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

[Shieldman]

https://twitter.com/KibakinsYT/status/1429543143481937927

Also, here is the survey they ran during the show

I only skimmed through, they really played Gartic Phone a couple of times to pad the whole thing, and there were less guests than in previous anniversaries. As a former fan, I'll say this was really weak.

 

[Dr. Pasquale]

Anniversary special wise, there's no way to top EFAP 100

They kinda went all in with that, having basically all the previous guests come on, EFAP Endgame meme, having Wolf back on, having a heart to heart with Downward Thrust, watching EFAP 1 clips together, so on and so forth

This one felt like they simply did it out of obligation. Why cover a Jim Sterling video from forever ago? Also fuck gartic phone, no one watches EFAP Gaming

 

[ABE LINN COHN]

https://twitter.com/KibakinsYT/status/1429543143481937927
View attachment 2470711
Also, here is the survey they ran during the show

I only skimmed through, they really played Gartic Phone a couple of times to pad the whole thing, and there were less guests than in previous anniversaries. As a former fan, I'll say this was really weak.

24 hours.
24 fucking hours.
How the fuck do you stay streaming for 24 hours straight? Do these people not sleep? Was the livestream continuing while one of them was in bed? Were they taking shifts?

 

[Dr. Pasquale]

24 hours.
24 fucking hours.
How the fuck do you stay streaming for 24 hours straight? Do these people not sleep? Was the livestream continuing while one of them was in bed? Were they taking shifts?

The 3 hosts stay on the panel all the time, powering it through with Monster and RedBull. The rest of the guests just sorta stay for how long they want and then leave, getting replaced by the next batch of guests.

This is pretty much how every episode of EFAP works, the only difference the anniversaries have is that they try to stay on for 24 hours. EFAP 100 went on for 37 if I'm not mistaken, because they wanted to surpass the previous one. This time they didn't try that.

 

[Quintex96]

https://twitter.com/KibakinsYT/status/1429543143481937927
View attachment 2470711
Also, here is the survey they ran during the show

I only skimmed through, they really played Gartic Phone a couple of times to pad the whole thing, and there were less guests than in previous anniversaries. As a former fan, I'll say this was really weak.

>24 hours
>only 4 videos covered

pathetic

 

[Passing Through Town]

I miss the days when EFAP was good enough that I could put it on and fall asleep 15 minutes in. Now when I try to do that someone manages to say something so mind numbingly stupid before I doze off that I leave a comment calling them retarded and close the tab.

 

[jspit2.0]

The 3 hosts stay on the panel all the time, powering it through with Monster and RedBull. The rest of the guests just sorta stay for how long they want and then leave, getting replaced by the next batch of guests.

This is pretty much how every episode of EFAP works, the only difference the anniversaries have is that they try to stay on for 24 hours. EFAP 100 went on for 37 if I'm not mistaken, because they wanted to surpass the previous one. This time they didn't try that.

Except no Tonald. This feels paired down.

 

[Dr. Pasquale]

Except no Tonald. This feels paired down.

Tonald redemption arc truly was the best arc. Him talking to Mauler, Rags and Wolf about his lifestory and YouTube content was the realest EFAP ever got.

 

[Passing Through Town]

>decide to check out some of the anniversary stream
>click through in search of the Black Widow video coverage because it sounds the most ridiculous
>Rags is fedora tipping in the middle of them covering the Scorsese video
He really can't go a single episode without it.

 

[jspit2.0]

Praise me, for I have set through the first part of the unholy abomination.

EFAP Tism

* Callum and company begin the stream by taking a shot at faggy cow, Jim Sterling. It's a fairly boring EFAP Mauler and company have forgotten what made EFAP interesting. For you see, the issue is Jim has made a video arguing that an objective review is boring. Mauler and company, rather than point out that Jim is a play doe man in a ridiculous outfit talking about video games, instead treat the mooing madman as a sincere opponent.

* From there Callum and company move to the equal parts impressive and Buffalo Bill esque fan video one of their followers made.

* Having gotten the 'light' stuff over, the gang moves into Grace Randolph. Grace, y'see, has dared to make a video criticizing The Suicide Squad.

I pause here to explain. The EFAP crew, for those not paying attention, are Marvel simps. They will react, viscously, to someone criticizing pre-phase four Marvel in a way they feel is 'unfair'.

How bad is Mauler's fanboy Marvel tism? He made a movie on the Snydercut where he actually spends most of the movie praising Whedon's Justice League. This should explain the uncharacteristic willingness to not nitpick a non-Marvel film and give it praise. For the director is James Gunn whose The Suicide Squad attempts to Marvelize the DCEU as much as humanely possible.

* Mauler and company, without getting into Grace's points, immediately are hostile. They spend most of the remaining 9 hrs struggling to calm down before returning to the video. After an unbearable segment of let's play gaming they return. The key arrives when someone raises the ugly truth. That The Suicide Squad was actually closer to a bomb. Immediately the excuses fly. It's a good movie, saddled with DC's horrible reputation.

I will again pause here. That argument is especially bad. Ayer's Squad actually did well financially, Snyder's MoS was controversial, but made money. WW and Aquaman were home runs while Shazam was a solid hit.

It's true '84 and Birds of Prey tanked, but, so did Black Widow. Does Marvel have a rep for bad films? Perhaps, just maybe, Grace has a point?

You start with Marvel zombies. To be sure, some crossed over to watch Gunn's latest gross out fest. But apparently allot of them didn't. If SS2 had brought in the people who watched Ayer's first movie it would have been fine. But they didn't. Maybe because SS and SS2 were different movies with very different tones. Gunn's movie was designed to appeal to Marvel fans. It's entirely possible that that put off Snyderbronies, DC movie goers who like a less whimsical tone and expect more from a DC movie.

 

[Dr. Pasquale]

How bad is Mauler's fanboy Marvel tism? He made a movie on the Snydercut where he actually spends most of the movie praising Whedon's Justice League. This should explain the uncharacteristic willingness to not nitpick a non-Marvel film and give it praise. For the director is James Gunn whose The Suicide Squad attempts to Marvelize the DCEU as much as humanely possible.

I'll disagree hard at the "EFAP/Mauler is a Marvel fanboy" take. Even before Phase 4 they talked shit about Marvel. As much as they praise some of its character and moments, most of them think Infinity War is a mediocre film and all of them say Endgame is terrible. They enjoy Iron Man 1 up until it's final minutes and say every other Iron Man movie is bad-garbage tier. Their latest hot take was to say that Winter Soldier, one of the MCU darlings, is a bad movie.

I understand where this idea that they simp for Marvel comes from. They are very passionate about the stuff they like in the MCU and they talk a lot of shit about DC movies, but in this case theres nothing incongruent on their part. They shower every movie they like with a lot of praise, just look at Mauler talking about stuff like Predator or the Prestige, they'll go on for typical EFAP 5 hours talking about how a single scene is so amazing and muh story and all.

They'll also talk a lot of shit about anything that is full of plot holes, plot inconsistencies and bad dialogue, amongst other things, and there's a lot of that in DC's movies. EFAP tends to view movies as "Story and Writing is King", and they think most DCEU movies fail hard at that, WW84, SS1, MoS, being some examples. They all said that the new Suicide Squad, as an overall movie, is a 5/10, but they really enjoyed the writing and the characters so they gave that aspect of it a lot of praise.

There's a lot to criticize about Mauler and EFAP in general, but I don't think any of their lenght and hyper focus autism is due to any fanboying.

 

[Passing Through Town]

How bad is Mauler's fanboy Marvel tism? He made a movie on the Snydercut where he actually spends most of the movie praising Whedon's Justice League. This should explain the uncharacteristic willingness to not nitpick a non-Marvel film and give it praise. For the director is James Gunn whose The Suicide Squad attempts to Marvelize the DCEU as much as humanely possible.

This is a terrible take. He only praised Whedon's JL in areas where it improved on what Snyder had done. He and the EFAP crew shat on both versions. Moreover, they did nitpick The Suicide Squad. It was very annoying.

If SS2 had brought in the people who watched Ayer's first movie it would have been fine. But they didn't. Maybe because SS and SS2 were different movies with very different tones.

Or maybe because Ayer's Suicide Squad was an absolute disaster and not many people wanted a sequel. Likewise, no one was really interested in a Black Widow movie. And they both hit theaters with Covid concerns still going on. And both premiered on streaming services, which made them remarkably easy to pirate. The tone Gunn took with TSS isn't the problem. It is abundantly obvious that the Marvel formula works better than the DC shit. So if he was trying to "Marvelize" it - which I don't think is the case at all - it should have been more successful rather than less.

DC movie goers who like a less whimsical tone and expect more from a DC movie.

More what?

 

[jspit2.0]

I'll disagree hard at the "EFAP/Mauler is a Marvel fanboy" take.

Continue.

Even before Phase 4 they talked shit about Marvel.

They would have the occasional nitpick. But they do not evaluate Marvel with the same lens as other superhero films. They have since pivoted with the general narrative that the recent MCU is bad. But that is a pivot.

But do tell me how Far from Home is better than Rami Spiderman.

As much as they praise some of its character and moments, most of them think Infinity War is a mediocre film and all of them say Endgame is terrible. They enjoy Iron Man 1 up until it's final minutes and say every other Iron Man movie is bad-garbage tier. Their latest hot take was to say that Winter Soldier, one of the MCU darlings, is a bad movie.

I understand where this idea that they simp for Marvel comes from.

No, you don't. I'm not saying that they are uncritical. But they overhype the MCU relative to other properties and especially with regard to certain creators. Joss Whedon.

They are very passionate about the stuff they like in the MCU and they talk a lot of shit about DC movies, but in this case theres nothing incongruent on their part.

Yes there is. Though this is falling type. People usually point to criticism from some to disprove they are a fanboy. But Callum and EFAP's criticism of Marvel is contextual.

This is a terrible take.

Yay...

He only praised Whedon's JL in areas where it improved on what Snyder had done.

Did it though? There was more than that too. Kindof disingenuous not to mention that he implied Snyder was responsible for cringe things in the Whedon cut and removed them posthumously from his cut after the poor reception. Callum's video reeks of the nitpicks and odd 'takes'.

I hate defending the Snyderverse. But no, his video is bad, Whedon didn't make the film better, he made it goofier. He dumbed it down and had Batman + company talking like his usual valley girls.

Or maybe because Ayer's Suicide Squad was an absolute disaster and not many people wanted a sequel.

Overselling it. allot. It wasn't Thor Dark World, Iron Man 2, Captain Marvel.....

People liked it. It was a fun movie that's real problem was it's script. Specifically it needed an Act III rewrite.

Your assessment, like theirs, is harsher. If it was a Marvel movie you'd give it a meh a move on.

Likewise, no one was really interested in a Black Widow movie. And they both hit theaters with Covid concerns still going on. And both premiered on streaming services, which made them remarkably easy to pirate. The tone Gunn took with TSS isn't the problem.

You say that as if its factual. Your opinion is not fact. Tone in fact can be a big, fucking problem. Who are you making this shit for? Who's the audience?

Because it wasn't Snyderbronies. It wasn't the popcorn crowd with its hard R rating and tone.

It is abundantly obvious that the Marvel formula works better than the DC shit.

For Marvel, for now. We'll see how it works going forward and whether Marvel's 'formula' sticks.

Marvel's formula is really a dumbed down, creatively void hackish copy paste of Dick Donner's Superman movies. They've artlessly applied it over and over to diminishing results.

Michael Bay's 'formula' works. Big, dumb, and flashy.

So if he was trying to "Marvelize" it - which I don't think is the case at all - it should have been more successful rather than less.

Or not considering Black Widow failed.

Maybe the "formula" only works if your consoomers are programed right.

More what?

Substance. For one. Originality.

 

[Dr. Pasquale]

Continue.
They would have the occasional nitpick. But they do not evaluate Marvel with the same lens as other superhero films. They have since pivoted with the general narrative that the recent MCU is bad. But that is a pivot.
But do tell me how Far from Home is better than Rami Spiderman.
No, you don't. I'm not saying that they are uncritical. But they overhype the MCU relative to other properties and especially with regard to certain creators. Joss Whedon.
Yes there is. Though this is falling type. People usually point to criticism from some to disprove they are a fanboy. But Callum and EFAP's criticism of Marvel is contextual.

Alright my dude, they fooled me with their 4D chess strategy to covertly simp for Marvel, but you saw through their ploy, tip my hat to you. Also ppl liked Suicide Squad at release and it's not a completely broken mess of a film on every level, got it.

 

[jspit2.0]

Alright my dude, they fooled me with their 4D chess strategy to covertly simp for Marvel, but you saw through their ploy, tip my hat to you. Also ppl liked Suicide Squad at release and it's not a completely broken mess of a film on every level, got it.
View attachment 2473990

That's a vision of fucking horror.

 

[Shieldman]

https://twitter.com/MauLer93/status/1429988914350202888

I hope Doc Oc doesn't have tentacle blades or Southpaw will shit his pants again.

 

[noonster]

https://twitter.com/MauLer93/status/1429731338899296257
Again with the complaints about people bringing up Jenny Nicholson. I know I'm a broken record about this, but Mauler when's the last time you say the thumbnail for that video?

If your're some random normie who gets this recommended for whatever reason, what to you expect them to think? Most of them aren't even going to click on the video to skim through it to see that you ONLY talk about her for five hours. Honest to God, how does he not understand the optics of how this looks, then again he and Rags willing associate with Sargon of Applebees, optics has never been a strong suit for a lot of these guys.

 

[Passing Through Town]

Yay...

For someone who talks shit about Callum, you act an awful lot like him.

Kindof disingenuous not to mention that he implied Snyder was responsible for cringe things in the Whedon cut and removed them posthumously from his cut after the poor reception.

He didn't imply, he incorrectly assumed. It doesn't matter either way. The point is he shat on both versions.

I hate defending the Snyderverse.

I don't believe you.

Whedon didn't make the film better, he made it goofier. He dumbed it down and had Batman + company talking like his usual valley girls.

He cut a lot of unnecessary garbage out and made the plot a lot tighter than Snyder had it. It's not "dumbed down" at all. Snyder's version is retarded, and Whedon's version is just less of the same retarded with some added bad jokes.

Overselling it. allot. It wasn't Thor Dark World, Iron Man 2, Captain Marvel

First of all: "a lot", not "allot". You keep doing that. But you're right, Suicide Squad is none of those movies, it's infinitely worse. I'd go so far as to say it's easily the worst capeshit flick out there. Everything about it is fucked. The dialogue, the story, the characters, the production, the soundtrack, and worst of all: The editing and pace. And you're complaining about Gunn's Suicide Squad lacking substance or originality. Compared to Ayer's Suicide Squad, Gunn's is the deepest and most original film ever made.

You say that as if its factual.

Because it is. I can make the claim that the tone is not the cause of The Suicide Squad's earnings issue because there's not any evidence supporting your claim that it is, and plenty of evidence supporting all that I listed. I didn't say tone can't be a problem, because it can be, but it's not in this case.

Who's the audience?

Because it wasn't Snyderbronies. It wasn't the popcorn crowd with its hard R rating and tone.

I'm not sure what exactly you mean by "the popcorn crowd", but if you're implying that the R rating and tone aren't a combination that can reach large audiences, then you must have forgotten how successful Deadpool was.

We'll see how it works going forward and whether Marvel's 'formula' sticks.

It won't, for the reason I mentioned in my post on the Scorsese article and video.

Marvel's formula is really a dumbed down, creatively void hackish copy paste of Dick Donner's Superman movies. They've artlessly applied it over and over to diminishing results.

It is creatively void for the most part, but it's not a copy of RD's Superman films by any stretch of the imagination. Those films - or at least the first two - have a lot more going than Marvel films do. I wish they would take more from those, honestly. The Marvel formula isn't a dumbed down version of anything. It's just a repurposing of comic book characters and repeating basic themes, with some cheap emotional moments and no real stakes. Just like DC, actually. The difference is that Marvel films don't take themselves too seriously, which is why they go over better. Capeshit is fundamentally childish. There's no escaping that. So when you have Batman in a big bulky suit fighting Superman with kryptonite gloves, there's nothing you can do to make it mature. It's just silly. Especially when you try to make it emotional, as if one of these characters dying is going to actually mean anything in the future.

Michael Bay's 'formula' works. Big, dumb, and flashy.

It only works when properly tempered with humor. The Transformers franchise was received less and less well as it went on as Bay tried to make it more mature and interesting. Doesn't work with capeshit, won't work with giant talking robots from outer space.

Or not considering Black Widow failed.

No reason to believe the formula is the problem when it's worked for every other film in their franchise. Although it's possible that people are getting tired of it by now. My point stands either way. The Marvel formula has objectively been more successful than DC's. That would be easy for you to accept if you weren't so blatantly upset about Marvel succeeding for some reason.

Maybe the "formula" only works if your consoomers are programed right.

Marvel isn't programing people to like their films, they're just appealing to the biggest possible audience. The masses will always enjoy dumb entertainment. It was true of ancient times, and it's true now. The unsettling truth of life is that people are born as consoomers, and most will live out their life as just that.

Substance. For one. Originality.

Substance and originality are the antithesis of capeshit. If you expect either of those things from Marvel or DC then you're criminally retarded.

 

[jspit2.0]

For someone who talks shit about Callum, you act an awful lot like him.

Ho ho.

He didn't imply, he incorrectly assumed. It doesn't matter either way. The point is he shat on both versions.

I don't believe you.

He cut a lot of unnecessary garbage out and made the plot a lot tighter than Snyder had it. It's not "dumbed down" at all. Snyder's version is retarded, and Whedon's version is just less of the same retarded with some added bad jokes.

I wouldn't call the Snydercut garbage. Soul draining, misanthropic, and bloated, yes. Garbage? no.

First of all: "a lot", not "allot".

Ooooo, grammar police.

You keep doing that. But you're right, Suicide Squad is none of those movies, it's infinitely worse.

Sure it's worse than Captain Marvel.

I'd go so far as to say it's easily the worst capeshit

unironically using capeshit. Is the Dark Knight capeshit? Batman Returns? Is Spider-Man or Batman TAS?

Everything about it is fucked. The dialogue, the story, the characters, the production, the soundtrack, and worst of all: The editing and pace. And you're complaining about Gunn's Suicide Squad lacking substance or originality. Compared to Ayer's Suicide Squad, Gunn's is the deepest and most original film ever made.

Nah. I'll take Leto and Harley or Smith's Deadshot over the thousand characters Gunn hackishly shuffled on and off screen. But moving on...

Because it is.

Just keep restating things.

I can make the claim that the tone is not the cause of The Suicide Squad's earnings issue because there's not any evidence supporting your claim that it is, and plenty of evidence supporting all that I listed. I didn't say tone can't be a problem, because it can be, but it's not in this case.

I'm not sure what exactly you mean by "the popcorn crowd", but if you're implying that the R rating and tone aren't a combination that can reach large audiences, then you must have forgotten how successful Deadpool was.

Whatever.

I mean, if you want to pretend that Avengers and Deadpool had the exact same audience go right the fuck ahead.

It is creatively void for the most part, but it's not a copy of RD's Superman films by any stretch of the imagination. Those films - or at least the first two - have a lot more going than Marvel films do. I wish they would take more from those, honestly. The Marvel formula isn't a dumbed down version of anything. It's just a repurposing of comic book characters and repeating basic themes, with some cheap emotional moments and no real stakes.

Favreau's Iron Man is the spiritual successor to those two movies. It copies many of the tools Donner used from the formula origin story to basic story beats. Favreau's Iron Man is the 'formula' without the elements that make Iron Man so good.

Just like DC,

In no fucking world.

The difference is that Marvel films don't take themselves too seriously, which is why they go over better.

Yes. Marvel films are quirky and have grown men spontaneously acting like teen valley girls. Thor Ragnorak

Capeshit is fundamentally childish. There's no escaping that. So when you have Batman in a big bulky suit fighting Superman with kryptonite gloves, there's nothing you can do to make it mature.

Oh look at you. Superheroes can't possibly be mature or sophisticated. Please. Go back to Batman '66 with your pretentious shit.

Doesn't work with capeshit, won't work with giant talking robots from outer space.

Dark Knight made bucket loads. In the first Donner film, made bucket loads, Jonathan Kent dies of a heart attack. In Spider-man Rami era had Ben Parker die in Peter's arms.

Tell me how mature subject matter doesn't work. Not that I'm wedded to it.

No reason to believe the formula is the problem when it's worked for every other film in their franchise. Although it's possible that people are getting tired of it by now. My point stands either way. The Marvel formula has objectively been more successful than DC's. That would be easy for you to accept if you weren't so blatantly upset about Marvel succeeding for some reason.

Now you put some ridiculous motive that I'm upset at Marvel for 'succeeding'. Whatever the fuck that means.

I don't like hypocrisy. I hated the Snyderverse and am happy it's dead and buried. But I also resent the double standard people practice.

Marvel isn't programing people to like their films, they're just appealing to the biggest possible audience.

No. They just don't hold them to the standard superhero films were held to before the MCU and outside of it are still held to for some reason.

Substance and originality are the antithesis of capeshit. If you expect either of those things from Marvel or DC then you're criminally retarded.

Sure. At this point I think we've gone as far as we can.

 

[6MillionCoofs]

So I made it 4 into his Black Widow review before clocking that he seems to have forgot what character development is in regards to Loki. I could then not be bothered watching the rest.

With a 4 hour review you'd think he'd rewrite the movie from scratch or some shit. Or finish of Force Awakens already.