Everything Wrong With "Everything Wrong With The Cabin in the Woods"
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 окт 2017
- Donate: patreon.com/bobvids
SPOILER WARNING
This video contains spoilers for the following films:
The Cabin in the Woods
Original "Everything Wrong With The Cabin in the Woods" video: • Everything Wrong With ...
SOURCES
/ hi_im_drew_goddard_dir...
www.thedailybeast.com/the-cab...
media.aintitcool.com/coolprodu...
www.syfy.com/syfywire/joss-whe...
/ i_honestly_dont_like_c...
• Video 
Кино
Is there any chance we can get "Hey Dumbass That's The Joke Better Luck Next Time" as a brief clip on it's own
sure: ruclips.net/video/QZIR-eZdvGk/видео.html
Our prayers were heard.
ruclips.net/video/G6Sz9Td7Vtw/видео.html
Spambot-Ex-Machina-cliché
You're doing the cinema god's work, my son.
I know "there's no gravity in space" gets memed a lot more, but "eagles can smell force fields" is probably my favorite dumb cinema sins take
The writers have clearly never been desperately trying to shepherd a bird out of a building it inexplicably flew into before it gets brain damage from repeatedly slamming itself into the window it can’t see
It's such an insane thing to say, I can't get over it
Ive been studying ornithology my whole life, the first thing you learn is that birds noses are shitty as they come
@@aceofheartzxaver1366guessing that’s the study of birds? Do you enjoy it:
@@aceofheartzxaver1366 Is that so the more malodorous enthusiasts know to approach them from downwind if they want to study them? Because that makes a lot of sense to me. OK, it makes, uh, an amount of sense, anyway.
Interesting point I realized watching this: CinemaSins wants everything explained to them, but when films DO explain things, they get dinged for exposition.
You literally can't win.
lol. If you're expecting to "win" you're not understanding that they sin movies for bogus reasons which they admit to. And that's because they don't take themselves as seriously as fans do.
Zia Paul They very clearly aren't joking on MANY of these sins, no matter what they say about it *after* they've been called out for it
This isn't about what they say after they've been called out, this is about what they say during the video. Even tho they have valid criticisms in their videos they have a lot of bogus sins as well, which are intentionally added to show that this isn't a real review. Hell, they don't even review the movie or come to some consensus about it--it's just nitpicking. How is that a review? They don't talk about the quality of the movie in said "review" either. If you watch enough vids, they basically admit to searching for sins, such as Cabin in the Woods. They said that the movie had very few missteps.
THe problem is that there's often no clear line separating which sins are jokes and which are legitimate criticisms. Some lines are obvious jokes, but others aren't, and their valid criticism sins are also very often wrong and show a clear lack of understanding of what the movie is trying to say. There's no cohesion in a cinema sins video to grasp what they're talking about.
If you compare to Plinket from Red Letter MEdia for instance (and I know some people hate his criticism and humour as well) there's at least a clear dividing line to signal when he's stopped critiquing and he's gone into an insane humorous tangent about himself or his life. His tone will change. The editing changes. Cinema Sins deliver everything in almost the exact same tone of voice.
But maybe legitimacy is fake CGI? Honestly, ya think people actually trust RUclipsRS to tell them stuff?
What are you, naive?
(Gotta come clean, am making a terrible statement for the sake of lunacy. Not serious about that, please no harassing.)
"Right, because it's unrealistic for people to have friends"
Especially a stoner friend who has a constant supply of drugs on him. Like, come on, man. These college kids being friends with a stoner kid who could also double as a supplier is literally the least unrealistic in this whole movie.
Yea you've never met real people
@@swagdaddy6932 I sure hope you aren’t saying this to the commenter
Well the real reason is because that’s a trope in these kinds of movies. There’s the jock, the dumb blonde, the stoner and/or nerd, etc.
@@gvd72 Yeah absolutely, but there's also tons of evidence that Marty isn't nearly as big of a stoner stereotype as he appears to be, but is being influenced into filling that role the same way the others are. Really, it just seems like Cinemasins are making the same mistake the Facility is in assuming Marty is the deadbeat stoner type when he's literally a philosophy major who just also does drugs.
@@swagdaddy6932 These are high school kids! Why wouldn't they want a friend who could supply them with drugs?
The answer is simple. Jeremy is just not smart. He doesn't understand things(largely due to not paying attention) and gets frustrated by it. Then he blames his frustrations on the things he fails to understand.
Basically he is the annoying friend who thinks he knows everything and interrupts people mid sentence.
THIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIISSSS
seriously, modern CS videos just trigger that cringey, frustrated, "why did we invite this guy again" feeling in me. If his fanbase wasn't predominantly children it would be clear just how painfully dull and stupid he is.
Ken Turner pretty sure most of the Sins is just there to explain the movie and to make their “movie reviews” mini leech movies. Would explain why people actually watch them.
The other answer is just as simple. CS does it for fun, and entertainment. Does he get shit wrong sometimes? Yeah. But who the fuck cares? This video is just taking something funny and trying to make it way too serious with the "critiques".
The other other answer is even more simple. CS has found a simple formula for getting lots of clicks and advertising revenue from RUclips while also putting in minimal effort on actually creating content and having complete disdain for other people. Basically CS is the Michael Bay of RUclips.
Agilemind if he wanted "minimal effort" he'd do react vids. I don't watch his channel anymore because I just have more important things on my plate but when I did I sure as fuck didn't tune it for an accurate representation of the movie as a whole.
Plus if you say CS has found a formula for minimal effort for a lot of clicks then what do you think these videos are?
It's insane because on paper, Cabin In the Woods should be their favorite movie
They can like a movie and still sin in.
In other words
*Jeremy sins something he likes cliché*
@@Whispersmith646 it's got nothing to do with "liking" the movie, it's because cabin in the woods is basically what sinemacins is pretending to be
maybe they do like the film. i wouldn't bet on it cause honestly jeremy comes off as a fundamentally incurious person and i don't think he puts any more thought into media he watches than is shown in cinemasins.
...but when your brand is to have a specific opinion, you'll always have that opinion whether it's warranted or not.
CinemaSins is the Onision of cinema. Takes everything litterally, refuses to use common sense to why people does something, talks on shit they are not knowlageable of and uses the character card whenever it fits their agenda.
Eva what do you mean by “using the character card”?
@@jamesmorriscreations When they say they're playing a character on the channel. The "annoying movie-goer" or whatever they call it. They often use that as a way to deflect criticism by basically saying all criticism is invalid or doesnt matter because "its just satire" or "its just a character". Hope that made any sense lol
Eva ah right, I get it. Thanks very much!
@@jamesmorriscreations no prob :)
3:26
It’s also a great demonstration of dramatic irony. Because we know that force field is there, we know that Kurt’s efforts are doomed, highlighting both the tragedy of what’s happening to these people and the horror of what’s being done to them.
It's like Hitchcock said. If a bomb goes off without warning, it's a momentary surprise, but if the audience is told about the bomb 10 minutes in advance, that's 10 full minutes of suspense.
plus it’s left just long enough that you forget about it
Exactly it tells us ahead of time that everything is weighted against them.
I like imagining his reaction to this scene had Cabin in the Woods not "spoiled" it by showing the wall beforehand. Jeremy would have lost his shit and absolutely sinned the movie for not setting it up.
@@heyitsharry I certainly forgot about it when I first watched the film.
I'm watching a RUclips video making fun of a RUclips video, making fun of a horror movie making fun of horror movies.
This video has layers.
Like an ogre!
Like parfait.
Mille-feuille
RUclipsception
I like your comment.
Therefore I am writing a comment about a comment about a RUclips video making fun of a RUclips video, making fun of a horror movie making fun of horror movies.
Wow, a channel that claims to be satire not understanding satire in a film is just hilarious.
It would probably be funnier if literally _everyone_ didn't claim they were being satirical whenever they face a bit of criticism.
What pisses me off about Cinema Sins is that they never seem to watch the movie through fully before deciding that every question a person asks (despite usually being answered) is a sin. They even maintain sins that are answered a matter of seconds later. Movies DO often leave you asking questions that aren't answered - but noticing plotholes takes thought.
Not to mention they clearly don't understand metaphors - or satire, or parody. Movies being metaphors, or symbolic of something else, is what makes them art, but CS hates anything that makes them thing beyond the absolute literal, or the here and now.
If a movie (or book) doesn't leave you asking a few questions that will be answered later, where's the suspense? What's keeping you from frizbeeing the movie out the window half-way through as you realise it requires all the brain-power of a monkey?
And it's not actually funny.
You are actually spot on, based on behind the scenes and their own words. They don't watch the movie through before asking the questions...they just go through the movie, pausing it to write down "sins" as they go (whatever they "notice" or gives them an idea). Then clearly they don't go back over it enough to check, and if they do ever notice this crap, they can't afford to just cut it out, because then the video won't be as long! Fuck it, just leave all the sins in, even the ones that are begging to be left on the editing floor and not included in their video.
Imagine if they didn't care how long their videos were...They'd cut all this crap out! :(
They drunk when they write the script. There's no way something as stupid as cinemasins content could be written sober.
@@ELFanatic Cinema Sins does these episodes for money, and what the hell, I've nothing against that. But the average movie is one and a half hours long. It's hard to believe that they can't be bothered to add so little time to working on an episode that is SUPPOSED to make them money.
What pisses me off about them is how they flat out lie, create fake sins, manipulate scenes, and fake ignorance. Their videos are painful to watch especially if you have seen the film in question.
I think Marty magically recovering from his injuries is also a trope. Like how main heroes don't bleed out from a 100 smaller injuries, get sprains from running falling and running again, don't turn into whimperring crybabies from watching their friends getting disemboweled, or get their wounds infected.
same thing with Holden getting attacked with the bear trap. It just near snaps shut on his back but in the next scene he’s completely fine.
I'm beginning to think that Cinema Sins doesn't even like movies.
I have adhd and i can enjoy movies more than this annoying twat
@Mcdicks bingo. It's not about liking or not liking film. It's about having no talent other than creating mindless Cliick bait.
To think?
They defebtly make a big part of their audience disslike movies.
That's because they don't watch films. They sit down for 2 hours with what they think is a puzzle to be "solved" or "beaten". They're the kind of person who tries to guess the punchline to a joke you're telling, because any entertainment is an opportunity to make them seem smart.
I used to know a lot of people like that, who would watch a film and call out things like "why did they do that?", moments before the film explains it, or declare "plot hole!" when a character makes a mistake. Cinema Sins only works in brief, out-of-context snippets where they can provide a snarky retort to dialogue where they can ignore the rest of the film.
"Torture family! They love to torture! That explains the torture!" How are they seriously missing the point?
“Why do these people hang out with Marty?”
The fact that Marty is smoking weed when he’s on vacation doesn’t say anything about his behavior on all the other days. He might be just a normal guy who decided to relax for once.
“That’s odd an intern would know what maintenance picks every year”.
Some of his colleagues could’ve told him that. Surprisingly, people talk to each other.
“The wind must have blown it open”.
That’s quite a natural thing to say. I mean, when something weird happens in your house, you probably look for a realistic explanation.
“How do you distinguish between witches and sexy witches?”
The first are probably old and ugly, while the latter are young and hot. Also, it’s just my theory, but sexy witches might have some succubus-like powers.
CinemaSins complaining about the lighting is really weird. I watched the movie in a well-lit room (I also didn’t have any glasses at that point, even though I’m short-sighted) and I understood what was going on.
“He came back to life after a crowbar-stabbing, so let’s stab him with a knife over and over”.
Well, real-life people don’t always die or even stop fighting after being stabbed once, but multiple stabs will kill them sooner or later, so it’s not a bad strategy. Not to mention that in a scary and unusual situation like that anyone would mostly act instinctively and not come up with some complicated plans.
“There’s a scenario by which you wouldn’t have caused that cave-in?”
It should happen at the right time, otherwise the landslide might bury the van with the characters or they might notice what happened and start searching for a way out instead of going into the cabin.
“What keeps the ghost beside the glass?”
What keeps supernatural creatures inside a pentagram, which is not even a box, just chalk lines? There’s some ritual involved, obviously.
“Whoever’s voice this is seriously thinks this situation is a talking-to away from being contained”.
Why not try to talk? It might at least distract the characters, making them stay in one place for a while.
“Dana somehow knows how to work the control board”.
The movie shows her pushing multiple buttons and levers, so it’s clear she doesn’t know!
I have more questions to the fact that there is the “release all the monsters at once” function at all.
“The Ancient Ones would certainly know whether or not someone’s a virgin”.
How are these guys so sure what powers those made-up creatures would have? Like they’ve personally met them or something.
“What made them go down in the first place?”
Again, some ritual. Have CinemaSins ever seen/read/played any horror, fantasy or supernatural movie/book/game before?
The fact that those creatures are called gods doesn’t mean they’re all-powerful and unbeatable like the Christian God. Humanity has come up with all sorts of gods.
“Is the Director a supernatural being?”
Yeah, sure, there is absolutely no way a non-supernatural woman can kick a man’s ass (especially when that man is already wounded). No wonder these guys hate Black Widow. Also, earlier in their video they specifically said Marty shouldn’t be able to fight after his injury!
“Whoever’s voice this is seriously thinks this situation is a talking-to away from being contained”.
Why not try to talk? It might at least distract the characters, making them stay in one place for a while.
THIS! The entire facility is overrun with monsters, standing out in the open is literally the worst thing you could be doing. So the best thing for the bad guys to do is make them do that!
25:53 "Ding, I guess."
Cinema Sins should change their name to that. It's a much more accurate description of their lazy, tedious videos.
Don't watch them, then.
@@Hamlet92100 sorry, why are you here, again?
@@Hamlet92100
Maybe they don't?
@@Hamlet92100Maybe we actually don't, dumb ass.
CinemaSins almost always sin ANY exposition, assumedly because it's "insulting to the audience's intelligence", but then they go on to repeatedly count sins incorrectly because of something they totally missed...because there was NO EXPOSITION TO EXPLAIN IT TO THEM. lol...dumb.
Jimbo Lawless THANK YOU! That’s something that has always pissed me off about them
They do it so fucking often too. In one video they do this back to back, they have expo dumped on them and then proceed to complain because another part didn't bash them over the head.
This actually helped me appreciate Cabin in the Woods more. I used to think the film would be better having the covert direction be a later reveal, but the film needs that context so you can see that it's all satire
As a former fan of Cinema Sins, I applaud the video. Nothing really made me immediately hate them, I saw a few of their videos on objectively terrible movies and enjoyed the format, but later realized slowly that their content was regressive and poorly thought-out (the latter might seem the case because it's partially how the format works and how they're able to pump out so much content). I definitely fell off before they did a video on Cabin, but watching you desecrate their needless cynicism with incredibly grounded logic was beautiful. Nicely done!
i immiedeatly hated them. i am better than you. worship me
yeah it was a lot easier for them when they were just making videos about legitimately shitty movies. but the fact that most of their videos now are about ordinary decent films just tells you all you need to know. it's fucking clickbait, they'll make a video about ANY movie that's getting a lot of attention, regardless of how many problems it actually has. and they have a perfect catch-22 cover for any criticism. when they make a video criticizing a shitty movie, they win because they're critiquing a shitty movie, they must be so smart. and when they make a video criticizing a good movie, they win because they're satirizing snobby critics, they must be so smart. they never highlight where exactly that line is drawn, it's left ambiguous because its whole purpose is for them to shift it back and forth to deflect criticism. their critique of interstellar is done in exactly the same format and style as all their other critiques, how can anyone tell the difference? they just make all their videos the same way, and wait for the feedback to pour in. if people agree that everything they said was stupid, then they'll just turn around and say it was INTENTIONALLY STUPID.
I thank god that I saw his videos. I almost wanted to become another CinemaSins channel and probably would've fucked up everything just like him.
When their content was only shitty movies, it wasn't so obvious how bad their content was. but once they strayed it was obnoxiously obvious.
I think it started out okay and went immediately downhill as he started to play the algorithm rather than make genuine content.
This is so funny to me because his entire shtick is flipping the bird to Hollywood and he still somehow totally missed the point of a movie that is literally doing exactly that.
I don't understand the joke because it's too subtle for me, even when its spelled out explicitly... its the movies fault!
but if the movie succeeds in spelling it out for me, even with just one line of dialog, it means it was annoying and pointless exposition.
ding!
theyre like the r/woooosh subreddit personified. that mentality of “doesnt make sense to me! so *you* must be the idiot!” gave me such a headache
you forgot to put quotes around that.
@@DriscolDevil Assuming they pay attention to it.
Ugh. CinemaSins is so much _worse_ than I remember...
"Marty would be excellent at CinemaSins." --- "No he wouldn't. Marty's perceptive and smart." Had me laughing for a solid ten minutes holy shit HAHAA!
CJ Van Meygaarden yeah that part was hilarious 😂
It was like "BURRRRRNNNNNN"
I am sure others pointed this out, too, but the "ancient ones" are also a reference to Lovecraftian horror, in the Cthulu cycle the ancient ones are sleeping below and occasionally inspiring insanity in people, causing them to take part in bloody rituals where they sacrifice people in gorey ways to appease (or empower) the ancient ones. So you could say cabin takes this trope from literary horror and recontextualises it to create a metaphor for horror cinema. If this was their idea behind it, this is brilliantly executed, since their metaphor is very strong AND their reference works!
Lovecraft's horrors have a poetic connection to the demons of our subconcious and this film connecting that motif with Jungian archetypes is very nicely done. Cthulu sleeping in the depths is a great metaphor for the primal programming we have inherited and the message of this film is that we appease our beastial nature by retelling the same strange archetypal stories ad infinitum. Also you can't make a love letter to horror tropes without kissing Lovecraft's bum.
It's a reference to doctor strange lol just kidding
"There is no way that giant snake could fit inside that elevator."
"Here is a shot of that giant snake fitting inside that elevator :)"
God these videos are so great.
He does their videos better than they do
Instant burn
@@mesyoup.3zy that's hardly the compliment you seem to think it is
@@fukkthisnewupdate8882 Its been a year big boy
@@RG-rm6ih and?
“Criticizing something for being unrealistic would work a little bit better if CinemaSins had a better grip on reality” BUUURN
Lmao I know that was great
I finally figured out why I find Cinema Sins so obnoxious to me. They're basically the critic version of the dumbass 'social experiment' thing, where someone shouts out something stupid and then screams 'It's a prank, it's a praaaaaank' when confronted on it.
PesterchumSA I’m not sure that’s what obnoxious means.
Also the guys voice is fucking irritating.
You kind of nailed it, but it's like they are some super successful prank channel that just shows fast paced edits of people being tripped or pushed into pools for 20 minutes.
Mr. Stuff Doer Dude, you've been actively harassing everyone in the comments. Wtf is wrong with you?
*movie makes joke* cinema sins: that doesn't make sense and would never happen in the real world." Thank you cinema sins where would we be without you
7:51 “...but also stoner guy would be excellent at cinemasins”
“No he wouldn’t, Marty’s perceptive and smart.”
Why is that such a hard diss
Cabin in the Woods is such a "CinemaSinsy" movie, or at least it seems like it. It's very nitpicky and making fun of these little things we see in so many movies. The fact that CinemaSins legit didn't get this probably means they don't get their own channel.
Just because the movie is satire doesn't mean they need to break character. 2:55 shows that they don't think it's a bad movie and most likely that they enjoyed it a lot.
Yeah they enjoyed it, but probably didn't understand its satire. Unless that's the "joke" in which case it's a pretty dumb joke.
They don't have to break character. It would actually be a clever spin that this guy totally gets the movie because it's just like CinemaSins. Instead he kind of treats it like every other movie.
So they either missed the point or are just doing the same thing again. Either way it makes for a pretty lame video.
As I've explained to someone else, they didn't break character because film critics historically trashes horror films as well as satires of this nature. They don't understand it nor do they care to. So, getting upset that Jeremy doesn't understand the satire it's utterly useless because the character is a satire of asshole, nitpicky critics. This doesn't mean he's exempt from criticism, but rather, to criticize his character as not understanding misses the point of his character. The joke isn't "dumb", it's actually clever and hilarious because people keep taking Jeremy (and real critics that his character is based on) seriously.
How much does Jeremy have to say, "This scene doesn't contain a lap dance" or sin it for other random bullshit to realize that he isn't supposed to be taken seriously.
Would it be a clever spin, yes. But, that's not why people watch the channel. You should watch Cinema Wins instead which is actually a great channel and gushes about movies with in-depth analysis.
See, you would be right, IF Jeremy and the other CinemaSins guy didn't actually act like this genuinely. Yeah they're "characters", but they're often projecting their real nitpicky opinions through them. Most characters in everything have genuine commentary through the creator. I mean that's why the characters are there. If you watched CinemaSinsJeremy, you'll see how little CinemaSins is "just a character".
Also yeah, I still don't think they got the point of this movie. Probably because they were too busy thinking about how it will be put into the video. People watch CinemaSins to be entertained, and them not thinking about how they could have made this more entertaining doesn't really make it clever. It's exactly the same as every other CinemaSins video ever created.
Act like what genuinely?
His on screen character is simply an exaggeration of trivial hang ups he may have projected onto a satirical character based off of critics. There is a difference between you acting as if this is how they really feel versus how they actually feel. The fact that you've watched Cinema Sins Cinema Sins, it wasn't just Jeremy--sin for you--you saw that they even admitted that many of the sins are trivial and, truth of the matter, they even said that their sins don't matter or hold any weight, so the fact that we're even having this discussion is hilarious. That makes this criticism even more questionable.
Even then, several times they have acknowledged that the film is meta aka satirical (I know they aren't exactly synonymous, but in this instance they are), so they know exactly what they were watching. Some of their sins were incorrect, but at the same time, the larger issue for you all is that others (including some of the critics) are upset because all his sins aren't bullshit and some are valid and sometimes you all can't tell the difference. You think it's a real review of the video when it isn't. They actually don't even comment not he quality of the movie, but find minor things to pick at-real or perceived. In several movies, including this one, they've admitted to liking the movie a lot.
Who says that made them more clever? This sounds like projection of how you feel the series should be ran opposed to what is actually happening. The series isn't for you, that's fine. But, it appears many fundamentally misunderstand the series and mistakes that for it being bad.
As an aside, is anyone else mildly amused by the fact that Jeremy apparently thinks that making out with a hunting trophy is dialing the dares up to 11? That's, like, a 2 at best.
So fucking a tree... about a 5?
Honestly that’s so true clearly he’s never played a real game of truth or dare in his life
@@samlindner1376 He'd need friends for that.
Missed a sin at 27:31, he calls those things "zombies" but they're actually the scarecrows.
The fucking repeated clip of "zombie TORTURE family" was so unbelievably extra I love it
RE: The trowel stabbing, I think this is also part of the satire - horror movie victims do fairly routinely walk off injuries that should be lethal and "you thought this character was dead but actually they're not" is a common twist.
Captain Mutton Yeah. If someone stabbed me in the back she'd beat me in a fight too.
I was about tp say this
20:56, jeez that legitimately made me uneasy and it didn't rely on cheap jumpscared or an extremely brutal amount of gore, just the direction and the disturbing mannerisms and appearance of the monster were enough, man I need to start watching J horror
If you're looking for that specific movie it's Ao Oni which is also based on an RPG maker game. Haven't seen the movie, but the game is pretty damn good. In fact, most of the RPG maker games in the horror genre are good for a nice scare and some good feels.
Thank you, that clip made me stop dead with the need to find the movie and see it.
damn I came down to the comments to find that film, it's been ages since a film scares me and this 15 seconds of that j horror sent chills down my spine i felt 10 years old again
good god yes
honestly and genuinely everything about that film's monster creeps the fuck out of me and it's not even gorey, just really fuckin creepy
Honestly it looked like a goofy cartoon. I don’t know how anyone can find it scary.
This guy makes Cinema Sin sound like that one guy in your friend group who questions everything without finishing any scenes and asks stupid questions and laughs at their own commentary.
26:30 I love how you also manage to mock the way CinemaSins gives out sins: "here is a shot of that snake fitting in that elevator car."
This right here should be the nail on the coffin for the idea that CinemaSins is satire. If they consistently can't recognize it in this movie, then it's almost inconceivable that they could intentionally produce it themselves.
From this video and others are yours, it's abundantly clear to me that they have little to no self awareness, and so the only logical conclusion is that they really are being genuine.
The character IS satire. A self involved, snobby critics wouldn't give a shit if the movie is satire or not and would nitpick trivial shit. The fact that you're expecting CS to criticize movies that way actual critics do is hilarious.
The fact that we expect cinemasins to be funny when we know everything wrong with cinemasins is funny.
"Relapsed Pop Culture Critic", I really need you to sit down and listen to what OP said again, because in your desire to defend Jeremy you are being dense yourself.
JEREMY IS NOT CAPABLE OF CRAFTING SATIRE OR A SATIRICAL CHARACTER
because
HE IS INCAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING SATIRE, AS EVIDENCED HERE IN THIS VIDEO
you cannot craft satire if you are too dense to detect and unwrap it on your own.
There are dozens of other examples explaining why this is the case but this is the most basic, simple way to get this point across to you.
listen to me: satire is not "jokes". satire is not just "joking around". satire is a carefully crafted form of comedy meant to comment on the thing being mimicked. and to literally anyone who has grown past their "just learning how comedy works" phase (usually your early 20s--yes, really, I say that as someone who used to watch CinemaSins!) saying "it's just satire" is just a quick way to be dismissed as someone too young to understand yet.
it's like when you were a kid and you lied to your parents and they somehow always knew you were lying. satire-as-an-excuse is like that. no one old enough to understand it ever tries to use that excuse.
@@Ziaonfilmandtv lol they aren't funny.
It's not satire.
He is saying shit that's in the movie but cutting shit out to make it seem like he did something smart.
.they also mention sometimes when they mess up.
Meaning they are being serious.
Lol, they are just trash.
@@Ziaonfilmandtv lol they aren't funny.
It's not satire.
He is saying shit that's in the movie but cutting shit out to make it seem like he did something smart.
.they also mention sometimes when they mess up.
Meaning they are being serious.
Lol, they are just trash.
These videos sound like they're actually physically painful for you to make, but can you please make more? Oh, can you do one on Captain America: Winter Soldier??? I HATED their "commentary" on it.
Slenay he does sound dead inside.
“Cabin in the Woods” is a wonderfully creative movie. CinemaSins’ “nitpicking” isn’t even nitpicking. It’s just a dimwitted guy complaining about things he doesn’t get or like. Lots of people like this channel because its tone (just listen to the guy’s voice) makes them feel like they’re better than everyone else.
"She is Sigourney Weaver, so the answer is both." Deadpan slaying, nice.
What the actual fuck is this guy's problem with Black Widow? I seriously do not get it.
RANT INCOMING:
She's a female character whose nominal function is to serve as eye candy but because the movies deliberately try to give her a modicum of character development (not enough if you ask me) Jeremy viscerally hates her. Why? Because he hates women, obviously. Sure, he might claim he doesn't hate women because "durr hburr I love boobies" but let's be real, this guy doesn't see women as anything more than objects, and that is made obvious through every one of these CinemaSins videos.
And if that's not who he really is, but just a character he's playing, then why the fuck is the character presented knowingly, like the audience is supposed to agree with and relate to him? I mean, I know Jeremy clearly isn't the BEST when it comes to understanding the basics of writing and character development but no, it's not "just a joke", as CinemaSins fans insist, Jeremy the character is merely Jeremy the person, his biases and flaws exaggerated ostensibly for comic effect, but actually because it's easier for an audience who already have misogynist leanings to empathise with a misogynist cartoon character, and that's why these videos keep getting so many god damn clicks, because it appeals to the lowest common fucking denominator.
TL;DR - fuck Jeremy and his godawful, juvenile, misogynist comedy. I hate this motherfucker.
It's the 'She's not a superhero in a superhero movie :(" argument stretched over an entire video. I don't think it's malicious as much as it is boorish. It's an easy dig to make, lets you put an attractive girl on screen, and it plays well to the...uh...'fans' we'll say.
He's a straight-up misogynist who seems to believe women only exist to be sexual objects and the moment they develop any kind of characterisation, he gets threatened by them for being an individual.
I didn't wanna believe this was true but his obsession on them asses and just RANDOMLY picking on Black Widow fucking again in a DIFFERENT MOVIE has proven that.
Skeleton Wizard If you've watched the clip of Jeremy creeping out over bikini-clad actresses' asses in this very video and still don't see him as the genuinely sexist douchebro he is, there's nothing that can be done for you.
@hotelmario510 I've even heard that type of "humor" referred to as *lamp-shading*, where the "joke" is so _obviously_ offensive that is supposed to be funny. Which is the excuse that always gets used when people get called out for it. It is so frustrating. You always get a "what a buzzkill PC baby, to get upset by it" response, for pointing out that they shouldn't say shit like that, and that it's one of the lowest and juvenile forms of humor that is so cliche. fucking kill me
Basically, you can’t say you’re just a satire when you show yourself incapable of recognizing satire. The comedian can’t hide behind saying he’s a comedian when he takes all other comedians seriously.
It's a satire of the critic, which when it comes to horror, many don't understand or respect the genre, so...mission accomplished?
@@Ziaonfilmandtv Now you're making shit up because you're desperate to defend their honor. The Cabin in the Woods was rates highly, dumbfuck.
A Olson what? Lol. That channel has y’all so bothered. They enjoyed the movie, which they admit during the video. People who take their criticisms seriously need to get a life. That includes you. I don’t take none of their videos serious because some of their sins are bullshit.
@@Ziaonfilmandtv I recommend you watch "Sustaining Stupidity - Why Cinemasins is Terrible"
13:06 They Seriously made a "this scene does not contain a lapdance" t shirt? That neandertholic line is the entire reason i stopped watching their patronizing garbage content, but i guess they're doubling down on it now. Glad i stopped when i did.
That was always such a bizarre running “joke”. When they finally explained it was a reference to the lapdance cut from Death Proof, it made me wonder how they expected anybody to get that. And then they just use it anytime a woman exists in a film, instead of maybe a bizarre moment where implying a lapdance scene was cut out would be funny.
Same.
You MUST do one about Babadook. Theres no way its satire, they honestly do not understand the Babadook is not real in the movie
13:30 ... They demand the movie spells it out for them, but they complain when a movie spells it out for them. It's almost like they are the problem, not the movie.
20:26 I love how the subtitles say " Marty:[ Screaming loudly enough for people nearby to hear him]"
16:30 Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Marty's archetype get filled with blood when we think he's dead? I thought it was so obvious that it's not "their" blood, that I didn't even consciously think about it.
exactly, and if he was paying enough attention to even notice it, cinema sins would have assumed that it was a mistake the actual producers of the movie made, and not an intentional mistake the characters made that was written into the script
Also they show the vial of blood being smashed inside the machinery.
The workers thought he died, because he was dragged away by the torture zombie. Then they got distracted and partied because they thought they killed everyone they needed too.
@@ischmidt 16:45 Yeah, that's what I immediately noticed...it's clear the blood (which there is a shit ton of) was always held there from the beginning, waiting to be "opened."
I just want to say that hearing you counter these awful attempts at criticism, along with showing the details and thought behind The Cabin in the Woods, just makes me adore this wonderful movie even more.
Thanks!
That's amazing. They actually pulled the "IT'S ALL A CHARACTER!" defense. Nobody is watching Cinemasins because they're laughing at the character Jeremy is playing, they're watching it like a critique video. And everyone from the producers down KNOW this. They make these videos because they're cheap, easy to produce, and STUPIDLY LUCRATIVE, not because they believe any of it.
I mean, "I'm PLAYING a character who wants maximum profit for minimum effort who's blessed with a fanbase that mistake sarcasm for intelligence" wouldn't play as well as a youtube comment war defense, but it'd at least be realistic.
LOL guys relax I was just joking! I wanted to see if you would take the bait. It was all a clever social experiment.
- Every person who got humiliated for starting a stupid forum thread
I dont watch it as a critique video, I watch it for the silly nitpicks
"[everybody is] watching it like a critique video"
I don't undestand where you get this from.
Cinema snob, nostalgia critic, Boogie, and a few others i cant think off the top of my head are much better choices if thats something you are in for. They also are pretty cool people out of character and i found muself drifting to their more out of character vids like brad's 'midnight screening' or when Doug and his brother are discussing whatever it is they watched.
sonicspeedx13 nostalgic chic is great great too.
Called it before even clicking on the link that cinemasins completely fucking missed the fact Cabin in the Woods is a parodical homage to american teen slasher tropes and cliches. :D
shinmai they definitely get it. The problem is the channel is essentially a the narrator playing a character that is hyper critical of everything and nitpicks the shit out of it which some people just don't seem to get. When they talk about this movie on their podcast they seem to enjoy it a lot
The 'character' defence is literally addressed at the end of this video.
I find it so funny people get butthurt over cinemasins to the point they make counter videos. Are some of his honest thoughts of the movie in the videos? Sure but the video as a whole is just mindless fun
shinmai Um, he *does* get that. He even praised the movie for it. Why do think he took sins off for the monster hallway scene?
Its Atlas
Oh my fucking God, do you even watch the video?
Half the sins (jokes or not, and "joke" is a strong word) seem to just stem from the CinemaSins team just not paying attention to the movie they're watching. When I see them sin stuff like this, I just wanna yell, "Watch the movie! If you watched the movie you'd know!"
If Cinema Sins is meant to be satirising nit-picky reviewers, he's done a bad job because nit-picky film reviewers weren't as popular of a thing before his channel was made.
He MADE the nit-picky reviewer genre, and the film industry is better off without it because now kids growing up genuinely thinking he was being critical about movies think that nit-picks are genuine film critique and not.. y'know... nit-picks.
Oh god that clip of cinemasins reacting to women was horrible.
Great critique, glad to see someone actively taking the piss out of Cinemasins.
grampaglasses Why was it horrible? Oh god, you’re from Tumblr, aren’t you?
grampaglasses I did not know that see someone have their piss taken out was anyone’s fetish.
MarliesMega Oh no, a man finds a woman attractive and comments on it; how WILL you survive?
Mr. Stuff Doer No, it’s just the fact that he is a grown 30 something man drooling over women on camera like a horny teenager that has never had sex. It is just incredibly sad and pathetic
Look I'm not usually quick to call men creeps for just complementing women, but I was extremely uncomfortable so yeah it's horrible.
That black widow line actually made me pause the video and say "are you fucking kidding me?"
This is easily the dumbest I have ever seen Cinema Sins. I'm not much of a horror fan, but even I can pick out the tropes and how the movie is satirizing them.
Also, it's pretty clear that Jeremy just doesn't like women.
Theoretically, Cabin In The Woods should be his favorite movie. It satirizes and points out common tropes and frequent bits from horror movies as a genre. Youd think CinemaSins would be praising the movie entirely but somehow, someway he hates and belittles one of the greatest commentaries on the genre ever.
"Non-gunnable"...the word you're looking for Cinemasins is bulletproof. Just use bulletproof.
Bulletproof!
I mean you could be non-gunnable and still be bulletproof. I could hit you with a gun and maybe your armour wouldnt hurt you, but perhaps your armour isnt ballistic proof. Its close to being nonsensical but you could parse out Non-gunnable being ok to say. Also i wonder if you can live from bullet damage but the bullets are doing damage if thats bulletproof. Like Mike Myers is obviously taking those bullets into his body but they dont kill him, hes not proofed of the bullets or immune to thier damage but they are damaging him, arent they? or the damage they do isnt killing him.Boy Horror movie logic should not be scrutinized ha ha
There's a kind of technical difference between being bulletproof and guns just plain not affecting them. The first japanese Death Note has the bus hijacker shooting Ryuk in the face and the bullets just pass through him entirely which isn't quite bulletproof while bulletproof implies that the bullets bounce off of them or just get embedded in the target and not harm them.
Uhh excuse me didn't you ever see that modern classic Nongunnable Kungfupriest?
Bulletproof means you can still be shoot. BulletPROOF not bulletimmune.
Judging by the logic that CinemaSins tries to use when coming up with sins, they don't actually know what bulletproof means.
The force field thing being introduced early on with the bird that Cinemasins is nitpicking is a classic example of Chekhov's Gun for fuck's sake!
Idk I think it would've had more comedic value if we didn't see it coming when Hemsworth nailed the wall
Shocking how many sins can be categorised by 'it doesn't matter' 'that's literally the point' or ''the film itself explains it"
I feel really stupid now. Because while I understood and loved most the satire, I never made the connection that the gods to be appeased represent the audience. But I also think the third act failure of the organization and the surrounding chaos was far more appeasing to me personally than just your typical horror ending which supposedly the "gods" wanted.
The ending was so satisfying because the "gods" ended up wrecking shop and being the most powerful thing in the movie, completely wiping everything else off the map! Audience empowerment much? XD
I think that was the point, the makers wanted to illustrate that something other than the expected ending would be way more interesting
The irony that a youtube channel that's entirely, according to their fans, about satirically critiquing films for their inconsistency, plot holes, plot devices, and various other mistakes, actually misses the film's satirical criticism of horror films.
Pretty sure the aliens Black Widow shot in The Avengers all died... The only antagonistic people she didn't shoot were The Hulk and Loki...because she knew it wouldn't kill them... What is CS even referring to here?
"Women being scantily clad for no reason other than eye candy is a weirdly large part of American horror films"
Fun fact! The way that got started was actually that horror became a weirdly large part of American women being scantily clad for no reason other than eye candy films
ProjectThunderclaw it’s because many horror movies are R-rated (or 15-rated, if you’re colonialist swine like myself) or above, and can therefore get away with racy content and nudity,
@@jamesmorriscreations well yeah, but what I'm saying is that it developed from the other direction. They didn't start with horror; the original equivalent of "R-rated" was basically softcore porn, and people were like "oh hey, we can get away with adding a lot of horror and violence to this"
Huh, interesting! My theory was always that if you’re getting an x rating anyways, in for a penny, in for a pound. Seems kind of twisted that they just assumed somebody wanting to see sexy ladies also wanted to see them get brutalized but society or whatever 🤷🏻♀️
@@iggykidd I mean, every horror film is indirectly or directly about gender and sex. Exciting 'violation' of taboos surrounding the human body is pretty central to it as a genre. Hell, orgasms are nicknamed 'la petite mort' (the little death)!
There's a reason why the most insightful horror film connoisseurs are women; why so many porn actresses go on to act in/direct/etc. horror; why horror is so beloved by my fellow Ell Gee Bee Tees; etc.
Horror, like porn, explores the human body in socially-unsanctioned ways, pushes it to its limits (and beyond), violates polite taboos, and revels in exaggerated depictions of our deepest urges. Horror is sexual, sexuality is a horrorshow, etc. etc.
The bit where you get furious about the "ex machina" line was incredibly cathartic. 29:50
To me, the problem with CinemaSins is that the satire of "cynical nitpickers" has already been done to death, before they even started, but because of the way they approach it, it's helped encouraged this sad culture of people who go into a movie like Star Wars: The Force Awakens or Captain America: Civil War looking for things to nitpick, and not taking the movie on it's own merits. CinemaSins may not have started it, but it feels a lot harder too appreciate movies, warts and all, ever since they became popular.
Uhh, I don't think The Force Awakens should be up there...
I'm not a gun expert or anything, but I think that when the guy is "cocking his gun," he's actually racking the slide to chamber a round, which is something you have to do when you load a semi-automatic pistol.
Doesn't that load a round and take the safety off on most firearms? Might be wrong about the safety thing, but most people with loaded carry weapons wouldn't leave one in the chamber as an added safety measure, so yeah, when taking it out of the holster expecting to use it, I would expect them to rack it and take the safety off.
@@ballsrgrossnugly The safety would be a seperate system on most modern handguns today. Considering the Organization was having a social event with a lot of alcohol involved, the weapon was probably carried without a round in the chamber, safety on, but a magazine loaded.
So it would have been necessary to rack the slide to load a round and make the weapon operational. Something that anyone who was watching the film and had the IQ necessary to not use the word "non-gunnable" would have noticed.
AKA not CinemaSins.
3:55
And 5: Marty's car probably reeks of weed, and the movie has established that the rest of them don't like that.
"The director is Sigourney Weaver, so that answer is 'both.'"
You're god damn right it is.
#43 is so cringe-worthy. Just gross, CinemaSins.
Nathaniel Matta He doesn’t even f*cking show what 43 was.
Mr. Stuff Doer they meant number 43 in THIS video, genius. The utterly nonsensical horny "he was her boyfriend who enjoyed fucking her" comment.
EnglishRosie That was 44. Also, is it nonsensical and horny if it’s true? Because I’d assume it’s true.
EnglishRosie First off... I wasn’t wrong in the first place. They original comment is mentioning the wrong sin. Second, the “enjoyed f*cking her” part wasn’t necessary, but that’s kind of CinemaSins’ thing. They’re so unnecessary and they just do not care.
Also, I love how you criticize them for being horny like there aren’t millions of guys as horny or worse in the world. And somehow wanting pleasure makes you a horrible person. Logical.
Mr. Stuff Doer that's not "cinemasins's thing". That's Jeremy's thing. Watch his ACTUAL reviews of movies. They line up pretty well with his cinemasins persona, in that they're trash.
Also, when someone says something is bad, you can't just say "WELL THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE WORSE THAN THAT!" It's an empty response. Yeah being horny all the time is bad. As a 14-year old boy, I can tell you that firsthand.
I loved this. So good. The criticism of the eagle scene annoyed me a lot because they sinned something that was so well put in place. I remember the first time I watched this. When I saw the eagle scene, I thought it was weird, but I put it in the back of my mind because the movie went on. That's what I assume happened to most people who watched the movie for the first time, they sort of forget it because the movie continues and you lose track of a smaller detail, because they movie is so interesting. Then the motorcycle scene happens, and then although you temporarily forgot about the eagle, you then get to call back to it and think "Oh yeah! There was a forcefeild!" And ta-da, it makes sense in the movie's world. Anyway, good job.
arcadegel completely agree! The planting and payoff thing is also especially important in horror which CS just hadn’t clued in on. There's a fantastic clip of Alfred Hitchcock talking about a bomb. And that suspense is when you give the audience information that the characters don’t have like knowing the bomb is ticking while the characters are oblivious. Otherwise, it’s just five seconds of a bomb going off which has a shock value to it, but not as memorable.
loupetron yes that's also a great part of it! Even if you remember there is a forcefield, you get the feeling of impending doom when you realize it will kill one of the characters is going to be killed by it. How many times has a movie showed the killer hiding out some where and when one of the characters starts heading towards him you scream "No don't go in there! The killer is in there" Setting up impending doom is a horror movie staple itself, and seeing as this movie is based on things like that, it's still perfectly placed in the movie no matter how you look at it.
I swear, the delivery on "A giant bong, in your fathers van?" is so perfect.
My favourite one they ever did was on snow piercer. They concentrated solely on how the train shouldn't be working. Nothing else. Its insane
I really hate to even admit this, but even though I obviously understood the genre deconstruction, I somehow managed to miss the most important point of the ancient ones being the movie audience. I think it's because I came to it through Joss Whedon, so I assumed it'd be more like Buffy, which doesn't go as deep.
Now I really need to go back and rewatch it, because I'm fucking dumb for missing that.
It’s all good, dude. I have to go back and rewatch it too because I want to see the little things I missed
Me too plus it's been a long time since I've seen it
I am so happy you made this. CinemaSins was cute at first, but then it became annoying and nitpicky. It's like watching someone trying to make up insults of someone when they clearly have run out of material. Liked, favorited and subscribed for real. Hope you do more, CinemaSins being that huge of a thing is a sin.
CinemaSins (and Neil DeGrasse Tyson) lost a lot of my respect with the Interstellar video. It was an eye opening revelation that they are both nitpicky brats that care way too much about how smart people think they are.
“They LOVE TO TORTURE. THAT EXPLAINS THE TORTURE!”😂
I remember watching Cabin in the Woods with my family, and we literally went back and forth from the board and the monster cubes scene, spotting all the match-ups. It was really fun, because the directors actually put so much effort into it.
oh no why does an internet have my avatar
+hbmonk he's a fucking jerk. probably stole it from you
Time to steal something back.
Become the internet.
Ah, the feeling of effort being put in
you putting in so much effort to explain Why the sins are so bad is seriously commendable. i wouldve just said "thats the joke" and "thats the point" until my tongue fell out
12:35 missed missed nitpick: that's not even remotely twerking. If sensually moving your hips is twerking, then a windy day is a tornado.
Yeah, that’s a big pet peeve of mine. Twerking isn’t just shaking your butt, it’s a specific style of African dance. Calling any butt shaking twerking is.. I mean racist is probably a bit much, but definitely ignorant and disrespectful of other cultures
Whenever CinemaSins and other cynical wankers get called out they go: "IT'S A PRANK, BRO!!!"
Anyone who says that straw-man line, you're in your legal right to throat punch them repeatedly.
Not like we're losing future surgeons or scientists.
I just made 2 videos Sinning CinemaSins a few days ago, check it out if interested!
LOL anyone who says that about Cinemasins doesn't know what a prank is and i actually doubt anyone says that about the channel. I'm a fan of them I don't say it's a prank to snobs who don't like it, but I do wonder why they are dumb enough to see that it's a balance of jokes, nitpicking, and actual criticism as it's intended to be. I mean when they say "this scene does not contain a lap dance. Or. Jennifer Lawrence isn't my girlfriend in this movie." And people actually can't realize that's not an actual belief that that is something wrong with the film. I mean everyone can see that they point out actual critism when it's something obvious and we all agree with, but when it's something like that they are "cynics"? Is it being cynical when they remove sins for someone's great acting, having something not seen in film, great action scene, something being funny, something badass, or something that you liked? I swear I only hear the complaints when it's something they liked that was made fun of or something.
Grimbot2 no they don't, you're an idiot
Yeah...It's not like it actually is a prank.....like a video made for entertainment....you sure get it...
24:24 If you want to a little nit-picky, you can say that this is an overhead press, which works shoulders, not biceps. But it's not like we expect Cinema Sins to understand basic human anatomy.
Hahaha, yes, and don't forget the traps and triceps! Probably your core a bit?
TORTURE traps and ticepcs.
Jesus, dude.
;)
"There. Now we're both awful." made me laugh out loud
"The director is Sigourney Weaver, so, both"
Hahaha, perfect
I wanna point out that "too dark to see what the zombies look like" doesn't... actually make sense as a criticism when you consider that this only holds true for home releases. This sort of thing is usually just fine in theaters, but smaller screens in brighter rooms makes it much more difficult.
Cinema sins: hate exposition
Also cinema sins: misses the point or joke of any scene where it isn't explicitly explained to them
7:16 So true...CS calls that a sin when they lust over Black Window in their Avengers videos all day. How convenient.
I really like when you point out nitpicks they miss, because when you do it you have a kind of silly "it doesn't matter, but isn't this funny!" vibe about it. When they do it, it sounds like they're genuinely mad and they want you to feel depressed
I’ve never seen such a brutal roast of someone who deserves it so much, this video is seriously a 10/10 from beginning to end
Some years ago cinemasins mentioned on his vlog channel that he doesn't really enjoy the nitpicking and negativity, so it seems now he's stuck with a format he has no interest in. Hence by this point he's permanently phoning it in. His videos consist of lazy, inaccurate guesses because it's just a chore for him. A grind too profitable to give up.
Tesla Death Ray I want to stress that if he's willing to sell a shit product because people buy it, he's still a shit peddler no matter how bad he says he feels about it.
do you happen to remember which vlog video this was?
Sorry, it's a distant memory now. All you have to do is watch everything on Cinemasins Jeremy and somewhere you'll find him lamenting that he'd prefer straight reviews, or at least something more positive because he doesn't actually view movies the way his sins videos make it seem.
They have pretty much admitted that on the podcast. Even if you hate the videos -- which I don't, but clearly many do -- check out the podcast. It's basically just three friends sitting around talking movies from a much more positive viewpoint.
Have they admitted the extent to which their phoning it in results in misleading / false nitpicks?
To be honest I used to like CinemaSins videos, but their older content used to be 5-8 mins in length. Then they started creating longer ones, padded with factually wrong sins. (however, I have not noticed as much as you did, only a few)
Your videos are absolutely brilliant compared to theirs. Please keep making them.
I think one of the saddest things about CinemaSins is that there were a few things you dinged where they WOULD have had good points... but they didn't seem to realize the actual issue at play. They were usually things where the satire of the movie fell flat or broke the rules of its own world, but CS was dinging it for... just existing, or for being a trope, neither of which are actual problems with the movie.
Thing is, some critics *can* signal when they're transitioning between sincere critique and tongue in cheek nitpicking. RLM does this. CS doesn't.
The first time I watched a CS review, it was Alien. I initially took it as satire of nitpicky angry reviewers. But then, like you pointed out, legitimate critiques would pop up with no transition or alteration to the delivery.
The effect was a feeling of discomfort and mild horror as I thought back to the jokes-the things I *thought* were jokes-I had laughed at.
It was not dissimilar to being in a conversation with someone and realizing that the edgy jokes you let pass were trial balloons and now he's denying the holocaust.
I just want to point out that CinemaSins *isn't* reviewing these films. It's done for comedy, not to give a genuine review on the movie itself. If you're going to CS for reviews then please look elsewhere because that's not the format, it never has been. Personally, I'd recommend moviebob but he can be a bit negative for some people.
Nyx Darklore Comedy is supposed to be funny
@Disappointed Turtle - yes, comedy is supposed to be funny but it doesn't have to be funny to *everyone*. I don't like Adam Sandler and don't think he's funny but just because I don't think he's funny doesn't mean he's not a comedian it means that he doesn't appeal to my sense of humour. Just because you don't think CS is funny doesn't mean it's not comedy, there are plenty of people who think it's funny and I count myself among them and know there are 2 others in my group of friends who feel the same - at least.
Your opinion on comedy isn't the be all and end all of everything. Comedy is still comedy even if there are people who don't think it to be so.
Nyx Darklore You already lost when you had to compare Cinemasins to Adam Fucking Sandler to defend it.
@Disappointed Turtle - if you think I was comparing them and not listing them as two separate examples then you don't understand what I was going for. I could compare it to several other youtubers here, I could compare it to comedians and other actors.
At the end of the day the point wasn't Adam Sandler < CinemaSins because those two will never be equal, it was an example of my point: comedy is subjective.
My gods, this is more entertaining AND informative than the actual cinemasins. You’re the best!
I totally agree with you.
A movie satire about horror movies;
Is criticized by a channel that claims to satirize film critics;
Which is then criticized for its failure at satire.
Wow. This is so meta. I mean so many metas. It could even be ALL THE METAS!!!
Jesus Christ, the clip of the J-Horror film freaked me out. "Ao Oni" I think, oooof.
Yeah kinda creepy :o
The satire defense is nonsensical of you watch their early stuff, when it was more focused on errors and "have you ever actually read those newspapers in the movies". They werent even that nitpicky.
I think that's initially why I loved Cinemasins, because it occasionally pointed out something like "this extra is sweeping nothing" or something similar. But now it's just unfunny.
Proteus success made them lazy
Even beyond the "sins" being dumb, how can anyone listen to that guy's voice for any amount of time.
Augh, and god damn it the "satire" thing just keeps piling up. So it's a character who's a satire of a nitpicker who's half-right half-wrong? Then how does it come back in a way to criticizing the character. The counter goes "ding", the movie gets a score. The movie is the target, not the "satire" character, so it fails at being definable as satire. And I'm still thinking of more reasons while typing this.
So glad you did this. When I first watched this, not going to lie, a lot of the comedy and the commentary on horror movies went over my head. I was pretty upset and thought the movie was awful. I watched the CinemaSins video on it and was like YA SCREW THIS MOVIE SEE I KNEW I WAS RIGHT!!! Then one of my good friends told me to watch this movie and I told him no and how it sucked and pointed out a lot of what CinemaSins said about it. My friend just stared at me and was like dude it's making fun of horror movies.....It's not trying to be a horror movie. I watched it again with that perspective and was so embarrassed, now it's one of my favorite movies. Glad you were able to point out all the issues CinemaSins had with the movie the same way my friend pointed out what the movie was about to me!
1:06
Hey go easy on Jeremy. This scene is definitely hard to understand to a person who likely doesn’t have a variety of friends if any.