|
The Vosgian Beast posted:So this article is making the rounds http://moviemezzanine.com/putting-the-geek-to-the-plow/ The Spoony drawing makes him look like a deformed Moai head. Is this dude saying that Kyle Kallgren doesn't engage with the films he watches? Really? I can understand the criticisms he levels at some other internet personalities, but to say Kyle doesn't put effort into trying to understand a film is wrong.
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 06:11 |
|
|
rudecyrus posted:Is this dude saying that Kyle Kallgren doesn't engage with the films he watches? Really? I can understand the criticisms he levels at some other internet personalities, but to say Kyle doesn't put effort into trying to understand a film is wrong. Kyle himself (kind of) agrees. 
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 18:34
|
|
|
Kyle seems to be taking that article to heart https://twitter.com/KyleKallgren
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 18:38
|
|
|
Kyle takes way too much poo poo to heart. Poor guy needs some thicker skin.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 18:54
|
|
|
The article doesn't mention it, but one of the big reasons why these guys tend to look at films from a nitpicky, 'missing the forest for the trees' kind of way has a lot to do with how they watch a movie repeatedly specifically to scour for funny or relevant clips, as opposed to sitting down in a theater, watching the film all the way through in a single sitting, then writing a review.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 18:56
|
|
|
Robert Denby posted:The article doesn't mention it, but one of the big reasons why these guys tend to look at films from a nitpicky, 'missing the forest for the trees' kind of way has a lot to do with how they watch a movie repeatedly specifically to scour for funny or relevant clips, as opposed to sitting down in a theater, watching the film all the way through in a single sitting, then writing a review. Which you see in a lot of the shows where they actually see a current movie in a theatre and then record something immediately thereafter or shortly thereafter, like Midnight Screenings, Sibling Rivalry or Projector. There you do get more of a dialog that engages with the film as a whole and you have a more balanced approach, unless the movie is spectacularly bad and they just start riffing on it. There, if someone nitpicks something, it's usually because it was so out of place it was disruptive to they rest of the movie. That said, poor Kyle. He's one of the better reviewers on CA, and while that article raised some good point, it did come across as meddle pissy at certain points. Still if he uses it to improve his format, good on him, but if it causes him to tailspin into self-doubt and hesitation now, well, poo poo...
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
The Vosgian Beast posted:So this article is making the rounds http://moviemezzanine.com/putting-the-geek-to-the-plow/ This article is terrible. The image from TGWTG's is years out of date, featuring people who haven't been on the site in ages. The guy basically seems to only care about Brows Held High and Atop the Fourth Wall. I mean, how dare Lewis ask people to watch ads so he can make revenue off his show? This guy sounds like he just collected a handful of criticisms about the site from two years ago from threads like this and threw them together into an article. Is his point "these nerds make too much money" or does he have some grander point, because all I'm reading here is a lot of sour grapes, or maybe a "gently caress nerds you should read REAL CRITICS (like me adam hobauer contributor to movie mezzazzine dot com)"
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
that was a really dumb article.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
I love how articles continue to use that chestnut about TGWTG's income in 2009. One data point from five years ago is not very useful in trying to analyze a business that's changing so rapidly, as we're seeing with the sudden recent rush to Patreon and other fundraising sites.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
I did agree with some points in that article but it was really odd that the writer focused on Kyle Kallgren so much when he's the antithesis of what the writer is rallying against. I've learnt a lot from his videos and they make 'arthouse cinema' (for lack of a better term) far more accessible to someone who doesn't have any grounding in that area. I feel that all of Kyle's recent stuff has engaged quite closely with the film itself and he hasn't been tempted to be dismissive for a quick joke. To give a recent example, his short review of Joss Whedon's adaptation of Much Ado About Nothing could have been full of avengers/buffy/firefly jokes and with very little analysis of how and why the adaptation works. Instead, he convinced me to watch it when I had just assumed it would be awful based on my own preconceptions.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
Franz von Dada posted:Kyle himself (kind of) agrees. This quote has to be sarcastic. C'mon Kyle, you're too drat even-handed and accepting and poo poo. Call this guy an idiot and tell him to laugh at a joke once in awhile.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 19:37
|
|
|
We seem to live in an age where people think promotion is begging and profit is desperation. We should be able to make money regardless of our financial situation. It's a sense of entitlement that really bothers me. I understand stigma against e-begging, people posting wishlists, and things like that, but ads cost you nothing and Patreon offers perks. Nothing is being taken away from anyone. But anyway, back to the real topic. This convo went off a bit on Twitter, but my take on it is that humorous criticism and dry criticism are both valid. Humor can be used to point out flaws, and that's what I do. If you criticize something you're a critic. Whether you think the person is any good at it is up to you.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
BottledBodhisvata posted:This article is terrible. The image from TGWTG's is years out of date, featuring people who haven't been on the site in ages. The guy basically seems to only care about Brows Held High and Atop the Fourth Wall. I mean, how dare Lewis ask people to watch ads so he can make revenue off his show? This guy sounds like he just collected a handful of criticisms about the site from two years ago from threads like this and threw them together into an article. Is his point "these nerds make too much money" or does he have some grander point, because all I'm reading here is a lot of sour grapes, or maybe a "gently caress nerds you should read REAL CRITICS (like me adam hobauer contributor to movie mezzazzine dot com)" Yeah, the more I read over it, the more starts to turn into a mix of "why aren't people taking ME seriously" couched in a thinly veiled hit job against people Doug, Kyle and Linkara specifically. Especially when Doug is on record as saying he doesn't give a poo poo about people who rant about him like that, so it's kind of a futile effort if he's trying to enact any change in the general operating practice of CA/TGWTG.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 19:41
|
|
|
BottledBodhisvata posted:This article is terrible. The image from TGWTG's is years out of date, featuring people who haven't been on the site in ages. The guy basically seems to only care about Brows Held High and Atop the Fourth Wall. I mean, how dare Lewis ask people to watch ads so he can make revenue off his show? This guy sounds like he just collected a handful of criticisms about the site from two years ago from threads like this and threw them together into an article. Is his point "these nerds make too much money" or does he have some grander point, because all I'm reading here is a lot of sour grapes, or maybe a "gently caress nerds you should read REAL CRITICS (like me adam hobauer contributor to movie mezzazzine dot com)" While I agree that "works for EW and is therefore professional" doesn't necessarily and inevitably mean "legitimate" or "good", I think there is something to this idea of entitlement, if perhaps it wasn't articulated correctly. Really, his rallying point shouldn't have been Kyle (whose great sin seems to be that he incorporates his personal issues into his work, which has gently caress all to do with how much money CA pulls in in a year), but people like Linkara. I think that one can certainly throw around words like "entitlement" when it comes to this sort of thing, being unsalaried while your parent corporation won't cushion you. And in that case, perhaps one can make a living wage off of "screaming on the Internet" for a while, but what happens if views fall or people use adblock? This, I think, is why there was such a backlash against Lovhaug when he put that video up last year, and a fair one, in my opinion. What makes you so special that you don't have to go out and get a job at the Olive Garden like the rest of us? Why are you exempt from the daily grind just because you have a few dozen fans who will throw whatever little money they have at you so you can do the exact same thing every week? But Lovhaug clearly thinks he should be able to make a living off his videos because he has, whether the market agrees with him or not. Rather than trying to change with the market, he insists that he should be able to make a living doing the same old thing he's been doing for years. That, I think, is a fair assertion of entitlement. That said, oh my god kyle's thin skin good GOD dude, this article wasn't even that mean to you.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
Pirate Jenny posted:What makes you so special that you don't have to go out and get a job at the Olive Garden like the rest of us? Why are you exempt from the daily grind just because you have a few dozen fans who will throw whatever little money they have at you so you can do the exact same thing every week? But Lovhaug clearly thinks he should be able to make a living off his videos because he has, whether the market agrees with him or not. Rather than trying to change with the market, he insists that he should be able to make a living doing the same old thing he's been doing for years. That, I think, is a fair assertion of entitlement.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 20:13
|
|
|
Kyle needs to not take this stuff so personally, based on this mini meltdown he's having on Twitter
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 20:16
|
|
|
I've been in the headspace where you let stupid stuff get to you and you can't shake it, and it seems stronger than it really is, and it's really bad and unhealthy.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
Pirate Jenny posted:While I agree that "works for EW and is therefore professional" doesn't necessarily and inevitably mean "legitimate" or "good", I think there is something to this idea of entitlement, if perhaps it wasn't articulated correctly. Really, his rallying point shouldn't have been Kyle (whose great sin seems to be that he incorporates his personal issues into his work, which has gently caress all to do with how much money CA pulls in in a year), but people like Linkara. This is lovely logic because teh reality that the only way for you to survive and thrive is to work some service industry job is a terrible one, and it isn't entitlement to seek a means to avoid that, especially one that doesn't hurt or damage anyone. Lovhaug is an idiot for demanding that his fans watch commercials because commercials are offensive to people with brain cells, but who gives a poo poo? That's not entitlement. Entitlement is expecting something for nothing, and that you "deserve" something based on things like birth or race or social class moreso than it is "an expectation of a better life/doing what I want for a living". Doing what you want for a living is the only rational way to live.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 20:18
|
|
|
BottledBodhisvata posted:Doing what you want for a living is the only rational way to live. ...I cannot tell if you are joking. Have you ever had a job?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 20:27
|
|
|
Pirate Jenny posted:...I cannot tell if you are joking. Have you ever had a job? Yes. Have you ever had a job you enjoyed?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 20:28
|
|
|
"The minimum wage just got lowered. What're you upset about? Just work more." Why does having a fun/enjoyable job make it not a job?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 20:34
|
|
|
http://spoonyexperiment.com/vlogs/spoony-april-hate-the-amazing-spider-man-2/ Amazing Spiderman 2 running time: 142 minutes This vlog bitching: 146 minutes.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 20:35
|
|
|
To be honest I see Kyle's response as being a show of strength rather than weakness. It would be too easy to just dismiss a guy as a loser looking for linkbait material and approval from parallel avenues. Instead he's tackling it face on without making some pissy point about Ernest Hemingway and how critics are the worst people ever. (In case Kimble Justice's still following this thread: I'm looking forward to the finale of your FF7 overview!) Kunster fucked around with this message at 20:45 on May 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 20:36
|
|
|
Tracula posted:This vlog bitching: 146 minutes. Look at the bright side; at least it's under 3 hours this time! 
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 20:39
|
|
|
Miss Wallace posted:We seem to live in an age where people think promotion is begging and profit is desperation. We should be able to make money regardless of our financial situation. It's a sense of entitlement that really bothers me. I understand stigma against e-begging, people posting wishlists, and things like that, but ads cost you nothing and Patreon offers perks. Nothing is being taken away from anyone. I have to say that I personally prefer the Patreon route. I know there's the whole area of blocking ads and whatnot and it leads to a vicious cycle of if you block an annoying add they get more obtrusive and annoying trying to force their presence on you so you block that one and etc. I at least get blocking ads so you can avoid incredibly obtrusive products being advertised the same time three times in the same video or a player being trash so you have to reload it several times because it crashes or loads improperly, making you watch said ads again. Patreon seems much more aboveboard and completely unintrusive. It doesn't bother anyone who doesn't pay but it offers a direct line of cash to content providers while the content maker can offer perks to those who basically pay them a salary directly.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
Miss Wallace posted:"The minimum wage just got lowered. What're you upset about? Just work more." When people are suffering, they take pleasure in seeing others share in their suffering. When somebody no longer seems to be suffering, envy spreads among those who are suffering. America has a lot of Christian guilt built into its cultural landscape too--how many people do you know who unironically say or believe that if you don't suffer then you aren't really earning it? "No pain, no gain" is actually terrible fitness advice, etc etc. It's a fascinating mindset.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 20:45
|
|
|
Tracula posted:I have to say that I personally prefer the Patreon route. I know there's the whole area of blocking ads and whatnot and it leads to a vicious cycle of if you block an annoying add they get more obtrusive and annoying trying to force their presence on you so you block that one and etc. I at least get blocking ads so you can avoid incredibly obtrusive products being advertised the same time three times in the same video or a player being trash so you have to reload it several times because it crashes or loads improperly, making you watch said ads again. Patreon seems much more aboveboard and completely unintrusive. It doesn't bother anyone who doesn't pay but it offers a direct line of cash to content providers while the content maker can offer perks to those who basically pay them a salary directly. That's great. That's also why one of the perks on mine is to get rid of midrolls. I don't want to ask for free money, so it's nice it's a way to give back to folks as well.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
BottledBodhisvata posted:This is lovely logic because teh reality that the only way for you to survive and thrive is to work some service industry job is a terrible one, and it isn't entitlement to seek a means to avoid that, especially one that doesn't hurt or damage anyone. Lovhaug is an idiot for demanding that his fans watch commercials because commercials are offensive to people with brain cells, but who gives a poo poo? That's not entitlement. Entitlement is expecting something for nothing, and that you "deserve" something based on things like birth or race or social class moreso than it is "an expectation of a better life/doing what I want for a living". Doing what you want for a living is the only rational way to live. Entitlement is also stagnation. I really love rock climbing. I'd love to be a full time rock climber. That doesn't mean the market is going to let me do that. There's a lot of talk about Patreon and Subbable these days, shifting business models, because purely ad-supported content creation is basically untenable. poo poo, Foldable Human has been pushing some voting contest thing to get a government grant. The criticism of Lewis' "let the ads play" video is that at its root was this sense that the audience should go out of their way to bolster a very specific revenue source rather than Lewis seeking any sort of alternative funding method or doing anything to change his method. Several full-time or semi-full time review people are also freelancers, or work in/tangental to the media industry. Getting a "day job" doesn't explicitly mean Olive Garden. In theory if you've produced several hundred short videos you should be coming out the other side with some marketable skill that you can use to get cash while still "doing what you love." If you haven't, if "doing what you love" boils down exclusively to "talking about cancelled TV shows" and you've gleaned no marketable skills in editing, writing, motion graphics, prop building, costume making, design, project management, or anything else from the process, then, well, I'm glad you had fun, I hope you enjoy Olive Garden. There is absolutely a sense of entitlement in that "let the ads play" video because it assumes that At4W is something that should remain financially solvent simply because it was previously financially solvent. I mean, what's Lewis' plan? What's the end game? Do At4W until...? Then what? The well started drying up and Lewis' first response was "pump harder, motherfuckers, there was water down there yesterday!" If anything a group of people who spend all their free and full time poking at one-hit-wonders, bad TV, and poorly-aged films and comics should be the most brutally aware that culture is fragile and a hit show this year doesn't mean a hit show next.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
quote:The criticism of Lewis' "let the ads play" video is that at its root was this sense that the audience should go out of their way to bolster a very specific revenue source rather than Lewis seeking any sort of alternative funding method or doing anything to change his method. I'm not sure I agree with this, mainly because I don't see why Lewis asking for viewers to support the current business model -- one in which he asks very little -- is somehow less valid than "finding an alternative funding method." MisterBadIdea fucked around with this message at 21:48 on May 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
LFK posted:Entitlement is also stagnation. I really love rock climbing. I'd love to be a full time rock climber. That doesn't mean the market is going to let me do that. I like to play a game where, whenever somebody says "the free market" "the market" "the marketplace" in contexts like this, just replace it with "Jesus Our Lord" and it completely fits. quote:There's a lot of talk about Patreon and Subbable these days, shifting business models, because purely ad-supported content creation is basically untenable. poo poo, Foldable Human has been pushing some voting contest thing to get a government grant. I actually do agree, one would think that after doing it for a few years, more reviewers would have some tangible skill in filmmaking or editing or the like, but the market being capricious doesn't mean you're not allowed to make money however you can. Whether or not somebody has an "end game" or not, that doesn't mean that they aren't completely correct in trying to make money however they can. The flaw with your thinking is that you're taking somebody making money in a very "new" way and then expecting them to ultimately go and make money the "old" way. If you made money by getting big on youtube because you're funny or you make animations on Flash or you have a good voice or whatever--that's your market. That's a market YOU own, too. You can cultivate that, you can grow that, and you can make that into something. LOOK at the Nostalgia Critic. He started out making five-second-movies and is now the face of a site that at one point certainly made six figures annually, that afforded him a film studio and a production company and a staff. He's created jobs, which is pretty loving valuable in today's economy. And he did that with ad revenue. Was this his end game the whole time? Probably not! He probably started out thinking this was an amateur undertaking, found he could make more money off it than his lovely factory job, and then after awhile found he was making enough to expand. You're throwing a lot of weight on Louis to have some kind of ten year plan before you give him cash. Dude, it's just money. He's not even asking you to GIVE money to him directly, even, he just wants you to watch commercials. This does not strike me as a sense of entitlement. I don't even like AT4W--I got sick of it when he started having all of these weird storylines and subplots and really badly staged fake fights with props and poo poo and the silliness became way too sincere--but the man is CLEARLY putting a lot of effort into appealing the show to the people who like it, for good or ill. He's working hard, and he wants to keep the freedom to continue working hard. If that's entitlement, then I think the word needs a reexamination.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 21:10
|
|
|
quote:I'm not sure I agree with this, mainly because I don't see why Lewis asking for viewers to support the current business model -- one in which he asks very little -- is somehow less valid than "finding an alternative funding method." I am willing to be persuaded though. Exactly. And before Patreon and such, there really WASN'T much of an alternative. But if you want to go that route, then Lewis has been making DVDs, selling merchandise, making plushies, etc, all as alternative means of income.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 21:11
|
|
|
BottledBodhisvata posted:This article is terrible. The image from TGWTG's is years out of date, featuring people who haven't been on the site in ages. The guy basically seems to only care about Brows Held High and Atop the Fourth Wall. I mean, how dare Lewis ask people to watch ads so he can make revenue off his show? This guy sounds like he just collected a handful of criticisms about the site from two years ago from threads like this and threw them together into an article. Is his point "these nerds make too much money" or does he have some grander point, because all I'm reading here is a lot of sour grapes, or maybe a "gently caress nerds you should read REAL CRITICS (like me adam hobauer contributor to movie mezzazzine dot com)" The grander point is to focus more on and improve upon critique/review and less on things like the Angry Nerd chic.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 21:20
|
|
|
Adblock users getting bitchy about being called thieves kinda seems reminiscent of the early 2000s, when people got angry when you called them that for downloading MP3s. "I'm not stealing anything, I'm copying a file!" Agh, can't anybody just own up to that they're circumventing things a bit? Automata 10 Pack fucked around with this message at 21:28 on May 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 21:21
|
|
|
I use adblock plus because of talking annoying obtrusive ads that can have spyware and poo poo in them. For blip, I turn it off for the videos because I tend to actually watch videos there. That said, if I never hear Perfect Day again, it will be too soon. e: Oh, I removed the bit where I said I knew it was a jerk thing to do. Senerio fucked around with this message at 21:39 on May 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
I mostly watch videos through the Blip app on my iPad and it never shows any ads for whatever reason.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
Mutation posted:Adblock users getting bitchy about being called thieves kinda seems reminiscent of the early 2000s, when people got angry when you called them that for downloading MP3s. Yeah, say all you want about the changing digital landscape, but an internet personality asking you to watch the odd ad is no different than a TV network wanting you to do so. The ads are, to a not-insignificant degree, the point. NBC doesn't exist to give you crappy sitcoms or procedurals for free. It exists to make money. They make money by selling ad time. Why does that model being followed by an individual as a primary, but not sole, means of revenue generation make it automatically a grave sin or some kind of 'entitlement'? "Hey, if you enjoy my product, please spare a minute to watch an ad, it's how the show gets funded, thanks" strikes me as just as reasonable as, say, a bakery asking you to maybe buy something if you enjoyed their free samples, or a museum suggesting you donate if you're a regular visitor. And funnily enough some people find this model LESS entitled than asking for money directly, which is an angle I never hear brought up. No shame to Lupa or anyone else who's gone the route of a subscription-type model, but for some people, making money from advertisers or hosting companies is less obtrusive than asking viewers for money explictly. I think it boils down to the fact that some people feel like entertainment is a one-way street. They shouldn't pay for TV shows or movies or video games or music or internet videos. And then they bitch when the show gets cancelled, or movie doesn't get a sequel, or the game stops being supported or the artist has to make massive compromises on their next album. I'll be honest, I use adblock, but if a site or producer gets visitied enough, and the ads aren't too obnoxious, it gets turned off. If they've entertained me for a few hours, and probably put more than even that into making the stuff, I can spare a minute and maybe help them earn a few pennies.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 21:45
|
|
|
I've always had a cycle when it came to reviewers and ads: - Use adblock fully, since gently caress ads and it's not like the creators are paying the original owners - Realize that the content creators are using this for income, feel guilty - Disable adblock - Struggle with all the known technical issues that come from the ads (volume, repetition, not loading), getting increasingly annoyed - Annoyance reaches maximum, go to first step I know it's a Jerk Thing that's not their fault, but still.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
I admit I'm often tempted to turn ad block back on on blip. Mostly because I keep getting these really insufferable and long British ads that are of zero relevance to me.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 21:54
|
|
|
I think turning off AdBlock is a perfectly valid choice, but I can't say I get all that annoyed with Blip ads either. I mean, they're just ads. They last for 30 seconds and they're done. Now, ads that play randomly in the background while I'm doing something, those can gently caress right off.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 21:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 06:11 |
|
|
Yeah but gently caress commercials jesus Christ. gently caress marketing people, gently caress advertisers, gently caress commercials, and gently caress you for forcing me to watch them, making them pop-ups, interrupting my poo poo with more commercials... I remember when Youtube had no commercials. NO commercials. And you know what? It was heaven.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2014 22:00
|
|