TGWTG "Nostalgia Critic" / Doug Walker, Rob Walker, Mike Michaud, Mike Ellis, Holly Christine Brown, et al - The Incompetent Predator-Protecting Upper Management of Channel Awesome, Doug Still Not That Funny

And the irony is that whenever he looks at something lighthearted or comedic, he holds it to an impossible standard of comedy. It has to be SUPER FUCKING FUNNY or he'll trash it.

So things either have to be 100% grimdark with no levity at all or 100% side-splitting comedic with no breathing room.

What a shitty "critic".
 
I gotta say, I'm pretty miffed that Doug complained about Jameson refusing to sell out Peter to the Green Goblin when his life was in danger. That's one of the main moments that showed that the former, for all of his bitterness and jerk attitude, does indeed have a good side to him and will not endanger the lives of his employees. It's basically adding depth and nuance to his character, yet Doug sees it as contradictory.

For all his talk about understanding subtext in films and the like, it's baffling that he misses this one.
 
And the irony is that whenever he looks at something lighthearted or comedic, he holds it to an impossible standard of comedy. It has to be SUPER FUCKING FUNNY or he'll trash it.

So things either have to be 100% grimdark with no levity at all or 100% side-splitting comedic with no breathing room.

What a shitty "critic".
The mid to late 90s must have really done a number on Doug.
I gotta say, I'm pretty miffed that Doug complained about Jameson refusing to sell out Peter to the Green Goblin when his life was in danger. That's one of the main moments that showed that the former, for all of his bitterness and jerk attitude, does indeed have a good side to him and will not endanger the lives of his employees. It's basically adding depth and nuance to his character, yet Doug sees it as contradictory.

For all his talk about understanding subtext in films and the like, it's baffling that he misses this one.
From Wikipedia:
8A0068F3-BC3F-447A-B362-3B35EE80B075.jpeg

Sounds like Jonah might be a “depending on the writer” case, but it’s not like you can’t play a part in a superhero saga if you’re some average Joe walking down the street.
 
Sigh

80F551B9-A2A6-412E-A145-602627CD5267.jpeg

Only Bob Chipman can unironically write a full tweet entirely in parentheticals and not be self aware enough to reflect on how idiotic this is


Doug has a slight point there.

I would argue that as an employer for journalist, a field that only exists by protecting sources, Doug’s point is answered in the context of the film. The big problem I have with the scene is how uncharacteristic it is if JJ. He would be shouting down Green Goblin as if he were Peter, not acting as meek
 
Why would he question JJ covering for Peter against the Goblin?

I thought that was a great little character moment for him. He's this boisterous asshole, but that was a little moment that was like "Awww, he does care".

Also, JJ is a loud mouthed asshole and an over the top sensationalist...I don't see sniveling coward that will give up people's lives for his own in any of those earlier scenes.
 
Last edited:
Doug definitely doesn't understand the character of JJ at all if he doesn't understand that moment and it's a great little moment.

Look, Doug's taste has always been kind of shitty and I've often disagreed with him over the years, but I still find his videos worth watching, I don't have to agree with someone all of the time to still like their content.
 
It’s called google, Sam. I know you‘be used it.

View attachment 1175237

it’s not “drama people won’t let die” it’s you being an idiot who says pointless things, gets way too mad when people tell you it’s pointless, and then you proceed to make multiple sock puppet accounts. Just lurk and eventually we can all forget about you.

And again, maybe I just misinterpreted the definition. Ever thought of that? Granted, this was not helped by the fact that I found out about enforced method acting first, which is when the director brings out genuine emotions/reactions in the actors, usually by not revealing certain information to them until filming. An example of this is in the film Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, in which the actors playing the kids and their parents didn't see the factory set until those scenes were filmed, so their surprised reactions are genuine. So I thought method acting was like that, but on the actor's part, where they try to think how they would genuinely react if they were in that situation.

Also, if it helps, I usually kept my sock puppets confined to the Enter thread, while everywhere else I just try to be myself and move on. You guys are the ones who keep derailing the thread by harping on at me and not letting it go. At least if you kept it to just, "Okay... thanks for sharing /sarcasm" or "well, that was pointless", you know, just general snarky remarks, I'd understand, but you keep going at me like I'm the sperm of Beëlzebub. If it were some random nobody making those comments, you likely wouldn't care.

But anyway, back on topic:

This whole "camp = bad" mentality is probably the reason why so many cartoon reviewers despise Teen Titans Go! nowadays - because they grew up with the original Teen Titans cartoon, which could be funny at times, but was mostly dark and gritty, almost like its generation's Batman: The Animated Series. And then this goofball cartoon comes along, and just wants to be silly and entertaining, and they see it as an insult to the original show.

Honestly, people need to grow the fuck up and realise that sometimes it's just good to have a good laugh. I was only introduced to the original Teen Titans in 2008, when the show had already been ended for two years, and I never really got into the show because superhero shows aren't really my thing. So had I not heard about Teen Titans Go! from the animation "reviewer" community, I probably would've come to the conclusion that it was a decent spin on an old classic, just being all goofy and off the walls. And likewise, kids nowadays have likely never heard of the original Teen Titans, so they won't make the connection to begin with, and they'll judge the show purely on its own merits. Granted, they won't necessarily like it, but a lot of kids must do, seeing how it's one of Cartoon Network's most successful shows of the 2010s. Just let the kids have their fun!

It's the same thing with Spider-Man, or really any other superhero, or even any franchise or IP - there's nothing wrong with a sillier, more comedic spin as long as it's actually done well, and while I never got into Spider-Man like a lot of kids I knew did, they sounded like decent enough films from what I had heard, and I'm sure I'd enjoy them if I sat down and watched them today. Doug just needs to chill his flabby white ass and let the fans enjoy what they enjoy, as long as they're not being rabid A-holes like him.
 
Last edited:
Hasn't almost every well known content creator from TGWTG turned out to be an idiot or a horrible person? On that basis I wouldn't be surprised if Brad turned out to have done those things. But goddamn, I would still be disappointed.
Pretty much, Brad just has the strongest Defense Force.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dimetrodon
While that Joker bit seems in character for him, I’d say it’s more of Doug thinks Batman has to be a certain way. Superman has to be a certain way. Certain characters must be a certain way, no exception. Also, if you wanna talk “celebration of all things Batman”, I got something for that.
That's how it is for a lot of the CA folk. A lot of Linkara's whining about All Star Batman and Robin was mainly about how an alternate universe version of the characters... didn't match up with the traditional interpretation, by which he means the cartoon he grew up on. And there are plenty of problems with the writing in that series but that was his main gripe. Spoony had some similar gripes with other stuff. And a lot of them hated Bayformers for not being like the G1 cartoons.

Basically, they're not really fans of the franchise as a whole. Much like Moviebob's obsessive love of Spider-Man being only for the Raimi trilogy, they only like one particular interpretation that they see as the true version, and their little minds break at any deviation from that.
 
To be at least somewhat fair not all the versions of a character through the years are good.Some are genuinely bad.You can usually figure out the good versions by how influential their portrayal proves to be over the years.There's a reason why Christopher Reeve as Superman is still the default image people have.By contrast Adam West as Batman isn't bad its just a bit too knowingly silly basically its trying too hard to be funny.Of course a reviewer has to mention this bit when analysing a different version and say why it doesn't really work or what is missing.
 
Last edited:
To be at least somewhat fair not all the versions of a character through the years are good.Some are genuinely bad.You can usually figure out the good versions by how influential their portrayal proves to be over the years.There's a reason why Christopher Reeve as Superman is still the default image people have.By contrast Adam West as Batman isn't bad its just a bit too knowingly silly basically its trying too hard to be funny.Of course a reviewer has to mention this bit when analysing a different version and say why it doesn't really work or what is missing.
Adam west is always the go to for reference whenever you wanna talk about that era of comics (where everything was safe for kids and goofy.)
Thats why we got two animated films that were basically a love letter to the show and said era
 
To me, the wide variety of interpretations you can do for the characters is part of what makes the superhero genre interesting.

Of course sometimes an interpretation works and sometimes it doesn't.
 
Blockbuster Buster is like that too. he used to go on rants about how there's only one true Batman, the cartoon one, and all the other ones were just fucking shit because blah blah blah one true interpretation nonsense. he basically had a freak out when Robert Pattinson was cast for the new Bats.
That’s because ERod is stuck in 2008.
 
Man, I am NOT looking forward to the rest of Doug's Spider-Man month reviews. As if his horrendous Matrix month wasn't bad enough.

Really though, it seems that he feels that these sorts of superhero movies need to be erased of any kinds of camp, if they are to be taken seriously by adults like him. Like, while he does acknowledge that the first Spider-Man is like a comic book, to him, being like a 50s or 60s comic book is outdated. Hence why he feels that movies such as The Dark Knight are the way to go, as they push the envelope on what these sorts of films can be like. Basically, that the films should strive to be more mature and sophisticated because they can, not necessarily because they should.

Heck, it's why he felt that the Venom film was a slap in the face to the character, as he saw it as basically making a mockery out of a potentially serious idea, and pointed out that settling for it was like settling for Batman and Robin over Joker 2019. There's so much wrong with that statement I don't know where to begin, but to save time, Venom wasn't being mocked by that film's campy tone. In fact, it was very much doing the character justice, as the comics the film pulled from were quite campy and silly.

I'm beginning to think that Batman and Robin has forever tainted his view of what a comic book film should or should not be.
On the other hand, he seems like the kind of geek who has a closet hard on for the 1990s Dark Ages of American comics. "Dark and gritty?" "More mature and realistic?" Sounds to me he was one of the first jackasses who was in line for The Death of Superman.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Decimator
That’s because ERod is stuck in 2008.
I swear everyone from Channel Autism are such exceptional faggots and/or pathetic losers who never amounted to anything in life. With the exception of Iron Liz, who is actually down to earth, left this crap behind, dumped Linkara, and works at a rape crisis center to help give counciling to victims of rape and abuse.
 
Back