What if Nostalgia Critic Did The Bionicle Movies?

If Nostalgia Critic reviewed the movies he’d just nitpick them and compare them to LEGO movie for 20 minutes. His reviews are never insightful and often hardly entertaining.

6 Likes

despite the fact that he has over a million subscribers

1 Like

Popularity does not equal quality.

5 Likes

Granted, my reply was pretty unclear.
I was mostly referring to the fact that even if y’all consider him unfunny and not insightful there are a lot, a lot, of people who do.

2 Likes

I only judge people’s channels by how many active subscribers they have.

Also your logic is stupid, do you know how many Adam Sandler movies there are?

1 Like

I think what @Toa_Vladin is trying to say is, just because you dislike something, doesn’t mean everyone else does.

I’ll admit that, for the sake of comedy, his videos tend to be poor critiques; however, when he does an editorial, he tends to actually put a lot of thought and effort behind it.

As for the overarching question at hand, I imagine the review would be very similar to his Pokemon: The First Movie video, as he knew nothing about either gong in. I found that video one of his better ones, though, so I’d be down for Bionicle reviews.

2 Likes

This.
And the proof that is “dumb” is the fact that over a million people are subsctibed and are watching his videos.
There is no actual method to count active subscribers. There are videos who do good with certain subscribers and some who don’t. This doesn’t mean that if I don’t watch his latest review I don’t watch him in general.

1 Like

This is why I can’t retain master rank on the boards

Here lemme review the message boards real quick

[quote=“Ghid, post:131, topic:51042”] So they’re kinda cool, I mean the UI and colour scheme is okay, old theme is kinda lame tho… That one Kahi guy he was a big poopoo so in theory that should make Eljay great but one time Eljay disagreed with me so it’s debatable.
Definitely get rid of the double posting rule, would make the site much better.[/quote]

By this logic this is a complete review. I even cited a potential fix for an issue with the site.[quote=“Chronicler, post:15, topic:51042”]
I’m saying he’s not a good critic whatsoever, but you may disagree. And he’s often wrong or misinformed on what he reviews. Most of what he does is goofing around or making fun of the production instead of actually critiquing it.
[/quote]

This is completely accurate. Most of Doug Walker’s ‘reviews’ are either ranting about a well-known issue with the subject and overacting constantly, or are completely devoid of any actual review and pad out the runtime with skits.

I’m not going to be discussing Doug’s character because that’s deviating too far from the topic.[quote=“Chronicler, post:17, topic:51042”]
Film review is a giving of opinions and your general thoughts on it. This is what Nostalgia Critic does, with his references and skits. He’s a comedian first and foremost.

Then there’s a critique, which undergoes the entire process of analyzing a product’s background and the way it is produced. In this, you certainly need to know context, or you will misjudge the product you are watching.
[/quote]

A legitimate critic needs to have a good understanding of the material they’re reviewing in all capacity - they don’t need a perfect comprehension and omnipotence but they need to have a basic understanding of every aspect, and provable knowledge in specific areas. That is why History Buffs (content not for kiddos) is a legitimate historical film critic - he understands film in a general sense but criticizes films based on their historical accuracy and how far they choose to deviate.

Stop valuing content based on numbers. Some of the best content on youtube is sitting under the thousand subscriber mark.

Risebell’s point is completely legitimate. As well, the stupidity factor is a reason why a lot of things become popular, and watching Nostalgia Critic’s content, it’s hard to believe he doesn’t rely on it at least a little. As your relative worth comparison just proved, the number in the little red box is what most people rely on to move forward, and what the audience uses to determine credibility. Keeping that high is way more important than actually critiquing things.

-Credo of the Clickbait Capitalists


Keeping the topic on topic - I’d like the Bionicle films to be reviewed by someone who actually knows something about reviewing content. Or better yet, not at all, because they were lame.

:gregf:

3 Likes

I even explained after that post that I was meaning to say that there are many people who still find him funny, still find him entertaining, and that what some people may not like, some people do.

1 Like

There are also many bots, many people subbed because their friends are, many people who subbed ten years ago and never unsubbed, and many people only watching because they dislike him and seek the chance to belittle him. This is true for every big channel.

And as for those many people who still like his content, he’s been around since 2007 with a consistently low production value easily comparable to his earlier content. I’m impressed he has a million in only thirteen years.

2 Likes

Oh, please.
If you want to believe that Channel Awesome use bots, go ahead and do so, but do not use it as a widely-known fact.
I for one don’t believe it, but if you bring me concrete evidence that they do, then and only then you’ll change my mind.

How much of a percentage do you think this represents?
And how much of that do you think are people who literally have nothing better to do than to subscribe to a completely unknown channel just because one of their friends is.
If there are people who subscribe just to please their friends, they even end up to still watch that channel (maybe not regularly, but still), and then if they don’t find it funny they unsubscribe, or unsubscribe anyway after their forgot that they recommended it to them.

I thought they would be automatically unsubbed if they are inactive.
Must’ve received a wrong info.

And that’s also a small percentage. Most people who don’t like something just don’t enter in contact with said thing.

It is, but rarely it represents more than one fifth to one fourth of the number of subscribers.
Which in this case represents quite a few, but not that big of a percentage.

This still doesn’t mean that there are still a lot of people who find him funny.
I am in the bucket of people that think he was better then, but I still find some of his content from time to time enjoyable.

2 Likes

Insert long sigh.

You’re making it sound like Nostalgia Critic is a poorly edited, lazy YouTube series. It isn’t. If you don’t like his style, you don’t have to.

What are you talking about? Of course he’s informed! He watches the movies/TV shows before doing his reviews. His reviews are based on a core of actual reviewing, but Nostalgia Critic is intended as a COMEDY series. This is the point most of you seem to be missing. That’s why it uses skits and rants-to satire movies that are bad, or point out the flaws in an otherwise good one. Again, no one here is saying you have to like it.

Clearly you haven’t watched his reviews of Wonder Woman or Star Wars Episode 7…

Toa Vladin already posted a response that was better than anything I could write, so read that one.

[tries to avoid tearing hair out]

First of all, Nostalgia Critic does know how to review content. His series is written as a comedy series to satire a movie, sort of like Cinemasins or Honest Trailers. If you want videos that are actually focused on reviewing a movie, without making a bunch of jokes/skits, then watch his Disneycember videos. Those are just purely reviews.

Second of all, reviewing lame/stupid/all-around-bad movies is EXACTLY Nostalgia Critic’s thing! He’s done Foodfight, The Emoji Movie, and The Cat In The Hat. Bionicle would just be another one on his spreadsheet.

I’m with Toa Vladin on this one, but the idea is kinda scary. What if every major YouTuber ever has used bots?

A good amount. For a long-time youtuber with as much street recognition as Nostalgia Critic has, I’d wager about fifteen percent. In spite of his subscriber count he’s fairly well known among veterans of the internet.[quote=“Toa_Vladin, post:32, topic:51042”]
I thought they would be automatically unsubbed if they are inactive.
Must’ve received a wrong info.
[/quote]

That can’t be true. I’m still subbed to channels I haven’t touched in years. Not because I’m lazy or anything[quote=“Toa_Vladin, post:32, topic:51042”]
It is, but rarely it represents more than one fifth to one fourth of the number of subscribers.
Which in this case represents quite a few, but not that big of a percentage.
[/quote]

I’d say even one seventh of a million is a large number. It’s around 143,000.[quote=“Toa_Vladin, post:32, topic:51042”]
This still doesn’t mean that there are still a lot of people who find him funny.
[/quote]

True, but funny =/= good critic. So I’d rather have a good review than a half-baked review followed by a comedy skit.[quote=“thewimpykid, post:33, topic:51042”]
You’re making it sound like Nostalgia Critic is a poorly edited, lazy YouTube series. It isn’t. If you don’t like his style, you don’t have to.
[/quote]

That’s not what I’m saying?

I’m saying your definition of a review doesn’t make sense. By your description my joke review of TTV holds as much validity as anything Roger Ebert may have put out.[quote=“thewimpykid, post:33, topic:51042”]
What are you talking about? Of course he’s informed! He watches the movies/TV shows before doing his reviews.
[/quote]

This informs him on cinematography, lighting, camerawork, professional acting, scriptwriting, and special effects, while also learning the in-universe lore, characters, historical background, and storytelling? No.

Not to say he doesn’t know anything about those topics, but c’mon man, you aren’t going to learn every possible aspect by watching it once.[quote=“thewimpykid, post:33, topic:51042”]
This is the point most of you seem to be missing.
[/quote]

I beg pardon, no, I’m not missing that and I highly doubt anyone else is. What we’re saying is that, even for comedy, they aren’t that good. You’re welcome to like them for comedy and you’re perfectly fine being informed by the review, but on the basis of a critique, it’s… Well, deserving of critique.[quote=“thewimpykid, post:33, topic:51042”]
Clearly you haven’t watched his reviews of Wonder Woman or Star Wars Episode 7…
[/quote]

Good analysis, I do try to ignore most of his content. But I have actually seen the Episode 7 review.[quote=“thewimpykid, post:33, topic:51042”]
Toa Vladin already posted a response that was better than anything I could write, so read that one.
[/quote]

You missed my retort by about three hours m8[quote=“thewimpykid, post:33, topic:51042”]
Nostalgia Critic does know how to review content.
[/quote]

Correct! He just doesn’t do it very well.[quote=“thewimpykid, post:33, topic:51042”]
Second of all, reviewing lame/stupid/all-around-bad movies is EXACTLY Nostalgia Critic’s thing! He’s done Foodfight, The Emoji Movie, and The Cat In The Hat. Bionicle would just be another one on his spreadsheet.
[/quote]

And there you run into why he might not have done a review on Bionicle yet. Maybe he did a little bit of research and found out Bionicle fans are even more vicious than his subscribers, and would start a witch hunt if he trashed it. I’ve seen much lesser names get hunted for much lesser heresy, and I would imagine he’s smart enough to steer far, far away from that mess.

But more importantly, I don’t want to see a 40 minute comedy skit skirting around multiple issues of the actual film or barely addressing it at all ending on using another youtuber’s content for sub cred(Nostalgia Critic: The Wall). I’d like to see a review. Maybe that kind of content is what you prefer to see, but a much larger count than what his subscriber base is detests his content, and maybe I’m just a little sick of the same act for over a decade.

TL;DR, I don’t care if Doug looks at the Bionicle films or not. For legitimate reasons I probably won’t be watching it.[quote=“thewimpykid, post:33, topic:51042”]
I’m with Toa Vladin on this one, but the idea is kinda scary. What if every major YouTuber ever has used bots?
[/quote]

Not to say that it’s the youtuber’s fault, as almost all the time it’s fans with too much time or some company out east, but I’m sure there’s a lot of bots subbed to every major youtuber over 5 million. Something tells me they don’t skip the ads

3 Likes

It’s the same situation with Cinema Sins. Hiding behind the “comedy series” idea when he’s called out for his lack of research or understanding the deeper meanings of films. It’s a cop-out to legitimate criticism. Do not use this defense, it is easily broken. Especially when comedy often relies on deep understanding of societal problems or understanding an audience and subject.

I would hope Doug doesn’t follow Cinema Sins’ example if he ever did review the BIONICLE series and actually took time to study the story, so BIONICLE fans can laugh along with him. Because that is what good comedy does. Needs to have people laughing, even the folks who are being made fun of. I would hope he reviews the films in context of what the fans thought and what outsiders thought.

4 Likes

I still don’t believe that the number is so big but fine, you think you.

I know, I said that, but I also said that compared to his overall subscribers it isn’t that much.

As I said before when was the whole NC/Ellis, I know. I don’t watch Doug for any life changing critique. I am watching him just to laugh of a bad movie.

1 Like

Doug is the less-profane AVGN of the YouTube film review scene. Dude’s made some decent memes over the years as he by-and-large clowns on the content he’s “looking back on.”

His Avatar/Korra reviews were decent. However, most of his stuff is roast comedy, which is fine.
I know I got bored of it back around Fall '14, but I do still get hype when I hear his theme. “The Review Must Go On” is top-tier YT intro material.

Subscriber count is a fairly useless metric, and does not necessarily indicate quality content, or the loyalty of the viewing audience.

Anyway, bringing this back to the subject of N.C. specifically reviewing BIONICLE movies, I’d say he’s already inadvertently gifted us with the best possible reaction to the 2005 and 2015 waves: https://youtu.be/DWhkMaT7jVo

2 Likes

Sorry I didn’t get back to this discussion sooner. The last few replies came in while I was at work last night.

And he also looks up who made the movie, what time period it was in, etc.

Then you’ll know that he actually does analyze the background behind the movie’s production, and says that he gets why Disney made some of the decisions they made, and then incorporates that into his review.

You…actually have a point here.

Again: I’m not saying you have to like NC.

CinemaSins, for one thing, started out as a full-on critique series. Its earlier videos focused more on actual plot holes and/or bad characters or special effects. It was only as it went on that it started to become a not-really-that-funny comedy series (the “same words my college girlfriend” jokes are getting real old, and they weren’t even funny to begin with). Not that CinemaSins has zero entertainment value (I watch it on a regular basis as well), but I think it’s a slightly different case than NC.

You’ve ran into the other reason I’d like to see NC review Bionicle. Most of us are kids that grew up with Bionicle G1 in the 2000s, and therefore feel nostalgic towards it. Imagine if, in a hundred years, someone came across Bionicle: Mask of Light on Netflix, or Hulu, or whatever it is they’ll be using in 2120. What if they decided to watch it, with no knowledge of Bionicle? What would their perspective be? Nostalgia Critic might be able to provide that sort of insight.

And no matter how he does it, it’ll still make excellent background noise for when I’m folding laundry or cooking dinner.

That’s not difficult or unusual by any means. Most star wars fans did that simply because they wanted to, and it’s hardly verification of his critiquing ability.[quote=“thewimpykid, post:38, topic:51042”]
Then you’ll know that he actually does analyze the background behind the movie’s production
[/quote]

As loosely as possible, yes. However that doesn’t address my point, namely being that he isn’t going to perfectly comprehend every aspect of the movie’s creation from one viewing.

CinemaSins used to be legitimate and encorporate actual criticisms into his roastings, but he’s relied so much on being funny that he’s lost all legitimate claim to being an actual critic. And while it is a different case than Doug Walker’s content, it is relatively comparable.[quote=“thewimpykid, post:38, topic:51042”]
Most of us are kids that grew up with Bionicle G1 in the 2000s, and therefore feel nostalgic towards it. Imagine if, in a hundred years, someone came across Bionicle: Mask of Light on Netflix, or Hulu, or whatever it is they’ll be using in 2120. What if they decided to watch it, with no knowledge of Bionicle? What would their perspective be? Nostalgia Critic might be able to provide that sort of insight.
[/quote]

I imagine anyone might be able to provide that sort of insight. Pretty much any major youtuber would be able to provide a clear and probably funnier insight onto an unknown perspective of the Bionicle films, but I doubt any of them - including the folks at Nostalgia Critic - would provide a good review of the film.[quote=“thewimpykid, post:38, topic:51042”]
And no matter how he does it, it’ll still make excellent background noise for when I’m folding laundry or cooking dinner.
[/quote]

I’ll toast to that. It wouldn’t be much of a review, but in all honesty it’d probably be really entertaining.

3 Likes

are we still talking about this? I highly encourage you all to watch any of Doug’s “””movies”””

he’s not funny

Or watch any other YouTube content creator as you clearly don’t watch any of quality.

Doug Nostalgia Walker Critic’s reviews are like fast food. Somewhat stimulating, intellectually non-challenging, bloated, and there’s a lot of them.

3 Likes