so is this guy better or worst than ''every frame a painting''?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d46Azg3Pm4c
Its okay. Seems better in not stating the obvious lik every frame does.
>>66736123
It's not obvious to me.
worse, way worse
Every Frame a Painting points out stuff and actually seems interested in sharing knowledge of filmmaking
This guy just seems like that dude who 'helps' people to just make himself sound super smart
>>66737773
The way he talks is so fucking pretentious. Like the dramatic pauses and shit. The Every Frame guy just talks to you like a bro.
worse
this guy just seems like he's trying to be 2deep4u film school student
every frame guy points out interesting shit that you never noticed, but your brain did.
his jackie chan one is a personal favorite
>>66735546
>prestidge
>meta meta meta meta
autistic and boring
Who is better:YMSorDemoD+?
EFAP examines intricacies of film artistry beyond technical, like acting, writing, or effects. I think Tony does a MUCH better job at explaining things and pointing out really lovely things in movies that have actually influenced my own work greatly. This stems from his experience as an actual editor and you can really tell his knowledge of film extends well beyond critical or academic. He's got a genuine love for it and it's kinda infectious. He talks straight to you like it's conversational, his editing is really good, and his voice is really nice.
Nerdwriter is always talking in his videos down to the viewer in a way, and he comes across as exceptionally pretentious. He always pauses to highlight points at the end that are always phrased to frame something profound or transcendental yet it is really clumsy. He makes good observations and I enjoy his work on things that aren't film (his examination of Las Meninas was really good but could have explored further such as the Velazquez's self portrait within it also contributing with the insignia he wore and holding his brush as if it were a pen instead of paintbrush to signify painting as equal to literature or poetry as an art). Overall I feel a bit insulted watching Nerdwriter at times, and even merely showing his face in the videos kinda puts me off a bit. It's less about the films or art and sort of showy, I think, despite the otherwise alright analysis.
>>66738120
demo-san but he never uploads
>>66735546
worse. like others have said he comes off as pretentious and condescending, but also far less knowledgeable than tony. he's also an SJW.
>>66738556
oh and to address the video in the OP, he's essentially doing what most shit youtube 'reviewers' do which is just narrating what's happening on screen, just with over-complicated wording and dramatic... pauses.
>>66738120
Demo without question
His upload schedule is slow but at least he doesn't ask for people to support his patreon, promise a certain amount of content, and just straight up not fucking do it.
>>66738556
>he's also an SJW.
Why?
>>66735546
I like his videos, but he comes off as super pretentious. He would sound a lot better if instead stating things as fact's he said "in my opinion" or "My thoughts" or something with a little humility. Instead of say "this is what this means" and "this is what THIS means!"
>>66735546
He didn't even point out that both tricks had a prop that was never copied.
Borden threw the rubber ball across the room every time he did the trick, never once did his assistant have the ball only Borden ever had it right to the end.
Angier always took his ring off when he did his trick and only the "real" Angier had the ring on at any time.
Showing how similar they each were.
>>66738669
he's had bits in a few of his videos where he at least pays lip service to sarkeesian-style 'criticism' of certain movies and uses words like problematic in the SJW way.
>>66735546
Not even a minute in and he already reference the "Inception team is actually paralel to a film crew!"
Sucks, his voice is also annoying, in a nu-male sort of way.
>>66737773
>>66737799
>>66738012
>>66738556
>>66738762
Looks like I don't even have to post.
These guys pretty much covered it.
This gives me conflicting messages, does this meanthat Tony is OK with a fraud copying his style?
>>66735546
Bravo... Nolan?
>>66735546
>the nerdwriter
>understanding art
>case study
I already know Tony is better, in 8 seconds I already know he's going to be a pretentious, preachy, and pedantic fuck.
>>66739444
Bitching about a shallow copy who can't match the quality of your content only seeks to validate your competitors, plus he doesn't come off as a spiteful guy, must be his Asian zen.
>>66738120
Links to their channels?
>>66740190
https://www.youtube.com/user/DouchebagChocolat
https://www.youtube.com/user/YourMovieSucksDOTorg
>>66738736
I don't think he's a SJW, he also has a good video on sexism that's pretty middle ground and surprisingly unbiased.
>>66740371
Fucks sake that's what I came up in my initially but thought it was just a coincidence.
This is just as bad a cinemasins except it's made for completely self unaware manchildren. If you enjoy that kind of shit you can't complain about filthy franks, h3h3, or nyanners.
>>66740491
The thing people find incredibly appealing about these channels is that, regardless if you agree/disagree with their knowledge/pretentiousness, there's a ton of creative visual humor and a ton of polish/nuance in the editing.
Filthy Frank/h3h3/nyanners don't put 1/100th of the effort into their editing and humor.Also, Demo is completely selfaware. YMS? Probably not.I also personally like Demo's more serious videos, devoid of humor, like his older style, such as https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfM3WjyCt8s , but I think https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9h7dsmO38c is his best review.
OK HOLD THE FUCK UP
THE MACHINE DIDNT WORK WHAT THE FUCK?? HOW COULD U THINK THE MACHINE ACTUALLY WORKED WHEN THE WHOLE MOVIE IS ABOUT ILLUSIONS AND SHIT??????? IT DIDNT WORK OK FUCK EVRYTHING
>>66740491
>filthy franks, h3h3, or nyanners.
Except these two guys put effort into what they say and do.
>>66740586
>polish/nuance in the editing
He literally dumps his reaction folder into his videos for no reason other than to "meme" which would be fine except for the past three videos you can tell it's intentionally done because he has to frame his "comedy" i.e. punchlines to a popular reaction image like he has a quota to fill for each video.
Genuinely funny moments from what I can tell are completely drowned out by "haha internet" quips which would be funny if you haven't been exposed to this kind of humor to be completely infantile.
Let's be honest here, this maddox type humor thing has been around and tried through over a decade. While I can appreciate at one time I might have enjoyed this, the issue that it's entirely juvenile and tends to run its course.
>1/100th of the effort into their editing and humor
It's is almost entirely exactly the same shit. In fact I'd make the argument that h3h3 puts more effort because they actually photo manipulating both video and stills and create their own content as opposed to soley using a 4chan reaction image and gif dump you've acquired through the years.
I don't know I guess I'm too anal to find this shit compelling anymore.
Nerdwriter is trash. He is pop-nerdism for people who self-identify as nerds, as in have a high opinion of their own intellect. His videos are interesting at best, but not informative, his analysis is weak and it's not intended as a true analysis, it's intended as something to make the viewer feel smart about themselves.
It's entertainment for people who like to feel smart and
His presenting voice is annoying as fuck because he talks about everything as if it is the most interesting thing ever and that his analysis is the greatest insight into the subject matter ever made.
The only two objectively good youtube Film reviewers are as follows:
>Every Frame a Painting (Tony is based)
>Rob Ager (loves Kubrick a bit too much though and posts some pretty tinfoily shit on occasion. His actual reviews are great though even though I feel he should expand a bit on the films he analyses)
Film ""review"" channels are trash, as is YMS whose channel is basically pointing out technical and continuity flaws and calling it a review
