plagiarize
Banned
Yeah. When you have to invent flaws in the movie in order to make your shitty jokes, you aren't being fair to the movie, and people who haven't seen it will reasonably conclude those invented flaws are real.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Kong: Skull Island Director Takes on Cinema Sins
- Thread starter Cruxist
- Start date
Yeah. When you have to invent flaws in the movie in order to make your shitty jokes, you aren't being fair to the movie, and people who haven't seen it will reasonably conclude those invented flaws are real.
People who watch CinemaSins before they watch the movie probably dont really care about the movie that much anyway.
Like this shiti would have no problem with someone nitpicking movies, but they're often simply wrong, so wrong that i question if they understood of even watched the movie
This was literally explained in the same exact scene
Hell pretty much seconds later
Even as a joke what's the joke
You really aren't supposed to take it seriously though.
They take the enterprise seriously yeah, in the sense they devote time and money to make videos that make them money. But all of the on average, 100 observations/nitpicks per? Nope. If you seriously think they seriously think there are 100 problems with a film deemed to be a classic or personal favorite, or If you think "does not contain a lap dance" is criticism meant to be taken seriously, you are simply disconnected from reality. That is what it is.
Beyond that, you may not think it's funny which is fine, but so what? Millions do.
I think Guardians of the Galaxy is painfully unfunny. Millions don't (allegedly). So what?
They take the enterprise seriously yeah, in the sense they devote time and money to make videos that make them money. But all of the on average, 100 observations/nitpicks per? Nope. If you seriously think they seriously think there are 100 problems with a film deemed to be a classic or personal favorite, or If you think "does not contain a lap dance" is criticism meant to be taken seriously, you are simply disconnected from reality. That is what it is.
Beyond that, you may not think it's funny which is fine, but so what? Millions do.
I think Guardians of the Galaxy is painfully unfunny. Millions don't (allegedly). So what?
TurnipFritters
Member
That's not even a joke, it's just a thing he does. For every movie.
Messofanego
Banned
I noticed Cinema Sins blowing up around the time of The Dark Knight Rises and people pointing to their video for plot holes as if that was the end all be all of criticism. Even RLM were like who gives a shit about that inconsequential stuff.
HOW DID HE GET BACK?! Everything has to make chronological sense! What is editing?
Inferno313
Banned
Vogt-Roberts tweeted some follow up comments this morning. They're good.
I watch CinemaSins and find it fun, I dont really take what they say seriously because it is all just nitpicks, jokes and sometimes just wrong. The Sins have no value, they have said it themselves. They themselves have said they dont consider themselves reviewers just assholes.
If you dont like CinemaSins that is fine, it isnt everbody's cup of tea.
Edit: CinemaSins>Honest Trailer
If you dont like CinemaSins that is fine, it isnt everbody's cup of tea.
Edit: CinemaSins>Honest Trailer
Thanks for the link. I watched his "Everything Wrong with Everything Wrong with Mad Max" and CinemaSins is just blatantly being idiotic. And I like Shaun's dry delivery hahaha.
The joke is that most of the criticisms aren't good and the sin points don't actually matter.
But people do take it seriously, not just detractors but fans. Fans will hold these opinions/videos in some form of high regard and will think that a movie has a bunch of things wrong with it when, in fact, some of those problems are completely made up. If someone never saw I, Robot and just saw the CinemaSins video of it it will look dumb to them and a waste of time regardless of the actual quality of the film. This can be said for literally any film.
Sure, there are "obvious" "jokes" like the lap dance joke or Hermione not being old enough to be hot but then there are things they think are legit wrong like The Iron Legion not fighting instead of the Avengers. People aren't gonna go "yeah, Hermione isn't old enough, this is awful/dumb" but they may go "yeah, why aren't these unmanned drones doing the fighting instead of the Avengers? This is awful/dumb".
For a guy who made a very bad movie designed to kick off some bullshit cinematic universe, you'd think he'd be sensitive to how cinema sins is responding to the commercial realities of running a YouTube channel.
It's not like Kong was some brave, bold work of pure creativity. Cinema Sins videos are products and as such make some sacrifices between the "pure vision" and hitting market. If you wanna say that those sacrifices cost to much to make the endevour worthwhile, fine, but don't pretend there isn't a reason the videos went from three to eighteen minutes.
It's not like Kong was some brave, bold work of pure creativity. Cinema Sins videos are products and as such make some sacrifices between the "pure vision" and hitting market. If you wanna say that those sacrifices cost to much to make the endevour worthwhile, fine, but don't pretend there isn't a reason the videos went from three to eighteen minutes.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
If you can't see that this argument is less than a millimeter to the left of "there is no point in watching this at all then" I don't know how else to make this more clear.
Your defense of the useless thing is that it is useless and nothing matters.
Like, if you have to invoke the tenets of nihilism to explain/defend why you watch shitty YouTube videos, I dunno if that's a YouTube video that's worth the trouble.
(and considering how many of the defenses of this channel, and how you're supposed to watch it, are reductive and borderline nihilistic in the exact same way, I just... This consistent glitch/disconnect in logic is confusing as fuck, really. Again: Imagine if people took this much time and pride in learning anything as they do defending their right to watch something whose greatest benefit as criticism is its total meaninglessness)
So... he shouldn't take it seriously because Cinema Sins hustle isn't too different from his own?
(but it is very much different)
Bjoern the Smexy
Member
Wait, people are taking Cinema Sins seriously?!
It's riff entertainment, just like MST3k.
It's riff entertainment, just like MST3k.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
jesus fucking christ
I enjoy watching CinemaSins shitting on movies that I hate and enjoy, I enjoy there delivery more then anything else. Just because I dont take there criticism seriously doesnt mean I cant find some enjoyment out of it and therefore not making it useless.
CinemaSins to me is like watching Transformers movies, just sit back dont give a fuck and enjoy the ride. Of course if you go in expecting some deep criticisms then yh the ride will suck, just like if you go in to Transformers expecting and amazing story it will suck.
Messofanego
Banned
So the Cinema Sins videos are longer because that's how they make money now? If so, seems like an even better reason to criticise them.
Stallion Dan
Member
I'm pretty sure the channel really took off when a director positively tweeted their video about his movie. They've had several people who made a movie they covered comment on them, both positive and negative.
Bobo Dakes
Member
Whelp he started tweeting again, once again he raises good points, but the salt is really coming through. Seems to be reacting to the responses from yesterday.
The biggest issue really is the people who keep insisting that CS is satire. It really isn't and I've yet to see people make a point as to why it is. Paraphrasing an interaction I read on Twitter.
"Well sorry you don't understand satire."
"How is it satire?"
"Well if you can't understand how it's satire I shouldn't have to explain it to you."
^ How informative. Same applies to the people that call it parody. Parody of what?
The concept started fun 3-5 minutes of light jabs at popular movies. The videos were longer for larger misfires and I enjoyed it for that, but then the longer videos became the new standard and they just got nastier and more indulgent. Went from small jabs to I just like the smell of my own fart. And at times they just flat out showed the entire movie so I never understood how they don't deal with copyright issues. Fair use my balls.
The first tweet that kicked this whole thing was the director differentiating the two. And just because something is a joke or isn't serious doesn't mean it can't be criticized.
The biggest issue really is the people who keep insisting that CS is satire. It really isn't and I've yet to see people make a point as to why it is. Paraphrasing an interaction I read on Twitter.
"Well sorry you don't understand satire."
"How is it satire?"
"Well if you can't understand how it's satire I shouldn't have to explain it to you."
^ How informative. Same applies to the people that call it parody. Parody of what?
The concept started fun 3-5 minutes of light jabs at popular movies. The videos were longer for larger misfires and I enjoyed it for that, but then the longer videos became the new standard and they just got nastier and more indulgent. Went from small jabs to I just like the smell of my own fart. And at times they just flat out showed the entire movie so I never understood how they don't deal with copyright issues. Fair use my balls.
The first tweet that kicked this whole thing was the director differentiating the two. And just because something is a joke or isn't serious doesn't mean it can't be criticized.
That's the thing though, shitting on an actually shitty movie is fine and I guess entertaining? But when they're shitting on something that isn't actually shitty, it's just stupid. Like saying "why did they do this? it's so stupid. he should have done this instead." Is fine if it ends there in the movie, but if the very next scene explains why it happened as it did, and you know it was explained because you watched the movie, what they said falls flat. And if you didn't watch the movie, you'd be thinking, "yeah that is stupid. what a stupid movie."
Stallion Dan
Member
Guy really should research why YouTubers need longer videos these days. Is where the money is.
i would have no problem with someone nitpicking movies, but they're often simply wrong, so wrong that i question if they understood of even watched the movie
I haven't watched iRobot in a long time, but did they not EXPLAIN the reasoning? Like. IIRC Will Smith actually states the reasoning aloud right after the cutscene.
That really only makes it worse, and doesn't really address or fix anything he said about them though.
Bobo Dakes
Member
He's still going ...
This thread might as well be called Everything Wrong With Cinema Sins, except, it's actually constructive instead of being a nitpicky asshole for the sake of comedy.
This thread might as well be called Everything Wrong With Cinema Sins, except, it's actually constructive instead of being a nitpicky asshole for the sake of comedy.
Yes
Bobby Roberts
Banned
You guys hit me for saying this shit is "criticism for people who hate criticism" and then these posts pop up and I'm like "how am I supposed to describe it in any other way."
How bout this: If you're actively seeking out situations in which you get to "not give a fuck" then maybe you're not quite understanding how not giving a fuck works.
"I don't give a fuck" isn't a level you should be aspiring to in either art OR criticism.
(the brainfrying irony - I think it's irony? I dunno anymore - in people suddenly picking up this thread that CinemaSins useless, pointless, shitty comedic criticism is now beyond criticism because it pays well is...)
Bobo Dakes
Member
You're right, he explained it right after that flashback. The Robot saved him because he has a higher chance of survival.
If you didnt even watch abit of a movie then your opinion on a movie is invalid, just like gaming, I dont take the criticism of people who haven't played a game seriosuly.
Your post literally screams like CinemaSins hated on something I like so they suck now. What defines a shitty movie? I think Twilight is a shitty movie but my cousin loves it.
Also I aint saying CinemaSins is above any criticism, they get shit wrong, they have admitted that.
Bobo Dakes
Member
"Their videos don't count as criticism, a joke nor satire. They play 18 minutes of someone else's movie with their shit commentary track. And they make a fuck ton of money doing it."
My dude is seriously trying to bury these guys.
My dude is seriously trying to bury these guys.
BronsonLee
Member
i would have no problem with someone nitpicking movies, but they're often simply wrong, so wrong that i question if they understood of even watched the movie
OK so I normally don't sweat these things but that is an absolutely awful take
Immediately right after that is Will's biggest monologue in the film about it, it's his main character motivation
This dude fucking sucks
old
Member
Never heard of Cinema Sins before so I watched a few videos to familiarize myself.
Have to agree with the director here. This Cinema Sins guy has a moving target. He often criticizes movies for doing things not inherent to the plot. But he also criticized Into the Woods for having Emily Blunt wander around the woods looking for a cow. He specifically noted the quest to find the cow was only so she could run into other characters and advance the plot. So anything that does't advance the plot is bad. But also doing something to advance the plot is bad.
He just wants to find things to nitpick yet he's hypocritical on those nitpicks. So his nitpicks don't really mean anything. He's pandering to audiences who want hate on things.
Have to agree with the director here. This Cinema Sins guy has a moving target. He often criticizes movies for doing things not inherent to the plot. But he also criticized Into the Woods for having Emily Blunt wander around the woods looking for a cow. He specifically noted the quest to find the cow was only so she could run into other characters and advance the plot. So anything that does't advance the plot is bad. But also doing something to advance the plot is bad.
He just wants to find things to nitpick yet he's hypocritical on those nitpicks. So his nitpicks don't really mean anything. He's pandering to audiences who want hate on things.
Yuuup. Robot sees he has a higher chance of survival so saves him whereas he knows a human would've picked the kid. It's all cold, unfeeling logic that allowed a little kid to die.
Bobo Dakes
Member
He is STILL going. Wants to use the Looper sins video as an example since I think Rian Johnson (who's probably like, "keep me out of this shit" right now) was the first director to criticize them (pretty lightly) 4 years ago.
We get it, you like Cinema Sins.
How it must feel as people hating CS and trying to take them down (and RLM).
We get it, you like Cinema Sins.
Inferno313
Banned
How it must feel as people hating CS and trying to take them down (and RLM).
Criticizing something is not "trying to take them down"
They can keep doing their thing, I don't care. I just think that what they offer is bad.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
This discussion doesn't actually threaten you does it?
Triggerhappytel
Member
Yes, in that conversation he tells the scientist lady that the robot saved him instead of the young girl because she had something like an 11% chance of surviving while his was considerably higher. I mean, this is really basic stuff and you have to assume that the CS guy knows his 'criticisms' are total bullshit but keeps them in anyway.
Bobo Dakes
Member
As much as the guy you're to responding has been annoying me in this thread, I think it's safe to say at THIS POINT Vogt-Roberts is trying to take them down.
I get it, you don't like cinemasins.
Just like the RLM threads....there are only so many ways to say you don't like them and why they are bad.
StanleyPalmtree
Banned
So i dont really want to touch on the subjectivity of comedic taste and how people get to like whatever they like, but there is something about CinemaSin's output that i just find genuinely wrong.
and im pretty sure some of this has already been said, but hey, bobby has (understandably) repeated himself like 15 times by this point so im guessing yall wont mind me parroting some things just this once.
So CinemaSins very frequently straight up misrepresent films, a prime example of this was posted recent about the I-Robit video, but there are many many more. These misrepresentations are frequently not done for any clear comedic purpose, they are played straight, presented as though they are a legitimate problem with the film. whether is deliberate or an honest (if really irresponsible) mistake, they are misrepresenting a film with the intent to demean that film, to paint it in a negative light to a very large amount of people, many of whole will never have seen that film, and have no reason not to believe it.
And thats just absolute bullshit, even if the intent is comedic, they are actively harming the reputation of a film, and by extension the reputation of the filmmakers, for at most a cheap laugh, and more often nothing more than another freaking DING.
and im pretty sure some of this has already been said, but hey, bobby has (understandably) repeated himself like 15 times by this point so im guessing yall wont mind me parroting some things just this once.
So CinemaSins very frequently straight up misrepresent films, a prime example of this was posted recent about the I-Robit video, but there are many many more. These misrepresentations are frequently not done for any clear comedic purpose, they are played straight, presented as though they are a legitimate problem with the film. whether is deliberate or an honest (if really irresponsible) mistake, they are misrepresenting a film with the intent to demean that film, to paint it in a negative light to a very large amount of people, many of whole will never have seen that film, and have no reason not to believe it.
And thats just absolute bullshit, even if the intent is comedic, they are actively harming the reputation of a film, and by extension the reputation of the filmmakers, for at most a cheap laugh, and more often nothing more than another freaking DING.
Stallion Dan
Member
Rephrase, why aren't robots made to always put children first. The movie's explanation flies in the face of what humanity has decided for a long while now.
Do you understand why it a sin now?
backflip10019
Member
Cinema Sins is unwatchable garbage. It's grating and soulless and bad.
Bobo Dakes
Member
I'm actually subscribed and find some of their videos entertaining, but I've yet to see a criticism in this thread that was untrue. Whereas you're being super defensive about everything said here.
SuperStiltzkin
Member
That's not a "sin" or a plot hole or a flaw or anything. That's a stretch to spin it as a negative.
Because they designed to save based on the chance of survival and what are you talking about decided