Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
Yeah Linkara's adorable because he doesn't really know what he's talking about.
Dude, that's way, way older than him (as an internet personality, probably not older than him as a person).
But fedoras are cool, provided you wear them with an appropriate outfit, which almost no-one does.
He is my favourite guy from that site. Before his reviews I had no sane perspective on comics and had no idea how awful some of them were.
Even as somebody who doesn't know much about comic books, Linkara's lack of knowledge still shows. I recall he had to apologize or something for having no damn clue who Angelo was when he reviewed some X-men issues.
@ninjaclown: Well, you're bound to find awful stuff in pretty much any medium, and I think the stuff he picks is more indicative of how bad comics could be, rather than an indicator of how bad comics generally are.
I don't know, comics just happen to have more awful stuff like hack writers who think darker = better, sudden cancellations of comics that had solid sales because they didn't appeal to their core demographic, writers who think misogyny is still acceptable (too many examples to list), etc. Pointing them out is not bad if you can avoid using them in the future. Before Linkara I just assumed every fan found this acceptable or something.
Not all stuff he reviews is bad either, he occasionally picks good comics as examples on how to write good comics. Simple.
Found everywhere in books and movies.
Also found everywhere in books and movies. And cartoons, TV series, and pretty much every medium ever, really.
Sudden cancellation is perhaps a point, I don't know if any other medium does that with any regularity.
Re: Nostalgia Critic:
If Doug's bringing him back because he genuinely felt he gave up too early, and he feels a renewed passion for the series, well, more power to him.
On the other hand, if he's bringing the Critic back because he feels he must do so to keep the site alfoat after the loss of viewership he suffered after retiring him...that's kinda sad. And it makes me suspsect the new episodes will be kinda soulless and mass-produced feeling.
Re: Linkara:
I admit I don't have enough comic knowledge to see just how full of it he may be, but one thing does annoy me: how fucking defensive he is about everything. For example, he did a bit where he acted perplexed at the term "coney dog". When people explained what a coney dog is, he got all "ARGH BLARGH WHY ARE SO MANY OF YOU EXPLAINING THIS TO ME, I ONLY NEED TO BE TOLD ONCE" Really? You make a mistake that could have been fixed by 30 seconds of Googling and it's the people correcting you who are in the wrong?
Another example was his first "Top 10 Screw-Ups" video, in which he doesn't actually admit to screwing anything up, but instead spends the whole time defending his perceived mistakes.
did Linkara once refuse to review sonichu as a request by fans.
Yes he did.
I missed this but I'd like to remind you that Humphrey Bogart is a thing that happened.
Man remember when Humphrey Bogart reviewed Tarot: Witch of the Black Rose?
I'm not even sure what train of logic are you following there, but okey dokey.
Well, Channel Awesome seems to be based on the principle of reviewing low-quality things (Even if some reviewers seem to go against this trend.)
And if it's the 1940s.
As Nova mentioned, these are not problems unique to comic books nor even particularly disproportionate in comic books. The real issues come from the fact that American Comic Books are overtly represented by the superhero genre and the Big Two in that particular form of storytelling.
And honestly, it's pretty clear that the Big Two handle their staff and material the same way a Hollywood studio would. And if you notice, there's also rampant bigotry there, which is actually mostly representative of the many forms of institutionalized bigotry.
Granted, all of this doesn't mean that these aren't problems, but they're perceived to be much bigger and ever-present than they are. I also feel that the industry has been changing and mutating. It still holds these problems, but they're being whittled and removed as time goes by and as they prove relatively unsuccesful.
Joss Whedon's entire career says hi.
Seriously, Angel even got cancelled because he asked the executives to be more timely about their decisions during season 4 prep-time.
Honestly, I wouldn't mind him not knowing about comics that much if he didn't present himself as a source of knowledge and if he wasn't so damn arrogant about having a show on the internet.
Okay, since apparently every person I know who has a show on the internet has been called arrogant by someone either from here or another site at one point or another, I feel compelled to ask what exactly defines them as arrogant?
See the CentralAvenue quote, which pretty much summarizes his attitude problems.
That sounds like everyone.
As it turns out, everyone's an asshole sometimes.
No, most people when pointed out that they fucked up on a minor thing just acknowledge it and move on and sometimes try not to fuck up again in the future.
The thing is, in what context could you possibly use such an outfit so that it isn't an attempt to be "cool" (therefore losing much of its coolness)? It's the same reason it's impossible to pull The Driver's outfit off, even if by some miracle you looked just like Ryan Gosling.
Granted the Driver's outfit looked dorky as hell. It just had the coolness added to it by being worn by a sedate psychopath.
^^Because 50's party. Or generally any formalwear event by extension. Or just for the sake of amusement of yourself and others. It's a surprise what you can get away with if your manner and body language doesn't strike the opposites of insecure or tryhard.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Anyhow, as to why people criticize? Have some rectumravaged David Wang(hurhur, I made a funny):
"And so on. Remember, misery is comfortable. It's why so many people prefer it. Happiness takes effort.
Also, courage. It's incredibly comforting to know that as long as you don't create anything in your life, then nobody can attack the thing you created.
It's so much easier to just sit back and criticize other people's creations. This movie is stupid. That couple's kids are brats. That other couple's relationship is a mess. That rich guy is shallow. This restaurant sucks. This Internet writer is an asshole. I'd better leave a mean comment demanding that the website fire him. See, I created something.
Oh, wait, did I forget to mention that part? Yeah, whatever you try to build or create -- be it a poem, or a new skill, or a new relationship -- you will find yourself immediately surrounded by non-creators who trash it. Maybe not to your face, but they'll do it."
I hate that article. Not because it's wrong, but because everything on it should be common sense and not something a Cracked writer has to spell out.
Also fedoras are over hated on. If you're not wearing one solely because you think it'll make you look like a hipster, who's really the hipster there?
@Cloverleaf:
Well, he brought that up in his next screw-ups video and tried to keep it to a minimum, so he can at least recognize some flaws. And in that video, he did genuinely admit to some fuckups.
... I miss reading Cracked. Oddly enough, it was David Wong himself that drove me away from the site in the first place.
That was a good article.
His latest Screw-Ups video really highlighted the errors in his videos too. If he was truly arrogant he would always assert he was right no matter what.
His complaint wasn't that people were correcting him. It was dozens of people correcting him in a row despite the previous corrections being clearly visible, which I can kind of see getting annoying.
There's quite a few things I don't like about that article. For one, it promotes a very specific lifestyle (with a correspondent definition of "success") from a very "American" mindset. Also, it immediately deflects all criticism by saying "If you disagree, it's because of your defense mechanisms and insecurities"...
... OK, so there were only two things. But they were pretty big things.
The fact that it's written by David Wong was enough to make me dislike it immensely right from the start.
I didn't know anyone was abstaining from wearing fedoras solely because everyone else was doing it; I could have sworn it was because fedoras look really goofy with everything that people wear them with nowadays. :P
David Wong does this kind of thing in almost all of his articles when he's not promoting his goddamn book.
He'll sometimes make good points but then follow it up by shaming the reader based on stupid assumptions about them (see: articles where he assumes every cracked reader is a male comic book geek in their 20s) or glorifying himself. He's also kind of a misogynist, which is weird considering how he seems to think of himself as a feminist. Granted he's of the "putting women on a pedestal" type rather than the "get back in the kitchen" type, but still.
Yes but you're still avoiding it because of popular opinion. Which I think is the only thing one can consistently define hipsterism by.
It's not important anyway, I'm just bothered about fedora-shaming because my dad used to wear them and he's certainly not a nerd trying to look cool.
Of course the only hats I wear are flatbrim baseball caps so what do I know.