Red Letter Media

Favorite recurring character? (Select 4)

  • Jack / AIDSMobdy

    Votes: 224 23.7%

  • Josh / the Wizard

    Votes: 65 6.9%

  • Colin (Canadian #1)

    Votes: 415 43.9%

  • Jim (Canadian #2)

    Votes: 201 21.3%

  • Tim

    Votes: 352 37.2%

  • Len Kabasinski

    Votes: 190 20.1%

  • Freddie Williams

    Votes: 244 25.8%

  • Patton Oswalt

    Votes: 22 2.3%

  • Macaulay Culkin

    Votes: 473 50.1%

  • Max Landis

    Votes: 52 5.5%
  • Total voters
    945
I couldn't even figure out why Shat was dragging them back into the discussion, seemed like his beef was with 2 other dudes and one of them happened to be following RLM on twitter and that was enough to set him off? Then of course the second he mentions RLM the fans take the bait and defend them, which only stirs Shat up worse. I knew the fanbase was autistic af but damn, recognize low quality bait when you see it.

Mike's address is public and his house was built for 300k last time I read. That's hardly living large even by shithole midwest standards. 15 mil is a stretch and those sites are notoriously wrong, especially for youtubers. Last time their Pateon figures were public they averaged 5 dollars per sub. They are now at 10,609 so if math holds they're raking in over 50k a month from just patreon. No telling what their ad revenue is on their extensive backlog of videos. Maybe we double it and say they make 1.2mil off youtube ads and patreon which appear to be their only sources of income. Taxes are going to eat a huge chunk of that, along with insurance, building maintenance and rent, props, monthly bills, etc.

TL;DR the boys aren't millionaires but they live pretty comfortably. Probably pisses off the lard ass running Shat twitter because he has to play puppet wtih a 90 year old C list celebrity to feel important.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: knightlautrec, Travoltron and Brain Problems
1.jpg


Mikebros....
 
  • Feels
  • Winner
  • Horrifying
Reactions: deeman, frozenrunner, Dark Edea and 19 others
FrickinFrackinFruckin said:
Click to expand...
it's always a horror show when RLM decide to talk about the work of an auteur. They're unwilling to accept the possibility that anybody's work is above them, or at least they're unwilling to admit the possibility on camera. they know 99% of the people watching this shit won't perceive any more than they do (most will even see less, saddening thought), and because of this they can express every dissatisfaction they have with the film as an objective failure on the part of the director. RLM viewers are happy to roll with this, because going along with everything RLM say means that the film really is simple. Nobody has been filtered. They tell people that all art they don't like is merely beneath them. This allows viewers to feel privy to the insider expert knowledge on how filmmaking really ought to be done, and it also tells them they're really smarter than the people who helm 1/10 of a billion dollar projects and have hundreds of people working under them to realise their personal visions. Sure you couldn't actually make one yourself, but you know George Lucas is a retard because The Phantom Menace doesn't have a single protagonist, and that's bad... because... "don't ask questions, consume web content and get excited for next web content".

This review, like all of their worst ones, is full of pacing and editing sleights to rush you through the lack of sense behind what they're saying. Plenty of what they say or show could easily be interpreted as a positive element but is clearly presented with the intention of making you think less of what Snyder is doing, or rather, feel less. They create a negative tone, then bombard you with noise. One example, Snyder deliberately visually quotes other genre-works in Army of the Dead. Mike and Jay recognise this and show side by sides. The zombie attack at the start being framed exactly like the werewolf attack at the beginning of An American Werewolf in London being something I appreciated. Jay and Mike show you this, but rather than taking it as Snyder's way of showing reverence for the history of genre film and perhaps suggestions that we should be looking for other repeating elements, they just shallowly dismiss it as a sign of a lack of creativity, and then suggest that doing things less like these past films makes you an objectively bad filmmaker. The treacherous bad guy dies quickly in Aliens, that's better because CONSUME AND STOP ASKING QUESTIONS.

What really sold this as an artistically illiterate shitshow for me was their mocking of the military convoy's name, 'Four Horsemen', paying no mind to the significance of the theme of apocalypse/end of days in the film. No mention of Gotterdammerung, the name of the vault, the prize, the motivation of the main cast, the (i thought) rather bluntly telegraphed key to understanding the entire subtext of the film. Maybe Mike wouldn't have been so bored if he were sharp enough to not miss absolutely everything that the film had going on beyond its most superficial elements. I'll explain my reading of the film in another post if any of you think I'm full of shit on this. I feel like at least half of the richness of my viewing experience came from the enjoyment I got from understanding and observing how these ideas were worked into the film.

This might seem overboard but this wilful cretinous retardation, this pure resentment-fueled guerilla war against the great men of cinematic art has absolutely polluted a significant portion of modern film discourse. This desire to build an understanding of art in which nothing is above the philistine and everything displeasing is below him will destroy art. Example below.

cretinous retard.PNG

Look at this moron in the comments. Something about the movie doesn't flow with him, A superficial contradiction in the actions of a character. What does this mean? Obviously Zack Snyder is a fucking retard and didn't realise the moral ambiguity present in his writing. Thanks Lelldorin84, why don't they let you write 90 million dollar movies? Life is just unfair isn't it?

Also yes you may have realised this is about more than Army of the Dead. This video reawakened my disgust towards their preposterously arrogant and nonsensical hit-piece against George Lucas. But there's a greater trend underlying their reactions to both works which I have attempted to explain here.
 
  • Mad at the Internet
  • Autistic
  • Dumb
Reactions: Cpl. Long Dong Silver, Rigor Meowtis, Great President of McHell and 57 others
biscuitscilia said:
Bravo Snyder
Click to expand...
Right? They literally pointed that out. It didn't go over anyone's head. That's why they were making fun of it for being on the nose in the extreme.

Now if you'll excuse me I am going to watch them talk about decidedly non-auteur works like The Lighthouse, The Intern, Fire Walk With Me, True Stories, and Exorcist III.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: TchPiKinmup, Potatoherder, Brain Problems and 12 others
Scarmiglione said:
it's always a horror show when RLM decide to talk about the work of an auteur. They're unwilling to accept the possibility that anybody's work is above them, or at least they're unwilling to admit the possibility on camera. they know 99% of the people watching this shit won't perceive any more than they do (most will even see less, saddening thought), and because of this they can express every dissatisfaction they have with the film as an objective failure on the part of the director. RLM viewers are happy to roll with this, because going along with everything RLM say means that the film really is simple. Nobody has been filtered. They tell people that all art they don't like is merely beneath them. This allows viewers to feel privy to the insider expert knowledge on how filmmaking really ought to be done, and it also tells them they're really smarter than the people who helm 1/10 of a billion dollar projects and have hundreds of people working under them to realise their personal visions. Sure you couldn't actually make one yourself, but you know George Lucas is a retard because The Phantom Menace doesn't have a single protagonist, and that's bad... because... "don't ask questions, consume web content and get excited for next web content".

This review, like all of their worst ones, is full of pacing and editing sleights to rush you through the lack of sense behind what they're saying. Plenty of what they say or show could easily be interpreted as a positive element but is clearly presented with the intention of making you think less of what Snyder is doing, or rather, feel less. They create a negative tone, then bombard you with noise. One example, Snyder deliberately visually quotes other genre-works in Army of the Dead. Mike and Jay recognise this and show side by sides. The zombie attack at the start being framed exactly like the werewolf attack at the beginning of An American Werewolf in London being something I appreciated. Jay and Mike show you this, but rather than taking it as Snyder's way of showing reverence for the history of genre film and perhaps suggestions that we should be looking for other repeating elements, they just shallowly dismiss it as a sign of a lack of creativity, and then suggest that doing things less like these past films makes you an objectively bad filmmaker. The treacherous bad guy dies quickly in Aliens, that's better because CONSUME AND STOP ASKING QUESTIONS.

What really sold this as an artistically illiterate shitshow for me was their mocking of the military convoy's name, 'Four Horsemen', paying no mind to the significance of the theme of apocalypse/end of days in the film. No mention of Gotterdammerung, the name of the vault, the prize, the motivation of the main cast, the (i thought) rather bluntly telegraphed key to understanding the entire subtext of the film. Maybe Mike wouldn't have been so bored if he were sharp enough to not miss absolutely everything that the film had going on beyond its most superficial elements. I'll explain my reading of the film in another post if any of you think I'm full of shit on this. I feel like at least half of the richness of my viewing experience came from the enjoyment I got from understanding and observing how these ideas were worked into the film.

This might seem overboard but this wilful cretinous retardation, this pure resentment-fueled guerilla war against the great men of cinematic art has absolutely polluted a significant portion of modern film discourse. This desire to build an understanding of art in which nothing is above the philistine and everything displeasing is below him will destroy art. Example below.

View attachment 2200629
Look at this moron in the comments. Something about the movie doesn't flow with him, A superficial contradiction in the actions of a character. What does this mean? Obviously Zack Snyder is a fucking retard and didn't realise the moral ambiguity present in his writing. Thanks Lelldorin84, why don't they let you write 90 million dollar movies? Life is just unfair isn't it?

Also yes you may have realised this is about more than Army of the Dead. This video reawakened my disgust towards their preposterously arrogant and nonsensical hit-piece against George Lucas. But there's a greater trend underlying their reactions to both works which I have attempted to explain here.
Click to expand...
t. Zack Snyder
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Winner
Reactions: Cpl. Long Dong Silver, TchPiKinmup, Brain Problems and 3 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back