Channel Awesome / ThatGuyWithTheGlasses.com. (Discussion thread.)

[DigoDragon]

Now there's some uses for that out there. Various parodies (like abridged series) are even more parasitic in that regard, frankly I'm not sold that the TGWTG model is one of them. And if there is hope for the concept, at least the proverbial big names there aren't doing it justice.

I had interpreted TGWTG's model as borrowing an idea from MST3K; they go through a movie in 30 minutes and pick it apart with snarky comments and puns to provide a comical skit under the guise of a review. I don't see most of their work as an honest critique of any sort. But I'm fine with not taking it seriously.

Like the Commodore said, he's just in it for the free entertainment and that's pretty much the reason I go there.

[Aotrs Commander]

Having just watched the latest NC review (Purge)... That was hysterical. Just... priceless.

And this is why, really, I am not overly bothered about whether or not people consider these to be "serious" reviews or not - because it was extremely funny, and at the end of the day, that is the real reason I watch TGWTG: because it makes me laugh. And that's pretty much the end-all and be-all of it for me.

(At the end of the day, I don't take as gospel any one review for something I'm actually going to partake in - especially as my tastes tend to run contrary to the Masses On The Interwebz - and for things I'm not... I am not watching it for the source material as much as I am for watching the people being funny and/or clever.)

[Psyren]

I stopped watching after I came to the conclusion there were few actual reviews on the site.

The entire concept, not exclusive to them, is flawed in this regard. You don't need to go through the entire raw material bit by bit to make a review of it, nor do you need much of a persona. Observe some professional critics, while not without their own separate flaws/bias/etc they generally don't go through something step by step. Not that many have the time but identifying say a running theme and its purpose doesn't take terribly long. Of course you don't see much of that from guys like the Nostalgia Critic, they're not using length to pick out the pieces of the bigger puzzle and highlight where this is all going, they're using it for easy potshots. The actual purpose of doing so for the 'internet reviewer' is to provide filler and padding for persona of the "reviewer" even, if its just their own personality, to react. That's not really review or analysis, its a parasitic original creation.

Now there's some uses for that out there. Various parodies (like abridged series) are even more parasitic in that regard, frankly I'm not sold that the TGWTG model is one of them. And if there is hope for the concept, at least the proverbial big names there aren't doing it justice.

While its perhaps hypocritical the only things like that I still sample are Cinema Sins and Honest Trailers. The former I will stress is (generally) not an actual review and easily half the sins don't matter, which is much of the joke. The latter is straight up parody in a short format. Neither makes any pretension (generally) of being actual critique though people do tend to use them that way.

At the end, they generally provide an overall opinion on the work's merits and flaws as a whole. That, however brief, is a review. (Lindsay typically goes several steps further in this regard - contextualizing a work's intent and influences before she even starts the linear exploration. See also reviews like Anastasia, Milo & Otis, The Lorax and City of Angels where she explores the historical context and influential works in detail.)

Also, while exploring a work sequentially they raise interesting points, the sorts of points you might see in a proper review. There's a reason people use these as actual reviews (including the two examples you listed, HT and CS) - because the only value in a review is the information that the audience takes away from it about the work. Anything else is just masturbatory navel-gazing on the part of the video maker.

[Metahuman1]

So, new at4w ep yesterday. Anyone wamt to speculate on the true identity of tje king of worms?