get pushed to the most people. You say it as a joke but I can confirm that many of the recent movies and shows from disney are horrid affronts to their medium. Whatever the reason for this is, they are outright terrible and its fascinating to watch them compete for rock bottom. There may still be good new things coming out, but what used to be the typical floor for quality has been dropping for a long time.
I mean not really? I mean yeah he is but he acknowledges his hypocrisy in like the first 3 minutes of the video though? idk I think he’s been pretty good with his criticism of movies in the past. like, just because he’s played into that once or twice (unlike the people he’s criticizing, who have made that their entire careers) doesn’t make him a hypocrite when he calls out other people for being much worst critics
@@restingsadface I’ve watched his videos lol and I agree he is fair in his opinions and I agree with most of not all of them. I was being a little cheeky that’s all. I do think some movies are so bad that you kind of have to talk sh*t about them. But it has to be genuinely awful.
@@ToliG123 no I didn’t, I just read the title and made a comment based on that. Because criticism is meant to be negative or at least it’s analyzing the faults or mistakes in something. So criticism will always be kind of negative. Don’t take it too seriously..
Without a doubt a lot of these UA-camrs should not be the face of modern film criticism. There's a case that can be made for allowing them their own corner of the internet, because there's nothing inherently wrong with that, but they are at the head of this subsection of YT
There's a 10m+ view video on a certain divisive blockbuster where the entire argument is based on wildly misunderstood dialogue and "This is different to the original, therefore it is bad" without analysing why that change may have been made. I found myself disagreeing with criticisms of a film I did not like.
Idk YMS is really great because he's constantly talking about and urging people to watch great foreign and underground films, and he has a great comprehension of concepts like the manipulation of films, presenting information in unique and thoughtful ways, etc.
@@etalex7074 But what does YMS stand for? (Rhetorical question, I know what it stands for) Edit: For all others, the name thing has been explained to me
My favorite type of film criticism is "this movie is trash but it's my trash." Some critics dont even feel like they enjoy watching movies.
They do enjoy watching movies, they are just critical.
YMS does that a lot with people like Neil Breen
That sounds alot like how I intend to do criticisms when I get to it on my channel, criticizing both positively and negatively things that I grew up with and/or really like, such as how to Train Your Dragon, Star Wars the Clone Wars, Halo, Minecraft, Lego Worlds, Ninjago, Lockwood and Co., Call of Duty and Agents of Shield.
It's like telling a doc that you need to enjoy surgery
Brutalmoose will complain about bad movies but he has fun watching them for that reason.
Negative criticism is fine as long as it is coherent and actually makes sense
That goes for positive critiques as well.
It needs some balance as well.
Most of them are no sense
Nah, most of the time it's just bitter internet psuedo intellectuals trying to prove their smarter than the writer.
it's helpful when the claim of 'its trash' can be corroborated with articulated thoughts and comments about the filmmaking craft in the work. That's what we're looking for generally from film criticism. However there is a crowd that just wants to hear someone say bad things about movies they don't like and maybe say the word 'woke' every 3rd word. it seems to be a trend, that's not film criticism that's just muckraking sensationalism.
It's not just youtube film critics. When Anthony Fantano puts out his yearly lists, the worst albums and songs lists get more views than the lists for the best ones
That's not true this year
0:38 ugh i hate thumbnails like that,
A kind i dislike more are the ones that shove a speach bubble and some quotation marks as if the actor or character actually said whatever is in the thumbnail
“Water is like liquid elevator music.”
-Bilbo Baggins
True. That's why I'm more interested in vid essays talking about themes rather than clickbait 'WOKE and TRASH!' nonsense
Honestly, the word "woke" has been so overused it practically has no meaning anymore.
@@TeresaKinsley Same thing happened with the word ‘cuck’ a few years ago. It had a meaning, started getting used more loosely and now it’s just a generalised insult people use.
I mean I know you're not directly saying this but It seems like you're saying their are only 2 types of reviews, ones discussing themes versus clickbait WOKE reviews. I have enjoyed videos discussing the themes and proposing theories but sometimes I want an analysis of lore/consistency or a video duscussing the cinematogrophy and guess what? All of these can be negative reviews. The Themes can be contradictory, The lore can be violated, The plot nonsensical, The cinematogrophy poorly designed or inaccurate. And then you have a negative review.
I am more interesting in talking about what constructs the themes rather than the themes themselves. It’s the effort and the execution that matter.
I try to stay away from that but it keeps reeling me in like a fish vs a worm on a hook
I love the fact that you used the classic disclaimer "It's just my opinion." in case you'd say something baffling and people would get angry about it.
Even if it's just your opinion, it can still be wrong; it can also be criticised.
Subjectivity isn't a shield.
I kinda disagree, I feel like saying "it's my opinion" is to ease up tension cause people on the Internet can get unnecessary rowdy.
Yeah you're right subjectivity isn't a shield but it's also not a sword, it's not like he's saying his opinion is right but rather giving out his own feelings in a matter
Fucking bullshit. “I like the color purple better than the color red” is an opinion. Opinions cannot be wrong. That’s subjective. That’s what subjectivity means
This video is very relatable. I have actually noticed that when talking to people on social media, people usually never respond to positivity, but ALWAYS respond to negativity. Almost feels like they're trying to say that being negative is correct and positive is wrong, which I find depressing.
It’s emotional contagion. People are more likely to be receptive to negativity on social media and carry it forth - this is substantiated by studies.
It can also go the other way too, when people are overly positive about a mediocre movie with lots of problems.
I think this is true in most parts of life. Like, if someone has a perfectly fine experience at the grocery store, they carry on about their day. If what they wanted was out, an employee was brash, or the lines were a little long, they're going to complain to friends and family it was awful later despite the fact that everything else went right.
The positive aspects of something are often just bundled with the negative. We risk losing those good aspects if we don't make the effort to be attentive and aware or defining them
You're more invested in negativity to push for change.
If you're unsatisfied with a system, you actively oppose it. It's a lot more common to have rallies of protest rather rallies of support.
Pride isn't mainly a celebration. It's a protest foremost.
@@danielplainview2584 I feel like these studies regarding the internet are largely lacking context.
Without at least a little bit of negativity, it would be really hard if not impossible to make constructive criticism; if we were to be just positive about everything, we'd let a lot of lesser or bigger problems slide and eventually people would just stop caring about quality of filmmaking... Resulting in a sea of movies resembling a tasteless, mushy, colorful blob, full of everything and nothing at the same time.
Furthermore, negative critique doesn't have to be motivated by negative intentions. Many, if not most people, negatively criticise media because they care about them and want them to be improved, not destroyed.
The more attention I pay to this video, the more nonsensical it becomes... Not only does it barely address the topic it's supposed to explore, but when it does, it's on the most surface level possible and with no nuance to speak of.
The creator wanted to talk about one subject but in the end spoke about something completely different and I can't decide if this was done on purpose or by accident as a result of incompetence.
If you pay at least a little bit of attention, you'll see how hypocritical and contradictory the premise and execution of this video is. Some could even say that it's "toxic" and damaging to the very concept of critique.
Simply because you've made a disclaimer that this is "just your opinion" and acknowledged your hypocrisy in a way, doesn't mean that this is no longer a very poor attempt at exploration of the subject.
It goes far beyond just film-making and entertainment media. Can you imagine a world in which you are always fine however you presently are- nevermind the potential for you to be any kind of shitty person or even criminal monster? We would see terrible, self-destructive lifestyles and even lifestyles that actively harm other people be promoted as being okay, acceptable and even praise-worthy. There would be no growth, no improvement, nothing to strive for, no goal to achieve.
Apathy is death. All things come to an end, but not like this. Not me. I'll keep being negative where I need to be, if only to use that as a means to improve myself and whatever is around me.
@@eyesfullofsky9776 I guess the creator just didn't realise how deep this topic really is and couldn't come up with good argumentation to back up his misguided position.
Before I begin my actual comment, I would like to apologize in advance for my inadequate level of English proficiency. I am not a native speaker of the world's current lingua franca which unfortunately leads to me making numerous embarrassing mistakes being made whenever I attempt to communicate using this language. Whenever I am reminded of how I lack the ability to convey my thoughts in an eloquent manner, I feel as though I have committed a cardinal sin, as though every English teacher in the world is simultaneously shaking their head and sighing due to how utterly disappointed they are at me.
Although I know that saying sorry to those of you who are reading my comment will not change the fact that I fail miserably to write and speak perfect English, I am writing this as a way to deter a certain type of people who cannot stand poor English (Also known informally as Grammar Nazis) from mocking me by posting unwanted and unnecessary comments detailing my every blunder. In my humble opinion, making grammatical errors should be perfectly acceptable as native speakers should not expect non-native speakers to be able to communicate in their second or third languages eloquently. If you are able to completely understand what the other person wrote, is there really a problem with what they've written? No, because the entire concept of communication is the exchange of information between other intelligent beings, which means that no matter how the exchange of information is made, as long as the information is accurately shared there is not a fundamental issue with their ability to communicate. To see it in another way, remember that someone who isn't fluent in English is fluent in another language. When you think about it this way, isn't it impressive for someone to speak a second language in any capacity? Having empathy and respect are qualities that are sorely missing for far too many people these days, especially on the internet.
That being said, I am aware that not all netizens who correct others are doing it to ridicule and shame. There are some who do so with the intent to help others improve and grow. However, displaying the failures of other people publicly will cause the person who is criticized to feel negative emotions such as shame and sadness due to the fact that their mistake has been made obvious which severely undermines the point they were trying to make in spite of their unfamiliarity with the English language. In most circumstances people are not looking for language help when they post anything online. Most people just want to enjoy themselves and have a good time on the internet which is why I would not encourage correcting other people regardless of your intentions. If you really do want to help others with their spelling or grammar, I would highly recommend you to help via messaging privately because not only will you not embarrass anyone, you can also go more in-depth with your explanation which I'm sure the other person will greatly appreciate if they want help, but I digress. I know that I've written a bit of an essay, but I hope I've made my points clear.
Anyways, here is the comment I wanted to make:
shid And coom,
i dont think the creator ever said that we shouldn't criticize, just that a lot of it tended to be skewed heavily towards negativity when critizism should and can encapsulate so much more, and that the way we engage with media is stilted becuase of this. There is as much value in analyzing why a scene works as there is in analyzing why a scene doesn't.
@@DecemberDaydreams But he ignorantly assumes that negative criticism comes from bad intentions and brushes it off as worthless and damaging. I have no idea how he came to that conclusion; vast majority of people expresses negative criticism because they care for something and they see it as the only way to have their voices heard and have a positive impact in the end.
Sometimes giving someone a slap on the wrist is not enough and a slap straight in the face is what's really needed.
Delicate, "positive" criticism won't always work, in fact it will probably rarely work, especially when it comes to big companies.
The YMS Lion King video does have catharsis, but there’s a lot in there about filmmaking. The original Lion King had care and craft, Adam addressed the beauty of the original. He also showed how the elements of the remake removed the quality from the original. I appreciate the original film more because of him.
You say “Is this all criticism is?” in relation to that video, and I say “If so, we’re lucky”
I don't think that he actually watched it.
YMS of the bestiality fame?
@@sierotkamarysia4199I didn't know there were still morons who believed this.
1. How dare you reduce YMS's Lion King live action review to "is this all there is?". He literally spent half the video saying how the original is better, as a lens for why the "live action" failed. Funny how there's a space for both.
You're literally saying he's doing criticism wrong. How about you do your own thing and let these people who are successful because their work resonates do the same, and see how that works out for you?
2. Toxic positivity makes bank on this platform too, and it can be just as annoying.
P.S. Chris Stuckmann is literally trying to be a director, so if he keeps doing negativity, other directors and agents in the industry won't like him, and reputation is everything in showbiz. He's not "cleansing" criticism, it's a business/career decision.
YMS gives good criticism, it's his presentation that I personally dislike, he acts like a jerk then defends himself for acting like a jerk. He tried explaining why him calling things "for babies" isn't insulting and why people shouldn't take it as an insult and his defense was "if someone called something i liked for babies i wouldn't be offended" which I don't think I need to explain why that is a childish response that lacks understanding of the idea that others people feel differently than you. The guy just rubs me the wrong way.
@@CaterpillarFetus The idea that nuance means an even balance of positive and negative is blatantly naive. Not everything is half good, half bad as you imply. There's not really a balance to be had when a thing has more good aspects than bad, or vice versa. I might even go so far to say that a balance is nearly impossible, otherwise why evaluate anything, why praise or criticize if we can boil it down to a balance?
Also no, it's a core example of his, and I'm simply pointing out why his example is bad at best, and disingenuous at worst.
"Is this all there is?" Give me one "negative" channel, and I'll show you 500 corpo shills sucking Hollywood off, paid or for free. Games and film journalism is nearly all advertising anyway, so it takes balls to be an honest critic.
Finally, the idea that I worship negativity is stupid. Where the hell did you get that? A lot of the people I watch have more to say than "thing good, thing bad, here's the percentage". Actual nuance is accepting that everything we consider good may have bad aspects and vice versa. I respect the opinion better when a person can give me a consistent take. Hell, I might not agree, but if you can articulate well, it's an pinion worth being out there.
The fact is that positivity is less risky to project, especially for films is that there's an economic incentive. Negativity ragebait clicks are PEANUTS compared to what studios (for films and games) are willing to offer for critics to suck their dicks. Again using Chris Stuckmann as an example, he is not critical anymore precisely because of the financial motivation. Fact is, if someone is being critical, there is less chance that they have the studios' dicks down their throats. Also, the more critical reviewers are also often the first to readily give praise if there is anything praiseworthy. Look at YMS. Anyone who's all praise WITHOUT ELABORATION just makes them more likely to be a shill for corpos.
tl;dr Miss me with that weakass, halfbaked, terrible fucking opinion.
*I love when meeptop said "It's criticizin' time!" and criticized all over the UA-cam reviewers. Truly one of the criticisms of all time.*
_"Truly one of the critics of all time"_
*-Jack Saint*
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ _6/5_
*_"One of the videos of all time."_*
well said
This video really makes you FEEL like meeptop.
criticized all over the place!
This is like watching a internal existential crisis and I appreciate it.
Let's hope he'll be able to come to his senses one day...
@@Kernwadiwhat?
I see a lot of UA-camrs who straight up refuse to criticize anything. The worst movies ever made these people will never say one bad thing about. I see way more videos like that than I do on people being negative
@@TheFAE_Plush angry Joe.
@@TheFAE_Plushhe got ya there, Angry Joe is a pretty accurate one.
@@TheFAE_Plush Even considering for a second that it’s impossible for a creator to shill anything they consume is how shallow, uninformed videos like this are made.
@@WL1264 What? I just watched his new Indiana Jones review and he clearly didn't like it. Actually you can see a lot of his reviews of films and games with a text "Angry Review" on a thumbnail and that's how you know this is negative review.
That sounds like a shallow, ignorant and childish habit.
I feel like the main thing to take from this video is that there's constructive criticism and destructive criticism. Use your words to help the field improve, not just tear it down. That includes naming what works and what doesn't✌️
What's the point of constructive criticism if the studios making the movie doesn't listen to anyone ?
Although you are right in pointing out some studios will release anything that will gain them quick buck, I still think making viewers expectations and understanding higher of film industry as a whole can lead to studios having to elevate their craft to meet them. (humongus copium but hey✌️)
Anyone can say film bad, but I enjoy videos that inspire me to create better stuff as well. If anything those videos can actually give you something valuable, unlike the films they often discuss.
@@boogerbeans Sometimes do they listen. They sure as hell listened with the Sonic design.
@@theflickster just that one time?
That is actually one of the points that make Ryan George's Pitch Meetings so entertaining for me. He points out actual plot holes or writing choices that don't make too much sense even in films I actually really like, and he does it in a humorous manner that feels more like a comedic roast than actual insult.
Things should always be criticized because that’s how things get better. That’s my opinion.
Not just your opinion, it's fact.
Amen.
Nutin but faxx
If said things need improvement, sure. But so much great stuff still gets criticized when it doesn’t need to be. I feel like no one can enjoy anything anymore because there’s no much constant negativity.
Pretty gay not gonna lie
People have a right to critique something anyway they see fit,given it's all subjective and opinion driven.
If I see something that's utter garbage I'm going to point out why I feel it's utter garbage
It's bad since it draws more eyes on bad things and fewer eyes on good things, so that's why we get more bad films.
@@Siegfried5846
I disagree. Pointing out mistakes in a film helps producers figure out where they went wrong and helps them to grow in their work
Calling everything wonderful keeps the trash coming
@@lindaeasley5606 No, it would be good if bad films weren't spoken about at all. Fans of Chris Stuckmann and Jeremy Jahns go to see those films to be armchair critics.
Sure are, but some people suck ass at criticizing or addressing their grivences, the "way you see fit" has many implications that you're doing it very sloppily.
Do you need a license to be a critic?@@Siegfried5846
Dont you think this is something that goes in both directions?
There are loads of channels that will slap a "10/10", "PERFECT" or "MASTERPIECE" with big red arrows and pikachu face thumbnails on damn near every review that they do. Channels that like twice a month publish a "THIS MOVIE CHANGED MY LIFE".
For every cinema sins on youtube there is a cinema wins and some of them are even good at their job
I get so tired of seeing "masterpiece" thrown around carelessly. That is a very strong word. There are movies I like, movies I think are better than the ones being called masterpieces, that I wouldn't necessarily call masterpieces.
There are definitely various critics out there who are just far too cynical and uptight for my tastes.
Title: Film Criticism Should Not Be Negative
Thumbnail: several respected film critics with the word TRASH all over them
He NEEDS money bro how else are the bisexual lights gonna be paid for???
A sad truth is that negativity is the backbone of interesting conversation. But it doesn’t have to be! In fact, some of my favorite video essays are about hope and positivity. We, as a team effort, could change the field of UA-cam Criticism forever
You and his video have not said a single reason why negativity is bad
@@EpicDiscovery truth be told, I wrote this comment a while ago and I don’t entirely know what I’m referring to here. I think I was talking about how lots of movie reviews nowadays are just “movie bad and here’s a 15 minute long video telling you why.” Movies the critics deem as mediocre are even worse because, either for comedic intent or their snobby arthouse persona, they’ll say something along the lines of “this was definitely a movie” and “this movie made me feel nothing. There is nothing here” I used to like 24 Frames of Nick but he fell into the same critic trap with the Mario Movie and he and a lot of others made the very (in my opinion) flimsy claim that a movie HAS to have a story to be interesting and that this was what he called an “ad movie.” It’s true that the Mario Movie’s story is pretty underdeveloped and it’s true that it’s mostly references, but I thought that the references were hidden very tastefully and not in your face. There were the obvious ones that an average mario fan would get and then there are the ones for the die-hard fans of nintendo. So, yes, while I should probably refrain from making the blanket statement that “positivity good, negativity bad”, I do stick by my point that negativity can be annoying and sometimes it can even alienate people from your channel. Positivity should definitely be used in these videos in my opinion, whether it be in the form of suggestions of what the movie could have done better or just having a calmer demeanor rather than “THIS MOVIE SUCKS” y’know?
@@EpicDiscovery I implied it and I think something in the video implied it as well, although I’m not entirely sure on that cos I don’t remember
@@zogwort1522 It could be. If you balance it correctly. I didn’t, as this was a blanket statement, so allow me to rephrase:
Film criticism should not be ENTIRELY negative. If someone has problems with a movie they can definitely express those. If their problems take up the majority of the movie, they should still try to find some kind of silver lining, just to be fair to it. It’s yin and yang, you need balance for a good critique. Maybe this is my personal taste, but I feel nitpicks should be their own section of the video seeing as they aren’t major and don’t contribute a lot the film being bad. They aren’t really valid “critiques” if you catch my drift.
@@zogwort1522 fair enough, but they should at least try to find one. If they can’t that’s okay, it’s probably a really horrible movie. Those would be the bottom of the barrel “January movies.” I think the biggest problem is that a lot of them are just pretentious. Google defines that word as and with those movies they deem “mediorce” they give such unnecessary nihilistic commentary about them. “This movie made me feel empty” “there is nothing to this movie” “this movie is soulless” etc. They do this for either comedic effect or because they want to sound superior and at first it’s kind of funny but my god does it get annoying quick. Movies are entertainment! They’re inconsequential to your life! They don’t need this. It’d be different if the film was blatant or disguised propaganda but it almost never is so the world wouldn’t be affected in any profoundly negative way
One of the things I've found the most frustrating is that over the past few years, as the cynicism and negativity have taken over the discourse, people in general have begun to actively hate conversation and nuance, and just want to be patronized. I’ve written comments on movie-related posts on YT/FB/other platforms that were just a few sentences… maybe a few short paragraphs at most. Something that would realistically take less than 60 seconds to read and understand, and took maybe 5 minutes out of my day (typically while I'm sitting on the toilet or having my morning coffee) to write.
But rather than engage, people will just mindlessly dismiss them with sarcastic comments like _“Ugh, some loser doesn’t have a job, I guess”_ or _“Wow, good luck with that novel, nerd, hahaha”_ because I dared write something beyond the circle-jerk of single-sentence _“OMG, [MOVIE] SUCKS, LOL!”_ comments like everyone else. And this even happens in social-media groups I'm in specifically devoted to discussing movies, which blows my mind.
And it's more depressing than annoying to read those comments, because it's telling me that people aren't engaging with cinema as art anymore, and that too many people just have nothing of value to add to the conversation, and just want to mindlessly tear down something. And that's unfortunately emblematic of a great deal of modern discourse when it comes to art and film.
You must have dogshit taste
You’d see it less if you actively sought out content where people said “thing is good. Me like thing.”
have you ever considered thats because there is way more badly acted, shitty written tv shows and movies today ?
When more people get frustrated, maybe dont dismiss it ?
I think we've had somewhat different experiences, youtube channels that mailny focus on film analysis has a lot of intresting comment threads with people taking the artform seriously along withthe videos themselves being super intresting.
Off the top of my head i reccomend "hello future me", "Sage's rain" and "Savage books" they all make a variety og videos deconstructing characters and stories or giving advice on how to create good movies. I love all their channels. If you want indept discussions of film i higlhy recomend checking out ^^
@@DecemberDaydreams It's way easier to just assume that every critique video is cinema sins-tier garbage though.
If you go back and watch all the old Siskel and Ebert reviews here on YT, you'll see just how much of the good and bad things we say about movies coming out today were true of movies coming out in the 70s, 80s, and 90s.
- Saying it's just your opinion doesn't mean what you say shouldn't be criticized.
- Admitting to your hypocrisy doesn't make you less hypocritical, or change the fact that it's bad to be a hypocrite.
- A lot of bad movies have been made the last 5 years. They should be called out as bad movies.
Except a lot of movies in the past 5 years weren't that bad.
a lot of bad movies have been made in the last 10 years, a lot of bad movies have been made in the last 20 years, SURPRISE BAD MOVIES HAVE ALWAYS EXISTED!
i think a lot of this new market for trashing movies is that hollywood has been shitting out trash for decades now its more enjoyable to watch the byproduct of new critics analyzing and deconstructing what theyre feeding us
I might agree the critic department has also been oversaturated but honestly I can't place blame on that because this might just be a chicken and the egg scenario
I do think that the issue is a bit more rooted in the alt-right propaganda machine that is part of the Internet cycle.
I do think that’s part of the reason. I also think another part of the reason is much simpler. Humans just love drama and negativity
@@drstrangelove307 That's a stretch but I understand the intent. As much as I am inclined to agree even if there is a fire there's also people who didn't care about tossing leaves on that fire further fueling the issue.
Is the alt right going to look for every excuse to be mad? Yes but that doesn't mean the carelessness of handling the issues and the damages from that all while not caring about feeding them more fuel isn't an issue. Would they probably have looked for non issues even without that fuel? Yes but the issue is they wouldn't have converted as many people and got as far as they did had they not been mad to feel righteous in their holy war.
Personally I've seen terrible reviews from both political sides so I can't see it. Sure the right is a bigger part of that but they happen to be the side that keeps being given bad shows and movies that further enforce their mindset of victimhood they are seeking.
The answer believe it or not is to just send these messages better and that would have incredible effects. Maybe it wouldn't fix the problem; but thats an unrealistic desire. It (these political messages or themes) is too often in media given little time to explore and often contradicting the material around it. Some part of the blame inevitably lays with the people who keep doing this.
@@drstrangelove307 go touch grass, wow that was a fucking atrociously bad take you just spewed
I don't disagree that there is lots of negative reviews but there's also tons of overly positive reviews and a plethora of channels that never give criticism because they are scared of their audience getting mad at them. Toxic positive is real and just as bad.
I honestly don’t see that. Full of negativity I’m seeing.
The ironic thing about this video is that it'll probably get picked up by the UA-cam algorithm because of the reasons you listed in it. This video is, for the most part, negatively talking about the negativity in most video essays on UA-cam.
Fandom - mindlessly loving something
Hatedom - mindlessly hating something
Criticism - mindfully examining something
The critic's opinion will obviously affect their work, but their work isn't about their opinion, their work is about the art.
You watch a critic to get their opinion, that’s the point.
Who's "their"?
What about the one where we just like stuff casually?
Try telling that to the retards that hate Netflix Resident Evil
Even then, fandom is not the same as mindlessly accepting everything you're given. You can be a fan of certain aspects of a work or certain works in a series without being barred from criticising the ones you think are flawed.
You did the YMS lion king review a great disservice.
Literally. Half the video is dedicated to how amazing the original is. Yms is not a mindless hater.
FINALLY someone talked about this. Film "criticism" on internet is so frustrating. You go expecting to have a fun time sharing and discussing different views, but instead you get people trying to PROVE why something is a masterpiece or a complete garbage. It seems like there's no middle term.
That's why I've been trying to get more and more away from any conversation about movies that looks negative. I can't stand it anymore. Twitter banned me the other day for no reason and I got a little desperate. But now I see it was a blessing, because is one less thing getting on my nerves. Every time a new movie came out, there was always someone making polemic tweets about the script or the CGI to engage other people to hate on it too, as if script and CGI were the only things that could make a movie fun. It was that or the hallucinated fans hyping the fuck out of everything. And on UA-cam I just started blocking every channel the algorithm would recommend with this type of negativity content, because they mess real bad with my head and my expectations for new things.
I miss when I didn't use social medias. It was lonely not talking to anyone about new movies and TV shows, but at least I could watch them and make my own mind in piece. Now I almost feel guilty for loving The Rings Of Power, for instance, because some people just adore to hate that show on every opportunity they get, and I get really pissed every time I see them using words like "woke" as an argument.
Holy shit, I feel the EXACT same. I always thought I was alone with that ;-;
I feel the exact same. There's some movies out there that I've seen people overhype as the best thing ever or overhate as the worst film to exist and when I watch it to form my opinions on it, I think, "Well that was average. Not bad, not good, but kinda mid." And there's nothing inherently wrong about that either.
Yeah! Like, what does it even mean to be "woke"? What stupid kind of word is that?
Woke is rarely used in proper terms anymore
@@armyofuno8196 exactly
Completely agree! I think the best example of the yin-yang you described is RLM. They show that yes they can absolutely shit on some movies, but also show that they care about the art form by giving thoughtful reviews. ALSO, the most important point is that they have fun while doing so, which has sort of been left out of a lot of movie reviews in the past few years. Loved the video!
I love RLM, they tend to disagree with each other on films which is fantastic
They always have fun. Except when they review Star Trek Picard.
Yeah RLM compared to something like mauLer or Critical Drinker is a big difference to me. RLM always feel like they're having fun, goofing off, and generally treat their opinion as an opinion. A lot of these newer 4 hour essayists seem cynical and depressed to be talking about this stuff and treat movies like a weird math equation where there's a right and wrong answer to whether a movie is good.
@@Tribrachidiumheraldicum Which is interesting considering that I think MauLer and the Drinker were very influenced by RLM and the Plinkett reviews, but they're pretty lackluster compared to them.
@@Tribrachidiumheraldicum Have you seen any of Maulers critiques? He praises even tfa in the moments it shines. Also, he has a series of unbridled praises. Same with the Drinker, he has a series of the Drinker recommends, where he recommends good movies.
Lets not forget that rlm is one of the most negative bunch. Even if they didnt start the George Lucas r*ped my childhood, they still contributed to it massively.
The point that we look back on previous eras of filmmaking and only look at the best and most significant films of said eras really resonated with me. There have always been bad, filler movies with nothing to say and no reason to talk about, but the thing is, they do fade with time. Even though it certainly does feel like Hollywood only makes good movies by mistake now, in 10, 20, 30 years, nobody will remember the fluff and garbage like Jurassic World Dominion and Rise of Skywalker outside of occasionally one off conversations that'll mostly boil down to "hey that movie existed." Whereas the good movies that really meant something to people. I imagine a film like Top Gun: Maverick will still have people talking about it well into the future just like the original one did. There will always be bad movies, but there will also always be good movies. We just need to remember that fact, and I think we will all be a lot more satisfied and content with the world of entertainment, even if it does seem hopeless at times.
You think people will forget TROS, or TLJ, or the Jurassic World trilogy, or Sark Fate, or any of these other movies that have taken beloved, classic properties and run them into the ground with terrible sequels? They should never be forgotten, they should (and will) forever stand as a testament to hubris.
If a response to something is "It sucks" and then proceed to argue with strangers who enjoy said thing , that person is the issue not the movie or the people who enjoy the film
We're all familiar with self-styled "critics" (amateur and pro) who feel compelled to declare everything either The Greatest Thing Ever or The Worst Thing Ever. They're the ones who don't have anything in particular to say about the movies themselves because they don't know (or care to know) how to observe and elucidate, only to opine. It's all about their feelings. (Like certain politicians...) That's why they're on UA-cam. It's a platform for self-promotion, not for reasoned analysis. Whether somebody "likes" or "doesn't like" something ought to be the least interesting thing they have to say about it. If not, who cares? Your opinion is worth nothing unless you can show how you arrived at it.
Great video! I really enjoyed it! I've definitely shared in your thoughts whenever consuming some of these reviews. (or even when making some of my own)
That algorithim is really the biggest problem for this whole thing, I know channels that should be much bigger that are mostly positive people but are'nt because they prefer not to get into rants and be overly negative. UA-cam rewards people who go overboard with it and it is real irritating. Combined with the anxiety of if you don't make a video consistently fast then you risk losing all your hard work and you have an algrathom that can be very hard to please.
Describing the algorithm as an entity that “attempts at every moment to negate the user’s impulse control” is so accurate 😂
If you cannot be negative, then you cannot be positive either. So you are clearly not capable be being a critic without having the full range of criticisms.
@@zogwort1522if you do nothing but give positive criticism, then you cannot properly review films because your opinion is worthless, because an honest review will point out the positive as well as the negative.
Did you even watch the video? He's not saying that film critics have to be positive. He's saying they have to be genuine, not overexaggerating their negative observations.
I definitely start out by watching and seeking out critiques of media I love, so you’re on the money with it being about validating and recognising art. However that same path lead me down a loophole of schadenfreude where I see the videos on notoriously bad shows and enjoy seeing what makes them as bad as they are.
Unfortunately the lines are getting blurred more and more these days, sometimes even on purpose. Fantastic video as always, Meep!
How did you write the title for this video and not spot the inherent contradiction? "Criticism should not be negative". Clearly you take issue with negativity, likely because it makes people not feel good, but that's like saying fire should not be hot because it burns me, and who wants to be burned, amirite? Unfortunately, Fire is hot by definition, just like criticism is inherently negative. Fire and heat are the opposite of ice and cold, just like criticism and negativity are the opposite of praise and positivity. So, then, what even are you trying to get at? Do you just not want people to be negative ever? May as well have titled your video "People Should Not Criticize Film" if you're going at it from the purely positive angle. If your issue is that people are being too outrageous, hyperbolic, or vitriolic about film criticism, then you should have maybe titled your video "People Need to Chill TF Out" or something. Again, let me be clear, saying as robotically as possible that "Batman getting back into Gotham when the whole city is on lockdown, he's in the middle of nowhere, he has no money or gadgets, and is trying to save the city but takes time to make a likely-oil lit fire in the shape of a giant bat symbol for seemingly no reason is a major plot hole and a problem with the movie" is not outrageous, spiteful, or mean. It is criticism, it is negative, and it factually exists in the movie. Whether you accept it or not, like it or not, or understand it or not, it is there, it can be pointed out and criticized as a flaw in as spiteful, respectful, or comedic a manner as you want.
Who cares? Watching harsh reviews of bad products is entertaining. If people treat overly negative reviews as serious analysis, that's their fault.
Why can’t serious reviews be overly negative? What if it is a terrible movie, shouldn’t it be overly negative?
By your logic, a serious analysis of an objectively bad product can’t exist.
Consciousness of that negativity hits even harder when you actually start to work on film projects and see all the hard work that creators have to put even on the shittiest movie.
It becomes important to have critical voices. A lot of care goes into filmmaking, and criticism can be useful. Pointing out shortcomings in films can be for the love of film. These flaws prevented said film from being its best. Filmmakers can be wary of hurdles and resolve them, making their art better. Unfortunately that’s not all criticism.
If you aren’t pushed to do better as a result of that criticism, you shouldn’t work in the industry.
o.o
@@kyrrotidoesn't most things have flaws I think few things are perfect
@@nineinchthread
Theres a difference between a not amazing, but pretty good steak and a half raw, rotten piece of meat cooked in rancid butter.
This dangerously implies that critics who make negative reviews only do so because it’s popular and that people who would otherwise enjoy the film, now hate it because a UA-cam thumbnail and critic said it was trash. This completely negates the fact that the content may genuinely be trash in their subjective opinion, contrary to what the film’s or series’ popularity would suggest, or a viewer LOVED the film and simply WATCHED the critique to see if the negative points presented actually resonates with their experience or not. And walked away still loving the film after the video. Give people enough credit to know whether or not they like something. They’re entitled to say something sucks if they think it does. Your unreasonable fear that saying a movie is bad equates to killing the movie industry is naive and misplaced. It’s okay, the industry will survive and improve as this is nothing new.
Edit: Inserted [naive].
I mean, most content is replacement level, and if you want people to pay extra for said content (ie go to a theater instead of just watching something streaming), then yeah, most stuff does not meet that standard and there is nothing wrong with pointing it out. Also, praise only has value based on how hard it is to attain (this particularly frustrated me in The Menu, if the critic never gives bad reviews, then her voice never would have had a chance to launch anyone’s career).
You have failed to support even the title of the video. Your audience should be ashamed of themselves, and your comment section makes me fear for the future of creativity
are YMS and Chris really the best examples?
Right? Yms is always explains why something doesnt work for him. He is not a mindless hater.
Good, thoughtful video. I appreciate in particular your nuanced take on the Plinkett videos, which often catch strays as being the nadir of bad UA-cam film criticism but are actually very articulate and detailed works of criticism, even with their flaws.
Though I want to throw a quick shoutout to Shampoo, which is actually a beloved movie in cinephile circles and Hal Ashby something of an unsung hero of 70s Hollywood (or at least lesser sung). Your point about recency bias in that section still absolutely stands.
Could you imagine if everyone started posting videos about how the room is actually a triumph
I literally saw someone say that there's no scientific way to prove that The Godfather is better than The Room. No, I'm not kidding.
@@jeremyusreevu237 holy shit lmao people are hilarious
I do find it weird Chris Stuckmann is included in the thumnail as he stopped rating and even critizing movies
Same with Jeremy Jahns. Those two are easily way more level headed and constructive than basically 90-95% of all movie essayists and critics on UA-cam right now. Stuckmann even openly admitted he doesn't have as much fun ripping into movies anymore because he wanted a break from having to watch something he dislikes for internet views
@@icedcapplord710 as a diehard star wars fan Jeremy Jahns gets my respect for his "Sorry George Lucas" video
He admitted he had a share in all the hate George Lucas got to the point Lucas gave up and sold Star wars to Disney
Of course Chris and Red letter media stopped because it's not profitable anymore to shit on the star wars prequels because many GOOD videos on the prequels called out their hypocrisy and the prequel fans grew up and rightfully defended Lucas and his craft
I'm confused. Stuckmann does critique movies. It is his whole channel.
@@CDLatin He rarely is critical anymore, he mostly reviews movies he likes nowadays and at most he'll give one or 2 constructive criticisms.
@@jaeblack4752... so he still critiques movies... if you watch a movie and only talk about what works in the movies favor it is still a movie/ review or critique.
"I want to live in a golden age of cinema where movies are good"
How do you think we get there if not by criticizing shitty movies?
Love your take on the recency bias, and feel that is very true about music. Every time I hear someone say that ‘Rap isn’t what it used to be’ I wonder if they forgot about acts like 2 Live Crew or Vanilla Ice
Vanilla Ice was criticised and attacked often for not being a proper rapper! He even had his royalties stolen off him!!!
So do you really know that much yaself!
@@crizzhutch1066 Yes Crizz, and that Death Row records sent a guy over who held him off of a balcony for more $$. I think the point you are missing here is that people who find that to be the Golden Age of Rap music conveniently forget the sub par artists of the time, while also overlooking the better artists of today in favor of the Vanilla Ice equivalents of 2022
@@eliasconnolly1973 I would say that those were the golden days, as with so much of the entertainment industry!!!
These days, everything is produced too fast, so there is little thought or care put into it. Just get it out get the money in and on to the next one! As so much is just treated as the product!
How many silly rappers, keep attacking Eminem, yet none have the rhyming ability of him!
Not everything was better back in the 90's but the quality was higher and so were peoples standards!
You can name two terrible acts, but ignore the majoirty of rap at the time which was very good.
Today it's quite literally the opposite. There is far more trash than there is good especially in rap.
@@TallicaMan1986 I can also name the Tag Team or Kid Rock or Too $hort or even Puff if you want me to keep going. The point I am making is that 20 Years from now I can point to artists like J. Cole, Denzel Curry, and Kendrick when making the same argument, and forget about Lil Pump or the Island Boys. That is the same point this video makes about recency bias and why I found it interesting
If you make a good film, you'll get a good review, including from YMS, RLM and other "comedic reviewers". There aren't swathes of great films being brought down by overly negative reviews.
The review community is making more entertaining and often more insightful material than much of the stuff coming out of Hollywood or streaming generally. And it often has insights beyond the realm of film. I think this new artform should be celebrated.
I'm sure there's a lot of off point, low quality reviews out there but every artform has it's share of dross so nothing new there. But there's plenty of great reviewers who aren't just entertainers but are actually very good at reviewing. There's more talent in this field than there ever has been. And there's plenty of fantastic films too. So have another drink and a bong and relax. It's not a problem.
💯! Exactly…it’s not that cosmic…
@@Blakmagic88 the cosmic???
Did you watch the video? Because he agrees with you (he literally said so of the stuff you said verbatim). His point wasn't "stop doing negative film criticism" it was "why is negative criticism so popular?" his problem with it isn't that negative reviews exist but that negative reviews are the biggest reviews even though the reason people watch and review films is because they like films as an artform and want them to get better, so why are the biggest reviews negative? When we know positive reinforcement works better and would help the movie industry improve more. meeptop articulates this way better than I ever could in a comment, so have another drink and a bong and actually watch the video before commenting
No, not at all, negative reviews is pouplar as ppl have a negative mindset and mental disorders who getting fueld by this shitty channels. RLM atleast have some purpose as they are damn funny and can argue for theyr take.
30 bad listeners for now
“My favourite reviewer is chris stuckman” video off
I absolutely _love_ negative reviews where much of the ire is directed at the directors/writers saying the stupidest things in interviews with a shit-eating grin on their face, as if they know what they're doing. Gotta be one of my favourite genders.
But seriously, that's what I think makes a lot of this content. You don't see many people going after experimental directors whose new ideas don't land, or humble writers who are just doing their best and will address criticism in an agreeable manner. I think most of us will have a ton of respect for people like that, even if we don't like their work. Having someone wealthy with a nice punchable face who makes the most milquetoast shit imaginable, won't listen to reason and comes up with excuse after excuse for us to dog-pile onto is just... *chef's kiss*
YMS is great, he constantly talks about films he loves, like in his top ten lists, and he's constantly trying to get people to watch more underground films that they may not have heard of before.
Contradicts the point of his video - Check...
Beneath the Mask plays in the background - Check...
Refenreces to old authors and/or film makers - Check...
"It's just my opinion please leave me alone" - Check...
Criticising something is not inherently negative. If something is worth criticising then it means it can be improved. That thing can already be good but can be made better. Criticism is how you improve works.
How can the plinkett reviews have aged poorly lol?
If things are bad then people should say their bad
Yeah and what if said things AREN’T bad and people are just narrow minded, hateful, nasty asswipes?
I have stopped watching overly negative views specifically because I’m trying to avoid things that make me angry. We are all on a rock floating in a fucking void like why does it matter that the new Star Wars sucks ass? I can simply not like things.I don’t need UA-camrs to tell me I’m right about my opinion.
Same here, mental health is more important then to be right, after i stoped following all this Negativ shitty channels, i actualy turned around and like Star Wars for what it is now.
This is about as unnuanced as the average movie criticism video. The fact that we're on a rock floating in a fucking void doesn't mean we have to be apathetic or nihilistic.
You can also simply not like things and not need UA-camrs to tell you you're right while deriving entertainment from their videos.
It's great that you're avoiding things that make you angry but that doesn't mean you have to pretend you live in a vacuum or project whatever you have going on onto the rest of the human race.
The problem is that most new content is produced by an industrial system therefore most is actually trash and not art.. perfectly accepavle to me in this era that most art is ravaged because most art that is consumed by the mainstream is producer and money fueled and ends up dumbed down
It's never occurred to you that the art itself might merit positive or negative criticism based upon it's, you know, merits? It's not the job of a critic or reviewer to be nice or mean, unless they've chosen a character or persona that depends upon those limits.
And this video belongs about five years ago at least. Criticism now isn't even in this format anymore, it's guys like Mauler and the EFAP crew, and you don't seem to be aware of the shift.
Now there is a gradient of criticism that runs from hollow grifting and anger farming to highly logical and evidence based analysis, and every stop in-between. Consensus opinions are formed in multi hour crossover live streams connected to fan forums such as discord and reddit. There's a whole structure to this beast beyond simple video essays.
“I'd rather be handicapped than a communist.”
-Bilbo Baggins
"let people enjoy new movies" ok i enjoy critical analysis and being hater.
Idk. I guess I don't see the issue. How are you supposed to have a well defined understanding of quality if you don't have something to contrast it to? Tearing something apart is valuable because it allows you to look at the guts and mechanics. Movies are very complex things that require thousands of elements to work in cohesion. Perhaps some channels are too gleefy or vitriolic in their disparagement of media; however, film has always had its fair share of cynical cash grabs that aren't really deserving of the soft gloves with which you'd handle an art students final peice.
idk what's wrong with yall, I can appritiate art by its own merits and form my own opinions. I don't even think that xotiine is that negative. For example, YMS is featured in the thumbnail, and while he can be harsh, he is completely fair, and doesn't do any misleading stuff like you mentioned
So what do u do when u find everything wrong with a movie? So what if it’s negative
Ironically enough, this video is probably the most doomer take I've seen on both the film industry and criticism.
Like, legitimately dude, maybe you should take a break if you haven't already?
My ability to enjoy criticism here on UA-cam, especially film criticism, is waning. Creators have left nuance at the bus stop and go to the extremes almost always because that’s what gets views. The art of criticism, the writing, the perception, the sharing of a subjective experience, is left out as a result. It’s sad.
We still have the written word thankfully. There are a lot of great writers out there who make a living from film criticism, people like Matt Zoller Seitz, Christy Lemire, Odie Henderson, and A.O. Scott. I dig these people and their work.
First time viewer here. I really dig this video and I appreciate that you made it. Big Ups!
The whole “every critic on this website is low-quality” argument is just a massive self-report for people who don’t bother to put any effort into curating the content they watch. I’m not going to blame a fast food restaurant when someone who goes there every day complains that they’re now in poor health when there’s a healthy alternative across the street.
Maybe I’m watching the wrong channels.. but I never see much people critiquing themes, Author intent Vs Critic Intent, the meaning of the movie, and the nuances that one can really dig into. That’s personally what I love to do after reading or watching something. I just really never get that from UA-cam
Honestly, I think there's something to this. If criticism has been flanderized in this way who's to say films won't from moving to streaming? It is stupidly hard to find good critics on youtube.
I highly recommend Implicitly Pretentious and Hello Future World in this regard. The former focuses more on comic book media but he is very in depth and invested in thematic storytelling and drawing from the finer nuances a lot of video essayists tend to overlook or ignore. His Spider-Man and Batman videos are especially incredible dissections
Lindsey Ellis and Dan Olson offer deep insights into movies. you should check them out
@@krustyknight2943 thank you very much! I'll do just that! Really appreciated!
@@icedcapplord710 thank you for those! Being a lifelong comic reader it should be perfect!
I dont watch a lot of video essays anymore, for a lot of the reasons listed in this video. But this video was awesome, it articulated what I have been feeling about film criticism and discourse and I loved how you ended the video. Thank you for this!
There a dope video essay channel contrary to "Cinamasins" called "Cinamawins." I am all for positivity to be brought back into spaces as well as nuanced critique!
@@edgytypebeat781 l love CinemaWins , and another good channel is Natalie Gold, she does reactions but she doesn't trash any movies she watches she'll either say "It's well made but it's not something I'm a fan of" it's refreshing
I'm in a similar situation. Around 2020~2021 I realized so many of the videos about movies I was consuming on here were negative in one way or another, and usually about things I didn't even care about most of the time. As more time passed it clicked that I simply wasn't enjoying them anymore, they were actively making me feel like crap and it was just too much negativity I didn't need in my life. So I stopped watching most of my regular channels in replacement for more things that were bringing me joy and being more selective about the videos and channels I watch.
The two comments above both mention great channels, and I wholeheartedly agree with them. Watching CinemaWins after watching a lot of CinemaSins years back was the exact type of thing I was looking for, and I can't sing their praises enough. After I started my UA-cam cleanse I also starting watching movies with my enjoyment in mind regardless of the general consensus online, and usually came away liking something way more than most. Finding a channel that actively goes out of it's way to shine a light on the positives in films that so many overlook, and not making anyone feel bad for enjoying something like so many others do was so refreshing to see. Reaction videos have been more of my cup of tea too because of the sheer amount of channels that have popped up recently and there's a lot more balance in the types of movies being reviewed imo. I've only seen a handful of Natalie Gold's vids, but her energy is infectious and I really need to watch more of her. Since everyone is giving suggestions I'll recommend The Movie Buds, they focus on more female lead movies and seeing stories that they aren't the target demographic for. They're really genuine, open minded, and no matter what make an effort to point out the bad a film may have without taking away from the things they liked and how they feel about it (wow this ended up being way longer than I meant for it to be lol)
I'm basically done with Classic Hollywood Purests. They constantly ignore the good that is happening now and just want what they had back then. They constantly scream at Rise of Skywalker and Captain Marvel but forget about films like Everything Everywhere All At Once and Nope. Change is the only constant in life and art reflects life.
Its a sad commentary on the state of people’s film taste that we’re considering EEAAO and Nope to be the “see, they still make good movies!!11!” of the year
@@IJohnSmith No it isn't. It just shows that there are people like you who only value film in a very limited way.
Art reflects life hahahahahahaha.
Not that trite crap! Most movies are not art, they're a commercial product, everything everywhere was not art!
If you're main source of income is "art" then it's no longer art, just product.
Very few true artists in Hollywood anymore
@@crizzhutch1066 Hollywood has always been a commercial capitalistic money put ran by the elite for the elite. Sorry to burst your bubble.
@@toons8744 er what? Elite for the elite!!! No, Hollywood is all about money, because it costs so much to make a movie. If the "artists" were left in charge, all movies would struggle to make a profit! As the majority have no idea bout running their own lives!
You've burst no bubble here, what you've said is pretty much known by everyone! I think you're a little too impressed with yourself!
So what do you guys think makes a good review/critique?
I think it has to be digestible, precise, consistent and most of all, what many critics on UA-cam often seem to forget, *constructive*
All I see are people on a tirade, however.
“I’m too lazy to curate my own content”
I turn off "reviews" as soon as I sense they're just being "cool and edgy and quirky" and just trash the films and shows instead of providing constructive criticism.
"This is trash" is not critiquing. "This is trash because this this and this and it would have been a lot better if they did this this and that" THAT'S critiquing.
I’m glad you actually curate your own content unlike a majority of people here who claim that this is the only type of negative content that exists and reject the genre entirely.
I mean... Rings of Power was objectively garbage, I didn't think anyone argued otherwise.
Literally when you were going to say what you had to say, an ad popped up 7:00. UA-cam can be annoying like that.
I think where I really have to disagree with you is on your YMS Lion King example. Like you, I also didn't grow up with Lion King as a holy grail, perfect and untouchable. But I love YMS's review of it (far better than his shorter reviews) because he very clearly put effort into dissecting the remake's decisions, and how they were almost all downgrades. He outlined quite indisputable faults and mistakes of the 2019 version, and even though he embellished the presentation with usual, dramatized outrage, it was laid out so you could tell YMS did his research, and the level-headed criticism balanced with the emotional takes. It was compelling even to me who, again, doesn't feel strongly about Lion King's story.
If all you walked away with after watching that review was like... raw, sympathy-anger along with YMS, who *does* have strong attachments to the original Lion King, then I think you should just look closer at the work put into it and other similar reviews. Negativity, or energizing the review with hyperbolic reactions, is not mutually exclusive with making intelligent points about the media. The best reviews do both.
I recognize that you had disclaimers both for all of this video being just your perspective (kind of a given), and that you don't directly blame a RedLetterMedia or a YMS for the consequences of their popular reviews. I agree with you that plenty of their viewers could've taken the wrong things away from their videos, but when you suddenly imply that you didn't get anything out of the YMS Lion King review except impermanent emotions.. then I'm afraid you also took "the wrong things" away from his work. Or at least, you didn't engage with the contents beyond the surface-level loud voices.
You are putting too much emphasis on a guy just because he sperged out overly simplistic, sentimental drivel for a movie that ripped of Kimba the white lion.
@@marshallw1902 Well, in that review I mentioned, YMS went into changes to Scar's presentation that serve to make him more shallow, and less intelligent. YMS noted points where there are just plainly mistakes in audio.. balancing? and notes in the musical numbers. He goes over how characters' expressions have been sacrificed for an uncanny-valley "realism". These are all observations that don't require YMS to be favoring the original Lion King, unquestioningly. He doesn't leave the conversation at "the new one is unnecessary", or "new one is ugly" with no qualifications. He makes arguments, removed from personal feelings, *then* he injects his personal displeasure at what happened to a film he holds so highly. Writing off everything YMS said there as "sentimental" is misguided.
Read Oscar Wilde's The Critic as Artist. I agree that critique is an artform and if you aren't careful your negative critique can be flanderized into cynicism. I hope for a higher level of critiques and films in the future, and that can only happen when critics and artists can hold each other to a higher standard. For me a lot of the channels you listed are flawed in that their positive criticism is not treated with the same effort or depth as their negative critiques. Like you said part of it can be chalked down to negativity bias, but Id also like to think that if creators made their positive criticisms with as much thought and value maybe more people would be interested in them. Lastly, you aren't being a hypocrite by criticizing an artform you take part in; you just want to see criticism get better, and, in a lot of ways, it does need to be better right now in order to substantiate legitimate concerns about how companies are handling switching over to streaming. Being irresponsible in critique could lead to an industry oversaturated by bad movies, not just mediocre ones.
loved your dahmer video not because it was negative but because it was dripping with care and nuance! I think the best 'negative' criticism comes from a place of true love and constructive criticism. don't get too caught up in the ouroboros of the 'worth' of what you're doing, you're smart and you have perspective and obviously you care deeply for nuance! the platform could definitely use more criticism like this and I hope you continue. sometimes you have to give the alg what it wants but also make it worth people's time, sometimes some nuanced perspective in a takedown video is like taking medicine with a spoonful of sugar lol. any cultural criticism that helps people with media literacy is a godsend in this our lords year 2022 even if you gotta stoop to some clickbait now and again.
o.o
I mean YMS' Lion King video came from a place of love for the original. It simultaneously explored what made that movie so good, while exploring the ways in which the remake just didn't do it justice.
"is this what film criticism is?" I'd fucking hope so.
It's really awesome watching your channel grow so fast! Well deserved, man. I've been around since 7k. 100,000 is just around the corner
I much rather watch positive criticism nowadays than stupid hate videos.
@HyperionUltimate I said stupid hate videos, not negative criticism. That's my point.
@HyperionUltimate Soooo... You don't understand what words mean. Cool cool.
@HyperionUltimate Correct in your own imagination.
@MundaneThingsBackwards you don't control the world
Just because you're a negative fuck doesn't mean everyone else has to be cringe lord
@@FlymanMS I agree. Normal/actual criticism is what you describe. I am just so annoyed by unnecessary hate nowadays that I rather watch overly positive stuff than that.
It just drives me nuts how the people molding an entire generations perception of "good cinema" consists mostly of individuals who really don't understand movies. They have opinions and can rant for hours on end therefore credibility... completely missing intent, execution, or the finer points of an entire artform to posture about their political or social positions and sound like intellectuals. It's all such nonsense.
Personally would retitle it as "absolutely negative" just so people understand it's the absolutist stance and emotions that are core to these criticism, but that is only mild criticism I have with this video, rest slaps.
But the ironic thing is, if you retitle the video like you said, the people who need to see it the most are less likely to click on it.
The Star Wars prequel hate is a perfect example of "hate click"
They literally parrot the same talking points and they get millions of views, they're not shy about it they hifive each other on the same tired "criticisms"
"Anakin was an immature teenager"(uh because that's what he was, a boy who was told to repress being a teen)
"Obi-Wan and QuiGon should of been the same character"
"Who cares about politics"(In a new hope the first hour of the film , is extremely political as is return of the Jedi , this is more of a "selective outrage" mindset they have)
"Anakin does evil things for no reason"(His mother was murdered by tusken raiders, his motivation of doing evil things was to keep loved ones from dying which was shown in all the prequel films )
And then the "prequel hating" fans parrot it and then argue with total strangers for years over a movie they didn't like
It's really sad how easily people can be manipulated into hating something
And in another comment section here I mentioned the John Kransiski's Reed Richards Photoshopped photos in alot of these big channels thumbnails, that's false advertisement, you'd think they're fans would be offended but nope they eat up and was mad he got killed off in Multiverse of madness
@@Chuck_EL I mean... let's not pretend the prequels are good movies, even if the hate they get is over the top. But I don't think a lot of people need to be manipulated into not liking them.
@@DerMoerpler Lets not pretend like the majority of the criticism the prequels got is just flat out wrong.
You put into words so many things I’ve been feeling lately but couldn’t quite articulate. Idk if the film *industry* is going down the tubes, but an open call for less negativity in film *discourse* feels pretty appropriate at this point. To put it mildly.
Great video, super great channel, can’t wait for the next one
oh no, the industry is going downwheel....
quick ,
lets pretend everything is fine and fake positivity cuz that will sure help. i'd rather have honest negativity and valid criticsm over dishonest fake positivity for coping
My favorite part was when he failed to answer the premise of his video and then immediately contradicted it in the sentence where he attempted to. It’s kind of hilarious seeing so many people bemoaning negative critiques and then just accepting whatever anyone says so long as it’s intended to be a counter argument against said critiques:
This video is not only overly pretentious but it also falls flat with its own logic, you complain about reviewers only seeing the bad but then you claim that yms review of the lion king remake was nothing but negative when in his video he constantly praises and shows why the original lion kig got certain things right.
i liked film critics but they are so annoying and cynical most of the time, you can tell when a critic makes art because theyre more nuanced and thoughtful. yms for example, is so painfully cynical about everything that watching any content of his puts me in a bad mood. on the other hand, someone like the film drunk or anyone who actually likes movies, will critique with care and make u think about what went wrong or right.
Honestly as a passionate artist myself I understand how it can really hurt when people just completely shit on your work
But also as a passionate Hater sometimes you gonna trash
Filmento is great for nitpicking an enjoyable movie for not being directed more..."smartly". Funny thing is his ideas, how he would've done it, are usually very good! I'm subscribed to and really like his channel. However, that click- baity aspect of how his criticisms and proposed fixes are presented has always bothered me. When he doesn't like a movie, he titles the video, "Anatomy of a Failure. How to ruin..." coupled with a thumbnail exactly how you described, a picture from the movie of someone looking tortured, angry or sad and usually with the word Failure written across. Lots of YTers are designing their thumbnails like this, even those who aren't particularly negative! Despite how tacky this thumbnail design looks, I guess if you've made UA-cam your job, you gotta go where the viewers and engagement are but it's just a solid shame we're silo-ing ourselves into camps that can barely see nuance in most things. That movie either "sucked ass!" or it was "perfection! How this type of movie should be made!" If Susan Sontag, Pauline Kael Gene Siskel, Roger Ebert, Armond White or J. Hoberman had been beholden to the algorithm, I wonder how that might have compromised their film review titles, the ways in which they criticizes things they didn't like about a movie and how flowery the praise would've been for movies they loved! Would they even be able to recognize the bag aspects of an otherwise praiseworthy film for the sake of being in the camp of "loved it!"? I'm just happy we have records of millions of examples of movie reviews from over a century of motion pictures from around the world, by everyone from your serious & high-minded film intellectuals to the critics who write for local papers whose job is just to tell you if this or that popcorn thriller, romantic comedy or action blockbuster is worth a few hours of you weekend on the 2 or 3 times a year you see a movie, or not.
*claims to be against negativity*
(Spends 60% of the video talking about what he is not saying)
What's that pleasant piano music you use in every video? Appears at 0:29
I really enjoyed this video, largely because it is something I've been wrestling with myself. As one of the former contributors to a site briefly mentioned in the video, I definitely made my name on negative reviews, even if I did try to mention things also worth praising if I found them.
But I also found myself naturally growing out of that format, at least on a regular basis, because I feel like that kind of thing can be poisonous. I have said things in those videos I'm not proud of or agree with now. But even in those negative reviews, I wanted them to be informative and useful; it is easier to understand how something works from a failure than something that does it well to the point of effortlessness.
However, I know a lot of my audience don't really like this change. I still put out negative reviews, but under a different banner and as part of a more traditional review show. And I know my views have gone down because I hate clickbait titles and sensationalism (I tend ignore videos with such), but I am a row boat struggling against the edge of a waterfall. I wish there was a place for my criticism here, but I increasingly fear there isn't.
Anyway, great video, first of yours I've seen, that I think articulated these feelings very well.
I just want to say I have noticed your changes and I appreciate them. I've watched your stuff for years, and I'm one of the people who doesn't want you to feel stuck doing the same shtick.
I wouldn't be too hash on yourself for your earlier stuff as that was the culture of the time. Even in the early videos you went into the 'behind the scenes' aspects and mentioned positive aspects unlike a lot of reviewers. I wish more people were like your reviews where you go into detail about your feelings rather than just look for views [like you I avoid the sensationalist stuff like the plague]. Keep doing what your doing as your fans appreciate it.
It seems like you followed this video’s main point of “negative criticism is bad, not to say that it is bad” pretty closely. What an abomination of critical thinking.
@@user-NameName No, I give plenty of pans. But I shouldn't do them all the time because it gets old, and it was making me miserable, feeling like all I was contributing was a toxic mindset.
@@FilmBrain That wasn’t the point of the video but okay then…
I hope this video connects with people, I'm not so much concerned about movie or TV show criticisms these days, but it's still important to inform people about nuance. Whatever it is you're critiquing usually is met with nuance. Whether it be art, food, politics, religion etc not everything is black and white like most people tend to believe. With a few rare exceptions you can find something at least neutral if not positive out of something that you may have an extreme objection to
Ya know, I've been thinking of this for a while now. Especially the recency effect when I point out to people that there's just as much mixed quality as there is now. People only think that modern movies suck now since they've only seen the good stuff of the past without really thinking about it. I've been trying to make my videos overall positive about the things I enjoy or at least highlight things I like in something I don't.
There's also a trend I've noticed of really any positive reviews of anything being attacked as "shills". Your opinions are now put into little boxes of whether not they can be engaged with good faith or not.
It's funny that you mention Jurassic World Dominion since the extended cut was better in my opinion and it's a damn shame it wasn't released in theaters. You'd think the film killed the dog of every critic.
Why do I keep hearing the Willamette Parkview Mall music from Dead Rising in so many videos?
There's playing the "youtube game" which is where thumbnails feel like they need to be forced to grab from this very point of view. Then there' negativity vs postivity and for me when I tackle or have a negative thing to point out I always attempt to say how it could be improved and for postive I try to explain why it's good. There's an understanding of subjective vs objective as well that ties into this process and lots of time for some let the subjective thing fuel their arugements.
I disagree, criticism should be harsh and negative as possible. I VASTLY prefer people telling it as it is rather than the modern toxic positivity bullshit that everyone is enamoured with these days.
It's hard to want to be a writer, knowing that somebody will make a video pointing and laughing at whatever I make.
Which I don't think should be the point of criticism.
Why shouldn't film criticism be negative? Why do you get to be the moral arbiter of what film criticism should be?
Why are you moral arbiter on who can do youtube videos on stuff hmm??
@@newrudo I'm not. He's allowed to make whatever kind of video he wants to make. I'm just criticizing him for making poor arguments and not even answering the question in the title of his own video.
@@newrudo Why didn’t you ask the guy who made this video the same question?
@@wolfiewoo3371 Poor arguments such as? He literally spells it out in the video, negatitve criticism is fine if it leads to actual improvement and discussion
Rather than pandering to a "lul ur movie is woke" human centipede of fishing for cheap clicks through rage bait.
Theres not a single second in the video (that you did not watch) where he claims anything that you are saying.
I think it's true that negative reviews are more popular than positive reviews. I think you make a good point about the algorithm, BUT I don't think you draw the line between the various sorts of negative criticism. You lump it all into one thing. Some critics seemly only care to rip movies a new one and have no passion for the medium, but for instance YMS's Lion King/Old Boy reviews aren't just about the flaws of the movie in question, they're also about the merits of the movie that preceded it. You speak about negative film criticism as if it's this toxic thing that's only about wallowing in misery, but too me many of my favorite negative critics help me build an appreciation for art and the things I like. YMS's channel has recommended me nearly all of my all time favorite movies, Linzi Ellis has helped me appreciate elements in films I used to not think about ect. In my opinion a lot of popular positive criticism is some of the worst critic related content. Lots of over narrativizing, with weird clickbaitey praises such as "How X redefined what it means to be a movie" or "why x is the best movie you shouldn't see". In my opinion what makes a good critic isn't whether or not their content is sufficiently positive or negative, but whether or not it deepens you lr understanding or appreciation of films. My favorite ever underrated critic is Mathewmatosis, he discusses games and every single one of his videos broadens my understanding and appreciation
I think what you're missing is that we kind of already have the ideal scenario you wanted. Audiences are both far more engaged in and far better at critically thinking about media than ever before. And, shock twist, the reason this is the case is because of all the people "dunking" on media. It may be the case that an average viewer just wanted to watch someone dunk on a movie they also thought wasn't good, but through doing so they will inevitably learn more about the medium. I can attest to this as I started watching videos like these because I wanted to see the funny youtube man talk about dark souls 2 and wound up interested in what he was saying while still being entertained. These videos of people tearing apart movies aren't them just pointing and laughing at the film, they're actually critiquing it. Even if that person is solely negative in their videos they are likely still bringing up valid points, and you don't need to specifically offer an alternative for that observation to be valuable. These people, both the video makers and the audience, very likely aren't dunking on these things because they hate media and just like ripping it to shreds, they do it because they like and remember good media. Taking House of the Dragon as an example, every critic (and viewer, really) on the planet hated what was done with season 8 of GoT, yet they recognized the value the new show had. If audiences just wanted to dunk then they would have, but the conclusion seems pretty unanimous that the show is actually good.
Also, there is no arguing against the fact that the average quality of media has been trending downward. This is especially true of projects which are high budget and naturally get pushed to the most people. You say it as a joke but I can confirm that many of the recent movies and shows from disney are horrid affronts to their medium. Whatever the reason for this is, they are outright terrible and its fascinating to watch them compete for rock bottom. There may still be good new things coming out, but what used to be the typical floor for quality has been dropping for a long time.
Seems a little hypocritical coming from you lol but there is a difference between fair criticism and being overly negative
I mean not really? I mean yeah he is but he acknowledges his hypocrisy in like the first 3 minutes of the video though? idk I think he’s been pretty good with his criticism of movies in the past.
like, just because he’s played into that once or twice (unlike the people he’s criticizing, who have made that their entire careers) doesn’t make him a hypocrite when he calls out other people for being much worst critics
Did you even watch the first minute before commenting this?
@@restingsadface I’ve watched his videos lol and I agree he is fair in his opinions and I agree with most of not all of them. I was being a little cheeky that’s all. I do think some movies are so bad that you kind of have to talk sh*t about them. But it has to be genuinely awful.
@@ToliG123 no I didn’t, I just read the title and made a comment based on that. Because criticism is meant to be negative or at least it’s analyzing the faults or mistakes in something. So criticism will always be kind of negative. Don’t take it too seriously..
We are all hypocrites, that doesn’t make certain points any less true, it really means nothing here lol
Without a doubt a lot of these UA-camrs should not be the face of modern film criticism. There's a case that can be made for allowing them their own corner of the internet, because there's nothing inherently wrong with that, but they are at the head of this subsection of YT
There's a 10m+ view video on a certain divisive blockbuster where the entire argument is based on wildly misunderstood dialogue and "This is different to the original, therefore it is bad" without analysing why that change may have been made. I found myself disagreeing with criticisms of a film I did not like.
@@MGB_2024 Exactly. The best criticisms are not front and center. That's the problem
Idk YMS is really great because he's constantly talking about and urging people to watch great foreign and underground films, and he has a great comprehension of concepts like the manipulation of films, presenting information in unique and thoughtful ways, etc.
@@etalex7074 But what does YMS stand for? (Rhetorical question, I know what it stands for)
Edit: For all others, the name thing has been explained to me
@@officialmonarchmusic I mean that name is really nothing more than a joke. I don’t see anything wrong with a more sardonic or cynical sense of humor.