Callum Nathan Thomas Edmunds / MauLer93 / MauLer and the EFAPshere - Objective discussion about not-Channel Awesome featuring Rags, Southpaw and more!

  • Thread starter Thread starter LN 910
  • Start date Start date

Are MauLer's videos too long?

  • Yes

    Votes: 186 13.0%
  • No

    Votes: 388 27.2%
  • Fuck YES

    Votes: 853 59.8%

  • Total voters
    1,427
Fringy acts as if Mauler not caring about Reva's motivation is a sign that the story is badly written. It's not. He doesn't care because he's only watching the show to make the Mini.
This is why the SW minis feel more tedious to watch than the Batwoman minis. With the latter they seem like they were actually enjoying watching how bad and goofy that show could get, with the former they come off with the enthusiasm of a kid who was just told he had a dentist appointment afterschool.
 
Y'know, for people who constantly harp about "visuals don't matter as much as the writing", they were really pedantic about that shaky cam.

Reva: Farmer, right? Kids?
Metal: How do you know that?!

Nigga, she asked him a question. She's not omniscient. Fucking Christ.
I'm never let down by how autistic these guys really are. She's asking a fucking question, it's like they're unable to just let a scene play out.
Ya know what? If a pickle joke gets the Act Man demonetized, then people like Rags and Jim Sterling who openly show off sex toys (be it a drawing or IRL) deserve the same.
The fact he openly has that shit in the background speaks volumes about him as a person. While I think most people could get away with it as a dirty, edgy joke, knowing that Rags has a history of being a sexual degenerate and made commissions for porn of his avatar makes it clear a public display of his sexuality. Which is fucking disgusting and embarrassing that he has to show case it. The last thing I want to see for a review of a Star Wars show is a gay furry's dildo collection, not even as a background gag.
@Passing Through Town
  • 12:06 - Mauler mocks the show for having bad guy music play as the bad guys arrive. Does this apply to the Imperial March in the OT? In my opinion it's not the presence of evil sounding music that's the issue, it's the quality of that music.
This is just stupid. They really try to justify their opinions by just being overly critical and smug about basic film making techniques. Playing menacing music for the villains arrival is something that films have been doing for decades. Why is it wrong for this show to do it? Oh right, they already hated it before it aired and decided that anything it does is an objective flaw. Like, really, what is wrong with doing that? I bet if anyone actually tried to confront them on this, they'd probably freeze up or mumble some bullshit about predictability or something retarded along those lines.
 
r/MauLer having no self-awareness again.

"Look at these nimrods, still letting us live in their head rent free. Yeah, we totally don't do the same with other movies and creators."
Noselfawareness.jpg
 
  • Informative
Reactions: José Mourinho
(Guys, Drinker isn't any better.) That's just lacking knowledge. Drinker does not present as though he knows better or is smarter than he is.
He claimed tons of people were disillusioned with Hollywood cinema and were switching over to East Asia cinema, which is a pretty baseless claim he presents, and then he fails to mention more than like 2 films from all of East Asian cinema
(Couldn't even name a single Japanese movie: ) Most people can't in all honestly.
Most people don't try and make a point about how people are switching over to East Asian cinema, singling out Japanese, and then fail to name a single movie. It doesn't help that all 3 films mentioned are not only from the basic-bitch entry level section of East Asian cinema but are all like 20 years old. Old Boy (2003) and Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon (2000) Battle Royale (2000).

If East Asian cinema was offering more options that appealed to average film fan, especially those 'disillusioned with Hollywood' bs, then he should not only be able to easily name films but be able to name ones that came out within like the last 5 years.

He is the one who brought this point up and then dropped all of the spaghetti. Point is, Drinker is a dumb fucking idiot who speaks out his ass about media when he doesn't really know much more than the EFAP spergs. He is just slightly less spergy and more culture warrior anti-sjw. IDC that he wrote discount Tom Clancy novels.
 
When it comes to the DQ (the Drinker Question), he's not as retarded or up his own ass as MauLer and co, but he's not as funny as he thinks he is and has very centrist/normie takes. Sargon of Akkad is more edgy and closer to the truth than him. Rather than say what's actually going on with media and why, he rather go "lol the message" but he'll never say what the message is or why it's pushed. Got to keep those YouTube bucks rolling in! I'm sick of these shills and gatekeepers.

If you want a short (by EFAP standards) video on why some new movie sucks, he's okay. Anything beyond that is pointless at best.
 
Can you imagine EFAP/drinker going to a cinema festival without laughing?
I can easily imagine Drinker actually enjoying a film festival. He isn't exclusively centered around Marvel and Star Wars shit like EFAP is, he actually enjoys watching movies that take him out of his comfort zone. The man's no genius or anything, but he doesn't try to be, and comparing him to EFAP is incredibly unfair.

That big Chance on the desk. I know he's being edgy but what if kids find his videos in the YT recommendation side bar?
It's not age restricted, btw.
 
When it comes to the DQ (the Drinker Question), he's not as retarded or up his own ass as MauLer and co, but he's not as funny as he thinks he is and has very centrist/normie takes. Sargon of Akkad is more edgy and closer to the truth than him. Rather than say what's actually going on with media and why, he rather go "lol the message" but he'll never say what the message is or why it's pushed. Got to keep those YouTube bucks rolling in! I'm sick of these shills and gatekeepers.

If you want a short (by EFAP standards) video on why some new movie sucks, he's okay. Anything beyond that is pointless at best.
He's a helluva lot better than the EFAP crew based on presentation alone. If nothing else, he at least knows how to edit his thoughts into a more digestible package instead of aimlessly sperging for hours on end.

Can't say I'm much of a fan though. For me it's his insistence that modern movies suck while almost exclusively focusing on American blockbusters and not much else, and the anti-SJW politisperging that populates his videos. I've always been annoyed by reviewers who make broad sweeping statements about the state of entertainment while only consuming a narrow range of what's being offered, and those who ramble about politics excessively, regardless of what their beliefs are. I gave him a chance by watching several of his videos, and while I enjoyed some of them, I decided that he wasn't for me.
 
It isn't just the negativity that puts me off youtube reviewers these days.
I think there's a common issue where too many of them are trying to pull off "gotcha" reviews; longform videos where they establish the Achilles' heel or other grand flaw of a movie or videogame (WHY X SUCKS, THE REASON WHY Y FLOPPED, THE TRUE PROBLEM WITH INSERT BUMBLEFUCK MOVIE HERE) instead of being more measured and providing pros and cons to stuff. RLM sidesteps this a bit by having a variety of opinions where Mike and Jay both provide different views on the aspects of a movie and it provides a degree of nuance and appreciation for the craft that helps you warm to them.

Not a movie reviewer, but the most enjoyable youtuber I discovered over the past couple years is the Running Shine channel that made the Yiik review that hit a million views a couple months back. That one and their OoT video are both around 2 hours in length with consistently funny editing and scripting compared to Mauler's lack of output, and those guys don't even get paid. Instead of the normal "youtube essay" format, there's more of a playalong style where he'll work through the plot while pointing out anything he likes while occasionally going off on tangents about the music, environments, user interface, whatever, and it's equally entertaining whether he loves the game or hates it.

Being able to give a balanced perspective and considering all the different moving parts of media most people wouldn't notice, like a lack of animation or ergonomic textbox design, considering the effect they actually have on the audience's involvement, and still taking the time to point out everything you think is cool or creative speaks to a real appreciation, amateurish or not, for the art form you're critiquing. People like MauLer just use reviews as a soapbox to complain about whatever they think is the culprit behind shitty writing that week.
 
Rags said that people that liked the Mandalorian are loser weirdos... says the guy that jerks off to drawings of dogs.
I doubt anyone in their audience reads these, but this is why no one takes them seriously. Once their critiques are ignored, they'll often devolve into saying you're xyz for not agreeing with them after they proved what the right response was.

But why say "they" when clearly only Rags said it? Well, how did MauLer respond? Did he say "no, that's uncalled for?" Nope. He never does. He doesn't think Rags is wrong when he says these things, he's just the one smart enough to occasionally keep his mouth shut. Then when people say Rags is a toxic prick who makes the podcast antagonistic to others, MauLer can now defend these comments he agrees with under the guise of defending his friend.
 
It's finally happening, a RLM video being EFAPed
The Obi-Wan show is definitely better than the lot Disney has produced so far. I don't see how it's controversial to say Obi-Wan is "alright." About on par with Mandalorian, though it's like a 6 or 7 out of 10. I don't get how such a mildly enthusiastic review is somehow the final straw that calls for an EFAP.
 
They already EFAPed RLM's Revenge of the Sith half a year ago. I saw Az piss and shit himself on Twitter because RLM dared to like Kenobi. Guess Longman was salty as well. Wonder if this might get a little drama.

Az Copium:View attachment 3401344
Felt like it was sponsored by Disney? Mike said he felt bad for enjoying it. What a ringing endorsement.
 
I can only hope that these Fandom Menace/Efap/whatever-the-hell-they-like-to-call-themselves type of people go into a full on autistic war with RLM, i feel like that's what gonna break them and expose how full of shit they are.
Saying that Disney sponsored them is nothing but lunacy.
 
From what I know of EFAP, they make responses to certain types of YouTubers, such as critics who will make a video with bad arguments, yet act like they're opinion is superior, like Jim Sterling or Quinton for instance. (Mind you I'm talking about older EFAP, I have no idea what they're like currently).

But going after RLM feels unfair. The thing about RLM is that they're not analytical review, their type of review is more opinion oriented where they talk about what the saw and have banter. An example of something from RLM that would make sense for EFAP to talk about (if it had any significant problems in it) are the Plinkett Reviews because that series is analytical, premeditated, objective, and has statements of quality, etc. that would be entirely reasonable to respond to.

On their other shows however it's not like that, they never claim to be an authority on criticism or like their opinion is better, it's just them talking about what they saw and having fun, like a podcast. This is why for instance when Mike said he liked Jurassic World nobody made responses about that one Half in the Bag, even if it is a bad movie, it's just his opinion, a subjective opinion as opposed to an objective one, which I thought would be really clear for them to know what the difference between the two are.

So what they're doing is basically going after someone for just stating what they thought of a piece of media, and I could've sworn they said quite a while ago that they specifically don't go after people for their subjective opinions. It doesn't seem like their fans aren't noticing this contradiction, nor are RLM's fans for that matter, which just sucks for RLM honestly.
 
Last edited:
Back