A non-biased summary for anyone who doesn't have time for the whole 150 minutes: - Adum agrees with the Drinker that the way that major studios are approaching film is a soulless, people-pleasing cash grab that does a disservice to the artform. - Adum disagrees with the Drinker that most modern movies are bad, arguing instead that it's specifically the blockbusters that are bad, and that smaller/independent/foreign films are often good or great. He points out that the Drinker could use his platform to promote these movies, rather than recommending only well-known movies and shows, but that the Drinker seems to have no interest in seeking out movies that he might enjoy. - Adum disagrees with the Drinker that movies used to be better, arguing that only the good ones have any kind of legacy, so those are the ones that we still know about today. He also disagrees with the Drinker's belief that modern writers are worse than they used to be. - Adum agrees with the Drinker that people won't really see a movie based on the main actors alone anymore (though other statements from Adum suggest that he doesn't think this is universal; for example, he thinks people only saw Red Notice for its cast). However, Adum argues that this is actually a good thing, as it reflects a moviegoing audience that understands more about the film industry and what determines the quality of a film. - Adum agrees with the Drinker that a movie should be judged on its own merits and not for whatever political or social arguments it makes. However, he points out the hypocrisy in the Drinker's stance on The Sound Of Freedom, as the Drinker argues that the movie is good because of its political message. Adum's consensus seems to be that the Drinker isn't applying this logic to everything, just to the things that he dislikes. - And, be honest, you're here for the identity politics stuff. Adum agrees that identity politics shouldn't replace the substance in a film, and agrees that they sometimes do, but disagrees that their presence is innately detrimental. Adum also argues that identity politics are nothing new, but that previously they were celebrating the 'straight white male' culture, so they were less noticeable to straight white males. - Also of note is Adum talking about the Drinker's strange status as a movie review channel for people who aren't very interested in films, and are more interested in the identity politics surrounding them. Adum briefly touches on MauLer here, dismissing the idea that MauLer represents everything wrong with modern day film criticism. - Adum requests that, should the Drinker choose to respond to this video, he does it at length so that he can address every point that Adum makes. Adum feels that this would be the most constructive approach for all parties. - And yes, there's a point where Adum starts complaining about the video quality of the Russell Brand video, but you don't need me to tell you that. TL;'DR Adum partially disagrees with the Drinker's approach to film criticism, but doesn't attack the Drinker as a person. He's interested in debating the Drinker, but doesn't want to start any beef with him.
Honestly I would love to see a respectable debate between the two. I love watching Adam and critical drinker review movies because they both go into detail on what makes a movie good and bad, but from different perspectives on the industry.
I’d say adum pretty much completely disagrees with TCD’s approach to the film industry, they just happen to agree on a few superficial points while the way they each get to those points is completely opposed
It's wild that the Critical Drinker seemingly thinks there can only be so many movies with female leads before it becomes 'too much' while the thousands of movies with male leads is just fine with no complaints about being over represented.
@@CloudMountainJuror It's especially wild too because despite what Drinker might think, plenty of male led stories could be replaced with females and nothing really changes. Its not the character being a male that makes them interesting, it is them being an interesting character and there are plenty of good female leads beyond just Ripley but Drinker will never see any of them.
Because he's misogynistic and doesn't see women as human people. Even now, people will see a female lead and think "oh who cares, it's a chick movie" but movies with male leads are treated like default and for everyone. Also these reviewer guys will see any female lead and nitpick every single character trait to justify saying "omg she was so stupid and annoying" Bonus points if it's a woman of color!
@@rubyrose312And even if he did his own bias would completely change the characterisation, anything he loved in a “strong male lead” is now “cliche, woke and unrealistic” in a female lead. More than just being painfully stupid, I find it hysterical he doesn’t realise this makes his opinions completely one sided and therefore impossible to take seriously.
@@morganfarrell2442 He always uses the only two examples that he knows of because everything else that features a female lead is 'woke garbage' and he hates it simply on the premise of having a female lead who isn't solely focused on getting a man.
@@Nightmarewrath except hollywood is filled with pedos and groomers and have been caught with hand inthe trafficking jar soooooo, really no leg to stand on.
This is exactly why i liked Barbie. Im a straight black guy. And im no fan of "redpill" culture. I laughed and cringed at Ben Shapiros response. But i also felt a little "attacked" for lack of a better word at alot of the commentary on men in that movie. But i still really liked it because even though i disagreed with points, what i 100% understood is that "thats how ALOT of women feel". And that resonated with me.
@awhellnah__No it isn't. There's a reason why analysis and understanding are the basis of research and criticism. You are completely valid to see what people like about something and still not like it.
This is a great context point mostly lost on watching media from that time now. It’s like watching movies from the early 2000s post 9/11 with no frame of reference for what 9/11 is. The 80s definitely took a lot of inspiration and influence from 50s nostalgia, from movies to music and even style.
Adum sometimes does that joke where when a black person shows up in something he says “wow whys it have to get so political?” The critical drinker actually takes that seriously.
@@heroicgangster9981 why is it when someone gets criticized. The response is "he wasn't serious" that's strange, if he wasn't serious why are people taking it seriously?
I'm 53 years old, and for literally my entire life people have been saying "There are no good movies anymore" and "there's no good music anymore." Literally, for my entire life, that's been a part of the culture. It's just part of the background noise of life, people saying "When I was a teenager and everything seemed new, things were better."
Because when we are teens we are on the wave of the latest, and other parts of life take over adn suddenly, NOW, what the kids are doing is stupid. It will never not blow my mind how often people think the the shit kids are doing now like terrible pranks, is new; with jackass existing.
@@MabansAllDayjackass were the butt of the joke themselves 90% of the time, now its mainly being a nuisance to people and harassing minimum wage workers
The crazy thing is that argument always is based on sheer ignorance. Their proof for why music is bad now is always the top 40s. It just shows they dont even know music exists outside the Top 40s. Thats like complaining that "art is bad now" and pointing to a coca cola billboard ad as "evidence".
Every time the critical drinker has said "T H E M E S S A G E" I actively cringe on command. His obsession on the wokeness of Hollywood is in-itself insanely cringe.
@@Wired4Life2fair enough, but how often does that actually happen? I’m sure it does happen, but I doubt it’s frequent enough to make a whole generalization of Hollywood about
And now Drinker seems to have abandoned all pretense of not being a right-wing culture war grifter by sitting down to talk with freaking Ben Shapiro about the movies Daily Wire is producing.
@@Kay-im6ht I'm sorry, I just read your "sandwiched in between" comment and immediately thought that it was a tongue-in-cheek sex joke. Long-explanation-short, I got a good laugh.
True art aficionados who lean right now recognize that The Daily Wire's mediocre offerings demonstrate the cost of the right surrendering the arts, entertainment media, and pop culture to the left. Also, Steven Crowder's decision to not join The Daily Wire ages better and better.
I remember when he completely shat all over Fleabag being femenist tripe despite admitting in the _same sentence_ that he hasn't watched it, which is extremely oreitating because i saw Fleabag as such an entertaining femenist series that despite what people would think a feminist series would do, it didnt shit on male society in the slightest and even jokes on the main female characters for being terrible femenists. And then he tried to sort of wind his words back when a fair portion of his viewers told him otherwise, but eh not really gonna invest time on a critic who makes a judgement on a thing they havent even seen it 😅
I feel like the characteristics of the things people like critical drinker don’t like are shared by many people who might call themselves feminists. The rabid strain of phemoid male haters isn’t exactly popular . Even if they do well on twitter sometimes.
He said the same thing about the Angry Video Game Nerd movie, while in the same breath admitting that he had never watched it and didn't care to know a thing about it. Drinker is currently working on a short film adaptation of his own spy novel series, Ryan Drake, and I bet he expects people to actually watch it rather than rate it based on third-hand opinions found on twitter. Methinks Will Jordan needs to stop smelling his own farts.
I remember when Phoebe Waller was brought in to help write No Time To Die. The drinker kept complaining that she was brought in to make Bond look incompetent and make the female characters look better than Bond. And he was basing this opinion off of Fleabag. A show he hadn't even seen. And I was there thinking. Both Fleabag and Killing Eve(2 Shows she created) do not indicate her to be someone who would write Mary sue characters and shit on male characters. She just seems like a very good writer. And lo and behold. When the show actually came out Bond was in fact not overshadowed by any female character and was front and center. Turns out Phoebe was only brought in to write some comedy bits.
I love that he uses the spice girls as an example, its literally one of the groups that the previous generations were pointing to and saying 'see all this new music is the same and shit and soulless'
All I can hear is Homer's dad. "I used to be 'with it', but they changed what 'it' was. Now what I'm with isn't 'it', and what's 'it' seems weird and scary to me... *It'll happen to **_you..!_* " It is terrifying how Golden Age Simpsons ages so well in so many ways.
@@saltystick_99 Yeah, the creen writers were quite clever on this one. And it's right, every generation has it's "Things were better in my days" moment.
The reason people don't get into broader art is because you always need to wade through a couple shit movies, games, shows in that category before developing your tastes and knowing how to find the good stuff. Basically you need to put in work up front to get into the niche stuff unless you have a guide, and most people don't want to do that. Adum's having the same meltdown I have whenever people say the game industry is dying and I'm internally screaming, "There's 30 games coming out every single day! Play an indie game you fuck!"
The problem with Critical Drinker I think is that he's kind of become one-note. He did a series for a short while about disastrous movie productions that was very entertaining, but he doesn't seem to make those anymore. He just complains about new releases being woke. True or not, I can only listen to the same shit a number of times before I can predict what he's going to say decades before he says it.
I think that's actually a great breakdown, I was scratching my head for words to bring to this, and you pretty much said how I feel better than I could. This is probably the main reason why I've liked his stuff genuinely before, but I find him to be unfairly cheap now in his criticism.
His videos are right wing propaganda disguised as film criticism. I remember watching his video on bad comics, a subject I actually agreed with, but couldn't stop thinking - Why did he have to make the rhetoric so fascistic?
@@luismarioguerrerosanchez4747 That’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard, I’ve seen most of his videos, and I can say with certainty, that the most right-wing Drinker has ever been is not liking Barbie.
There's literally a writers strike happening right now, because studio producers don't think writing matters as an art form and want to replace writers with AI who will just regurgitate "sure thing" scripts. Like why do people always blame the creators and not the people who dictate whether those creators are allowed to make anything original. It's so frustrating.
Because it's easier to just go "the writers suck +woke", instead of an analysis that is actually informed about the structures and factors that create the current movie landscape.
The real question is will the AI race swap classic characters and shoe horn in LGBT messaging into children's movies. Yea I think the writers can go too.
Saying "modern movies suck" based off the big hollywood releases Is no different than saying "modern music sucks" basing your opinion off the top 200 list
@@NDenizen not really. There's a crap ton of bad old Hollywood films. The issue? Only the best ones get remembered, so people who grew up in modern day think that movies back then were overall better when all we can reference is stuff that's heralded as classic
@@ColombianThundervery much agree except with one clarification: it is entirely possible to reference and find all the shit that’s fallen to the wayside, especially with how much more access the internet and streaming has given to older media, just people don’t think to/feel like putting in the work to do it. I definitely think in 10-20 years time younger people will have a similar reverence to some 2010 films as people do now to 80s-90s ones, though since everything has been documented much more extensively for like the past 20 years or so it’ll come with some caveats. Like, “now obviously it had its fair share of issues and a lot of bland generic stuff, but the 2010s were an amazing decade for movies,” which is probably the same way people would talk about any decade had they received the amount of coverage the internet offers present events. It’s funny, cause people don’t realize when the masses groan about sequels and remakes and comic book movies that the same complaints were being made like 60-70 years ago only about musicals and westerns. And as far as the sequel stuff goes, that’s been a criticism leveled at Hollywood since franchises got big in the 80s. “Wait, you’re telling me there’s a FOURTH Jaws and a FIFTH Rocky!? That’s it, Hollywood’s officially out of ideas.” But now look at how fondly that time was viewed.
@@plasmasnake4774 that's actually a great point about the Internet. The fact everything is being documented, the future consensus might be a bit different, especially since it could be easier to see how people felt since videos and articles can be found very quickly, whereas it's a little harder now without searching through an archive for old videos and scanned magazines/newspapers. You're very right
Modern music does suck, based on the top 200 list... Do you know what the top movies were in 1940s? The top music in the 1950s/60s? Modern media is absolutely in the tank compared to what was ‘popular’ back then.
@@TheCapedWanderer you know the billboard is made because regular people keep listening to that stuff right? Modern music doesn't suck at all. An argument to be made that popular modern music sucks, that's fair, but there is so much good stuff out there. Literally just have to find it and be open minded about what you find. I'm so tired of this disingenuous attitude that art is no longer good. It's out there. Go explore. If you really truly cared about having a meaningful, purposeful experience with art, you would find it instead of waiting for it to be dropped on your feet.
Fun fact: When the trailer for "House of the Dragon" first dropped, he made a video titled "Why nobody cares about House of the Dragon," but once the trailer started getting a positive reception, he changed the video's title to "House of the Dragon Trailer Breakdown." It's almost as if instead of giving his actual opinion he just says what he thinks his audience wants to hear...
The initial reactions to the trailers for House of the Dragon and Rings of Power were equally negative. But then it turned out that House of the Dragon was amazing… especially when compared to a dumpster fire like Rings of Power… so he officially changed his mind and praised House of the Dragon. Just like an adult.😂
It's not QUITE that simple. You follow the popular narrative, of course, but you do, most importantly, be able to come up with some reason for why the thing people didn't like was "woke", and why the thing people did like definitely was not woke. That's how one thing can be woke propaganda because it has one black woman in it. But something will not be woke propaganda even though it contains criticism of police violence, prison labour, colonisation... Because you've acquired an audience that is completely story illiterate but very passionate they'll eat up anything that seems to support their opinion.
@@ramigilneas9274 An adult would admit that they changed their mind, explain why that happened, and then move on. Changing the title, on the other hand, is what a cowardly, pathetic child who's deeply afraid of his audience not thinking he's cool would do.
He did this all the time. He called these movies bad and woke before it release and when it’s turn out it’s good he be like “amazing movie with flaws” blah blah blah
The three examples of "good" female characters the drunk guy gives Ripley/connor: movies by a guy that would be an eco terrorist if he wasnt directing movies Trinity: movie done by two transwomen while they were figuring out their gender identity But yes, keep repeating "duh message" in your reviews, mr drunk
Connor even goes on a rant about how all men can do is destroy in T2. We all know that if that film came out today the anti woke gallery would have a field day with that little rant. But fortunately for them it came out during their formative years so they have massive nostaligia goggles.
You know what’s the most annoying thing when he says “the message.” The message is called the Theme. Like…yeah. A movie is usually going to have a message. All good stories have one. Because we use art to say stuff. Like…dude. Did he even go to a literature class?
I stopped watching the Critical Drinker because he just seemed to hate everything at some point. Even finding criticisms that weren’t there imho. I stopped listening to everyone actually and did this crazy thing called making my own opinion on things.
So many seem to miss that CTD actually does "CTD recommends" and explain why he recommends those things & why they are good. Sure, they are fewer, but he has a series of those videos.
@@vincentgraymore And that’s fine but I don’t need his recommendations. I don’t need him to tell me what I should like. I’m done with online movie critics and critics of every nature. These people NEED content. And you can’t have a channel if you like everything. But shitting on everything is a great way to keep spitting out episodes. Naw I’m good.
@@viperrecords3288you should never make decisions on what to like or dislike based off of what someone says. Some people listen to the Critical Drinker because they agree with his sentiments.
What you said about bias towards the past is 100% correct. We just have this nasty instinct to dismiss the idea that our nostalgia for something isn't as close to the truth as we want it to be.
@@BlazingOwnager You're so blinded by nostalgia that you start to make up conspiracies about it that don't even make sense according to their own logic. Fucking hilarious 😂
@@youcanthandlethetruth8873 You could look at the same thing happening in Comics in the 50s-60s. Look at the Comics Code Authority (or the Hayes Code if we wanna stay in movies).
I love how they say "movies weren't political" and then, in the same breath almost say how Arlond Swarzeneger movies were about "big buff American man" and about "America dominating the world". Like it isn't politics. It's like a lot of people say, when critizing this approach. It's not that these critics/circles want a-political movies. They're just angry that not all movies, main-stream movies that is, have the political messages THEY agree with.
The big buff Austrian man. Lol. But the difference is that there's been a total overhaul in how we approach political messaging these days. Today, there's a stronger belief that the political messaging of our media will 'move the needle', and have an impact on our culture directly. You can't say that there isn't a much, much bigger focus on using the politics for movies as a force for social change. These days, you literally cannot be nominated for an oscar if you aren't hitting a requirement on diversity and inclusion. Of course, there have always been movies with / about politics. But people who use this "Movies were ALWAYS political" argument are sidestepping the point. Political messaging has become more important then the films themselves. They didn't used to try and shove it down your throat like they do now.
@@kaygirl5160 Oppenheimer literally swept the awards season and it has the whitest cast of all time. Also, what films are forcing their “political” message down your throat other than that non-whites and non-straights exist?
@kaygirl5160 no one is shoving anything down your throat, there is no diversity/inclusion check point for the Oscars, you need to go outside and watch independent films because you clearly stay in an echo-chamber
@@kaygirl5160I just don’t see that, dude. You can only believe that if you don’t actually watch old movies. The entire medium is designed to reflect the attitudes of the time and old movies were just as geared towards political/moral/spiritual messaging as anything today. They’ve been making movies about class struggles since before movies existed. They were called plays. Read a few of those, Plato wrote a ton of them. Exceedingly political and status-quo defying. The problem with “woke” movies isn’t the wokeness, it’s the cynicism. The people making them don’t care about the message, they’re just trying to make money. Same as it ever was. People like the Critical Drinker aren’t lying to you because they say bad movies are bad, they’re lying to you because they’ve convinced you that the commodification of art is a new problem. And one that depends on a vast conspiracy of cultural decay rather than the obvious and inevitable result of making art into an industry.
The movie was written for a cast of men (the original script by Dan O'Bannon uses only surnames). I think it was Ridley Scott who decided to change the genders. According to an interview with Veronica Cartwright (Lambert) that I read ages ago, Sigourney was chosen to play Ripley because her family was influential in film and television. I believe the quote was something like "her daddy was a bigwig in the industry".
Says someone who's never seen one of his videos. Go watch his review of the original blade runner. He understands storytelling and explains it beautifully and poetically. The guy also wrote a couple novels and is making a film right now...
ffs i hate the way people talk about the bechdal test. It's not an analytical tool, it's a punchline first and a rhetorical tool second. "haha isnt it funny how few movies pass this incredibly low bar but also isn't kinda fucked up?" not "here's a list of that divides the morally pure movies from the sinful movies"
Criticism is fine, garbage movies should be called out but people like Crifical Drinker and their non anti-SJW variants too, don't know anything about movies or cinema, they're totally unqualified to give opinions and just serve up mundane commentary that random people off of the street could have made. I love how Adum dissects the sound and production of movies like the Lion King remake. I like how Ralph the Movie Maker explains film making concepts with angles, lense filters etc Redlettermedia don't just dunk on B movies, they'll elaborate on the craft too, I feel like I'm gaining insight, not just a cheap laugh. I don't need some opinionated nerd with nothing to offer, telling me tabloid level commentary. They're a dime a dozen and not even half as intelligent they seem to believe that they are.
Even The Nostalgia Critic, whose primary shtick is getting irrationally over-the-top angry at shitty movies, and who by this point is pretty much universally agreed to be cringe, occasionally talks about things he likes and even sometimes says positive/constructive things about things he doesn't like.
There are two channels I love that dive deep into the thematic elements of stories, and I always feel like I learned something after watching them. Pillar of Garbage makes really, _really_ good videos. I'd recommend his video on Smiling Friends and Prey, and his channel as a whole. I'd also recommend The Media Zoo. Her videos on The Pale Man and Robert Egger's "The Witch" sent chills down my spine when I watched them. Cannot recommend her enough.
@@jakek1735You mean just like the critical drinker also does? He has videos recommending films, he also recommends lesser known films sometimes also. There is nothing inherently wrong with him mostly focusing on the big films of today. That is what most people watch and are interested in so it makes sense to cover that more then anything else for some channels.
@@jakek1735I'm not a regular watcher, but Nostalgia Critic is way better now than he was a couple of years ago. He has finally embraced the criticism.
@@Gabi-bv9uxYou're focusing on the wrong aspect of the comment. The problem isn't that he just focuses on big movies, it's that his criticisms are surface-level and inconsistent, and his conclusions don't hold up to scrutiny.
46:14 I’m literally so pissed by not only the wilful ignoring of Russel Brands question but in the answer he does provide, he completely ignores historical context. For someone that continually preaches ‘blockbusters in the 70s and 80s were better’, you would think he would be knowledgeable about their production contexts. In the 70s the major film studios took a big financial hit due to changes in law to ‘4 wall screening’ (the ability for a production company to buy out a cinemas exhibition space to remove competition), numerous entertainment industry strikes and general economic hardship as a result of Vietnam War. This coincided with americas introduction of films schools which the likes of Scorsese and De Palma attended, and out of film school they were able to work through people like Roger Corman, who ran a model of making a shlock film a week. Along with Spielberg and Lucas, they were able to break into mainstream due to the afar mentioned financial hit to studios, which led to auteur led cinema influenced by foreign cinema they were shown in film school. A lot of their films critiqued American values and focused on flawed characters due to many soldiers coming back with PTSD from Vietnam. This era became known as the ‘soft body films’ (which entirely debunks the critical drinkers claim that characters used to be hardened warriors and are now ‘softies’). In fact it was due to this very vulnerability that Reagan initiated a turn towards ‘hard body films’ in the 80s; leading to more hyper masculine displays of power to counter act the soft body films. It was a literal government incentive which is the basis of propaganda. This isn’t new, it’s been engrained in cinema back to its rootes in vaudevilles. This isn’t to say that you need to know your history to review media but for the critical drinker to continually criticise contemporary production contexts and persistently condemn modern media for ties to political ideology it's outright hypocritical and wrong. He also clearly doesn’t care about foreign media unless it happens to break into popular discourse
Is there another term used to name "soft body films"? I tried looking up "soft body films" and couldn't find any results. I would love to learn more about this topic but can't find any thing as exact as "soft body films"
A lot of war films from this period were strictly anti war and anti American foreign policy. I mean the rebels in Star Wars as stated by George Lucas are a allegory for the Vietcong. George Lucas himself stated the palpatine in the prequels is based on George bush and where he thought his administration was going, which is really extreme but that was a lot of films during that time like V for Vendetta which is why Alan Moore hates it because it took away the British context and turned it into a criticism of George bush. Films always had political subtext in them, whether It was more subtlety done is the question and whether it was subtext rather than the focus.
Yea but triple a games used to be really good and now they are trash in comparison and that should be pointed out so I think your point isn't pointing here.
@quintonbackhand2519 The system under which these games and movies are made requires infinite growth. That means it isn't enough for these companies to be profitable. They need to make more money this year than last year, and they'll need to make more money next year than they made this year. If their profits stop growing more and more every year, investors pull out and the company dies. This is why these big mainstream games and movies seem to be made by committee to try and capture the largest audience possible while cutting as many corners as possible. Because they literally are.
Understand the circumstances these things are created under and then maybe you'll have something worthwhile to contribute to the conversation. Or, you can be like the critical drinker and just screech and whine about everything being "woke" while collecting fat paychecks from your audience of mindless drones.
I used to watch Critical Drinker. The wake-up call was seeing his Loki review, and on seeing a black woman he commented, “captain diversity,” and realising oh no, this isn’t a bit, he’s genuinely a racist.
When he put up an image of trump and said, "pay attention to what they're doing instead of criticizing everything they do." I started backing up. Then recommended vomit inducing trash like tango and cash and willys wonderland.
This is what I’ve come to appreciate about Adam. He doesn’t simplify his thoughts, he accepts that this shit is complicated and works to talk about it. Even when I disagree with him he’s always willing to discuss opposite opinions from himself. This is the kinda discourse we need about our media lol
@@quatreraberbawinner2628yeah that's absolutely a garbage take. That's like saying film critics who watch pop culture movies don't understand "real" movies.
@@SpiceCh i think he said it because Drinker doesn't understand film critique, which I agree, Drinker only really cares about the emotions a movie wants to share when it's from a saga of movie he already likes, otherwise he watches movies as if they were excel spreadsheets where the plot and characters needs to follow certain patterns or else the movie is "objectively bad", it's a trap many right wing media critics fall into, being fair about superficial criticism but dismissing the themes of the movies they're watching entirely, especially if he deems the movie "woke", and if you go to the comments section you can see a lot of Drinker fans thinking the same way
@@Dolavin been watching him for like four years, less and less each year, at first i liked it because he was against bad marvel movies and all that stuff, but it's like he cherrypicks when to have a soul, and when to review a movie like it's a social failure or something, especially if the movie has "too much inclusiveness" cuz in that case he can't recommend the movie and has to find mistakes on it, my favorite example is midsommar, a movie he interpreted as woman empowerment because he couldn't comprehend basic plot points
I used to not like YMS very much, because he crapped all over a movie I was (and still kind of am) very passionate about: "The Strangers." That was the first thing I ever saw from him. Now seeing him crap all over this joker, The Critical Drinker, I have much respect and admiration.
I am genuinely curious, what are you passionate about in that movie? What did you get out of this movie that you didn't get in, lets say, When a Stranger Calls, that did everything the strangers did 30 years prior to the strangers, while also having one of the most bone chilling stomach dropping moments in film history with a killer twist that everybody knows to this day. Or the last house on the left that basically did the entire strangers plot, including the whole "because you were home" vibe, but that was just the first half because a plot like that isn't enough to sustain an entire film. Or the hundreds of other home invasion thrillers, including "Them" which the strangers may as well be a remake of, but without the actual unique scares the movie came up with. Funny games Martyrs Inside Halloween Was it your first home invasion movie? Have you seen any home invasion movies since? Really not dunking on you, or saying the movie is the worst thing ever, it's average at best, but no matter what angle I look at the movie from, I can't see anything somebody could latch on to be "passionate" about this.
@@nicklafleur7620 I was passionate about it. Not really any more, though i still like it. I remember watching it when I was about 12 and being scared enough that I had a hard time getting to sleep that night. Movies rarely frightened me then (less so now that I've matured) so I grew to love the movie, because being scared is a fun experience. I like the sense of ambiguity in that you never see the strangers' faces or who they are. It makes you fill in the blanks in your head, which I enjoy. Also the sense that they are still out there in the end to do it to someone else is creepy to me. The main part that got to me is that famous scene on the poster of the masked man watching Liv Tyler's character when she has no idea. That is the scene that kept me up at night because I imagined that man was watching me from my doorway when I lay in bed. Most of those other movies you mentioned I've also seen and I like them too
I liked the Critical Drinker at first cause he hated on a movie I didnt like and I watched 2 more videos and was like "yeah these movies suck hes right". Then I watched his reaction to a movie I never watched. At it became clear exactly what perspective he goes through.
He was funny at first then I slowly tend to see his political bias (Also he reviewed Godzilla vs Kong as a bad movie so without even watching it so there's that)
The videos that made me like the Drinker at first was his 2 parter of ripping apart Justice League (the Joss Whedon cut) but nowadays I rarely watch him not because of his political views but it’s the same repetitive stuff he says both negative and positive.
I used to respect the Critical Drinker back when he released his Black Panther review. Most people avoided disparaging the movie because they didn't want to be associated with the very small group of bigots who also detracted the movie. Despite that, Critical Drinker made some valid criticisms which have been more or less vindicated over time, as today most people concede that Black Panther is a B-tier Marvel movie. I don't agree with everything Drinker says in his review, and he can be a bit (okay, very) nitpicky, but I could totally see where he was coming from and at the very least I respected his honesty, because he didn't shy away from praising aspects of Black Panther when he thought those aspects were praise-worthy (e.g. Chadwick Boseman's acting). I don't think it's unfair to point out that the Black Panther review might have been an accidental dog whistle for some bigoted audience members, but at least Drinker made an effort to talk about parts of the movie he liked despite the review having an overall negative slant, which to me indicates that, deep down, he himself is not a bigot, nor is he trying to harbor such an audience. Today, it seems like Drinker tries so hard to cater to the particular fanbase he has developed. He's more than happy to homogenize his opinion by only voicing his criticisms of a movie when he dislikes it, and only praising a movie when he likes it. There's no longer any middle ground with him. A movie is only either good or bad, and it seems to fall in line with what the small group of bigoted people in his audience might believe, even if that group might have different reasons than Drinker's to have the same opinion on a movie. This to me demonstrates that Critical Drinker is perfectly aware of what kind of people are in his audience, and is willing to adjust his opinions to validate their opinions, but he also doesn't want to associate himself with them so he doesn't actually speak opinions he doesn't hold, rather he omits opinions which contradict what that section of his audience believes. And generally, when someone has only either positive or negative things to say about a movie, they are usually being dishonestly reductive.
Aliens is unironically about a woman who walks up to a group of a bunch of overly macho hyper-masculine manly men and gets ignored because she's a woman even though she's 100% right about everything, and then the rest of the film is everyone realizing that Ripley was right and she's the most competent and badass member of the group as all the dude-bros die off one at a time as they struggle to deal with the exact situation Ripley literally tried to warn them about beforehand. There's no way in hell they wouldn't call that movie woke if it came out today, people would unironically be trying to nitpick how Ripley's a Mary Sue for knowing how the forklift exoskeleton works and crap, lol! Like, unironically, I don't know if I could even think of a single notable flaw that character has off the top of my head. But because we all recognize it's a good movie they just HAVE to pretend Ripley's just special and she's the one time they got female characters right despite falling into every single criticism they shove at every woke female protag they latch onto in media.
@@dracocrusherit’s not because she’s a woman. It’s because she’s not a soldier. They have a woman with them and she’s the one who is most dismissive of Ripley. They think they can handle anything because they’re all tough soldiers.
@@elvickRULES You say that, but let's not kid ourselves, right? It seems pretty obvious that that type of toxic masculinity is absolutely the intention.
@@dracocrusher Sorry, but this isn't a counterargument. The person you're replying to gave reasoning for why the dismissiveness of the people around her isn't gender related and you completely ignore that and continue on with the narrative you formed and are condescendingly all "yeah, but it really is, that's obvious." despite evidence being shown to the contrary.
@@Pik3rob I think you're insane if you actually believe people wouldn't call a woman being right and effective against a group of hypermasculine almost exclusively male 'experts' incredibly woke if it came out today. You would absolutely get that predictable big Ben Shapiro video where he calls her a Mary Sue that's emasculating men and all the other usual anti-woke talking points. Unironically the only reason it doesn't happen is because the movie's old, so the discussion ended before it could become a big dumb internet reactionary culture war thing.
I agree. It's why I've stopped watching channels that purely focus on negative movie reviews. It's also why I stopped watching Cinema Sins. It is simply unhealthy to have this idea that media is just garbage nowadays. There are so many good pieces of media that are much more worthy of peoples time. Criticism is important, but when that's all there is, it's just exhausting and sad.
@@michaelstrong5383 I stopped watching because it became incredibly boring and predictable. The same five jokes (roll credits when the name of the movie was said in the movie itself being one of them) in every single video that after a while it felt like the videos were coming out of a factory instead of something that was carefully worked on.
I can see the other side of the coin too. If you just watch overly positive movie reviews, they tend to not represent the films very well either and oversell
@@patricksnoring4739Yeah, Chris Stuckmann is that bad side of positivity. Specially when it's so transparent why he does it after that fiasco with his script for Batman v Superman. Also because he does movies now and doesn't want to piss off people in the industry.
That's the thing that drives me crazy about people who are "mad" about everything being so "political" and how companies are just including elements to score cheap points with people, then go crazy for a movie that is transparently using its subject matter as a political cash grab like Sound of Freedom. "It's about child trafficking, you guys, so if you don't buy a ticket, you hate children" is awfully convenient for the studio that stands to make money from it, and a pathetically small-brained take. If you hate when studios capitalize on liberal talking points to make money, you need to also hate it when they do the exact same thing with QAnon nonsense if you're going to even pretend to have a shred of intellectual honesty. Otherwise, don't say you hate politics. Say "I wish there was more propaganda that I personally agree with!" But anyway, I really appreciate how you mentioned that of course a person's opinion of modern media is going to be low if they only watch blockbusters. It's the same thing when I pull up any 70s or 80s prog rock whatsoever on RUclips and always see the comment of "this was back when they knew how to make music! Today it's all crap!" No, no it isn't, and shame on you for insulting all the phenomenally talented musicians out there for only committing the sin of not being famous enough for you to notice them. Of course if you wait 40-50 years for society to come to a consensus on what was the best of a particular era and point it out to you, you will have no trouble finding those things and consuming them. Don't act like things were objectively better a generation ago because you're too lazy to seek out the good things that exist today. It is agonizing to see someone who identifies as any kind of critical thinker to say big dumb 80s action movies were the height of cinema as an art and the peak of clever writing. Maybe they made certain kinds of people FEEL smarter, because a major 80s blockbuster motif was an average joe sticking it to intellectuals by just charging forward blindly and succeeding through dumb luck. Despite what people like these two will say, it is not "elitist" to know what you're doing, or to get annoyed by people who don't have a clue what's going on when they insist they know what's best. And he's not a fan of "erasing history" and "sanitizing things" to pretend they were different, but he's a fan of Ron "Slavery was beneficial, actually" DeSantis. Okay. I absolutely do think he's either a bad-faith actor or he has never even once examined his own beliefs critically for even a second.
Really, art is subjective. Like, there is no 'high art' or 'low art,' art is anything. Like, it's that open, it's a vague term. What matters with the art is the execution, does it conjure up something to the viewer. Yes, a lot of blockbusters these days pander to the audience for the sake of getting in as much money as possible with cheap nostalgia or 'people pleasing' stories/endings. But, Drinker is absolutely doing the same thing by pandering to people who hate 'modern movies' for the sake of getting in as much viewership as he can. I'm sure he doesn't like these movies, but he's most definitely using his persona to push up the negativity into a steady income of clicks. And he sure as shit can't actually articulate these ideas effectively, because the man's just a terrible essay writer pretending to know what 'high art' is.
Not to mention that a big movie a lot of these "me hate politics" people love is Captain America Winter Soldier, which is a VERY political movie that is effectively the superhero equivalent of the Patriot Act lmfao
@@JustSomeDinosaurPerson they love Winter soldier because it's a very political movie, but it doesn't pinpoint certain politics as bad. As an example, the new Batman isn't nearly as political, but it has batgirl calling out the rich white men in one scene, so a lot of people took it as an offense to not only capitalism, but right wing people in general, saying the movie was woke shit Winter soldier has the USA government conspiring to do some Nazi shit, but the entire political spectrum fears/theorizes about that all the time, there's nobody blamed as guilty because it's all part of the Powers that B wanting their world domination as usual in these movies, and Captain america is the one who saves the day. Fallout is another good example of this, the world goes to shit due to nuclear war but you don't have to pinpoint that as a fault of capitalism, but a fault of humanity wanting to bring war, or a fault of stupid governments who kept manufacturing nuclear weapons, but not capitalism in general, so a lot of right wingers are fans of the game
As far as remembering only the good art, it's called the Sieve of Time, and all art goes through it. We really do only remember the best of each time period, even though terrible art is made all the time, too
@@RenegadeVileI think this is definitely true for certain people, but more broadly speaking I think we compare new things we watch to cultural milestone movies like Star Wars or Terminator, etc. We don’t watch movies and think about it in comparison to idk the Ewok movie or whatever other terrible films we’ve watched, we compare it to things we like and therefore we remember those things more.
@@notapplicable6985 that is true. negative things stick with you but in the case of movies and music the situation is different since the good pieces are more likely to reruns and plays for decades into the future. All of that makes it waay more memorable than its bad counterparts.
2:19:52 there's something so funny about the Drinker finishing a passionate tirade about artistic integrity, and for Russell Brand to respond with a disinterested "yeah, nice one mate" before moving to the next part of the interview.
I think it has something to do with the fact that Russell Brand is actually intellectually a lot more capable than he is. So like despite the fact that Russell Brand is a quack, his notable disinterest speaks volumes. It also doesn't help that he says it in his cool casual accent lol.
@@glenstortroen1286 I think it's also notable to point out that Brand asks him the same question twice because he noticed that Drinker pretty much didn't answer the question. He probably just didn't press on him too much cause he's just a guest and not a professional critic really.
@@ColombianThunder lmao professional critic. You're about as useful as the writers concerned with ai. Critics are usually pompous clowns as yourself who ingest fecal matter
Critical Drinker: How can people not be supporting 'The Sound of Freedom'?! It deals with important, serious subject matter that everyone needs to be made aware of!! Didn't I hear this guy arguing not five minutes ago that a movie's politics shouldn't overshadow things like its writing, story, and characters? That the reason movies suck now is because Hollywood cares about shoving" woke" messages in your face more than focusing on good storytelling/filmmaking?
I think there's an obvious difference between a movie being about political or ideological topics vs the writer or producer's personal politics/ideology corroding a project, and thus tanking its quality(or tanking it further).
Probably because that would fly in the face of the false narrative Drinker and his colleagues have created about how "modern movies suck because of wokeness." If they actually admitted there were good current movies with well-developed female main characters in them, it would completely dismantle the story they've been pushing to their viewers.
@@lingy69 Allegations are always taken as truth, just look at the Kwite situation, sure Kwite was at a much smaller scale, but his career om RUclips was nearly ruined by a narcissist that took an opportunity to accuse someone of something awful to ruin them.
My consensus is if he likes it then it's not "woke".. If doesn't.. It's "woke".. I didn't hear him give one example of a true "woke" film. His definition of woke is anything not centered on a straight, white man obviously. Nobody called Nutty Professor (remake) woke.. He absolutely would today.
I used to watch the Drinker a few years ago because I'm obsessed with film critique, and I like to hear all interpretations, especially ones I disagree with. Mostly because if someone off the internet says something along the same lines as drinker, I can refute it with some actual back up and practice haha. That being said, his "opinions" are dangerously close to the alt-right pipeline, and after a couple years I started to get recommendations for videos under his that have titles like "Does Spiderman NEED to be black?" *soy face*" SO yeah I hopped off that train, even if I was there ironically. He can be dangerous.
The drinker’s view on movies is so pessimistic and irrational that it seems like he’s doesn’t know that he has juvenoia towards new material. And doesn’t seem to realize that this new generations tastes are wildly different than 40 years ago
It’s so weird that two movies he recommends are The Whale and The Menu, two very political films (The Menu more so, but The Whale has a lot to discuss with religion and American social structure), and also he’ll rant about Indiana Jones because there’s a woman in it. Does he actually not get it? Or is he assuming he can talk about these movies to his audience because he doesn’t think they’re smart enough to figure out the themes if the lead is a white man?
personally ive come to the conclusion that a lot of woke film criticism can boil down to “I dont know why I dont like it so here’s something more obvious to me that’s a trend so that’s why its bad”. Dont know enough about critical drinker to say personally. but I get that vibe especially with marvel/disney critics that see wokeness as the primary issue.
@@NDenizenThat’s not at all what she’s there for in Indiana Jones. She’s a foil for Indy. She’s there to make him feel like a relic, while also having an emotional connection that compels him to keep her safe. And she’s knowledgeable about the Dial and propels him to go on the adventure in the first place. She’s not supposed to be right, she has a character arc and grows at the end to become a more compassionate person. And I don’t even like the movie! Or her character! But to reduce her role to being “woman” is factually incorrect. She contributes a healthy amount to the film. I mean damn, if you want to talk about a character existing just for the sake of it, her kid sidekick is right there.
@@thatnoobnextdoor Logically speaking, he should be complaining about both equally. Dial of Destiny isn’t very good, but he doesn’t think it’s bad for any substantive reason other than it’s woke. The Whale opens with fat Brendan Fraser masterbaiting to gay porn. How much more woke do you get?
I don't think the Critikal Drinker has made a single video where he didn't complain about the "strong female character". I haven't watched him in years but I see that he is STILL doing it to this day. Unbelievable
He's right, though. We've had strong female characters in media for a century now and the "strong female characters" that have been written in a lot of major productions today, mostly from Disney, are not well-written because they're bad caricatures of how hypermasculine, insecure men behave, or they're blank slates with little to no character. We can find lots of good examples of strong female characters in media today, but it's usually in smaller productions that don't get the same level of visibility as things like Rings of Power or Marvel flicks. The reason why he focuses on those is precisely because they have a lot of visibility. But I'll admit I'd like him to do more reviews of things he liked to promote more positivity and to give eyeballs to productions that deserve them.
Not sure how far he got into the show, but the beginning of the show does have kind of basic and templated conflicts, because the main priority is exposition, and those basic conflicts mostly exist to string the viewer long enough to get them comfortable with the setting and characters. Until those conflicts begin to invert, and the show catapults into something else, I don't blame Adum for abandoning the show since he watches a lot of media, and it's easy to think that the entire show is going to be bland and basic, even just based on the first fifteen minutes of the first episode.
@@youtubeviolatedme7123 Adum ain't got no taste then if that's why because that reasoning makes no sense to me. If he couldn't get on board with the show in the first 15 minutes or whatever, he's not gonna get into the show period, because I fail to see how the beginning of the show is any less brilliant than the rest of it.
Exactly. This problem also applies to other grifters as well. Matt Walsh may have never shot someone or directly threatened a hospital himself, but he has acted as an enabler of people that have preformed those criminal acts.
@@TheRealGaucelmI’m late to this but they’re grifters because they don’t hold actual opinions, they say what gives them the most money, many people have pointed this out but critical drinker often bashes a movie before it comes out like Prey, but when it comes out he changes the title as if he didn’t
Remember when Adam said that dumb stuff about Citizen Kane, then everyone dunked on him and he acknowledged his mistakes and admitted he knew little about old Hollywood? Imagine if Adam had the same ignorance about every single aspect of cinema, refused to ever correct himself, added dogshit reactionary politics to his reviews and had zero self awareness, then you’d get the CD
Being fair, I'm assuming the politics we're discussing here is The Sound of Freedom, which I think is delving into something beyond just the insane world of wokeness and is getting into something increasingly serious in the world right now. There are literally (check the numbers), more slaves in the world right now than at any other time in history.
The whole "movie star" thing is so insufferable to me. Why do people want for there to be mega celebrities who absolutely dominate the film industry? Why is that a good thing? The old "movie stars" didn't dominate because they were uniquely gifted at acting, they dominated because Hollywood as an industry was hyper exclusive and stagnant.
Movie stars gave audiences reliable brands that they can trust to not deviate too harshly. Denzel Washington persists, for example, because of the movie star brand he built up over the decades.
all of these reviewers endlessly acting like they’re under some obligation to rant about the latest studio junk for hours while ignoring the ocean of great stuff coming out in the specialty/indie scene reminds me of that meme of the guy ‘drowning’ before showing he’s literally sitting in two feet of water
I feel like even if I was a conservative “anti-woman, gay, lgbt, pink, Barbie,” guy, I would still be exhausted and depressed by the constant negativity and bitching. They whinge about literally everything.
Adum actually missed out on the Sound of Freedom theater experience. When the credits roll in, a 2 minute countdown appears for a "special message". The special message is Jim Caviezel talking to the audience about how this film is so revolutionary and how everyone needs to see it. Then a QR code pops up and they say that it's our way of doing our part: scanning the code, and buying a ticket for someone who can't afford it. Not a charity, information or organizations dedicated to stop the crimes in the movie, but a way to generate more revenue for the film. From Montreal, and my theater was packed and all the old people stayed and tried figuring out this QR code.
Just like at the end of “Gods Not Dead,” the Duck Dynasty family told everyone to text 100 of their friends “Gods Not Dead.” Just to spread the word of God, I’m sure in no way to promote the movie with the same name.
This is kinda what happens when you're someone who gets into the political sphere and make content online surrounding it: you dip further into extremism because that's what gets eyeballs and keeps viewers entertained. I've been seeing this happen a lot lately with people I follow. People who go from having moderate and decent takes to then becoming hysterical, bitter, and paranoid about the people and world around them.
Yep! This is the archetypal story of online politics. Hesitating on breaking news means you lose viewers to other commentators who have no issue jumping to WILD conclusions while information is still coming in. Maintaining a high standard of steady, balanced, nuanced commentary just leaves viewers bored, and makes them think you're stagnating. Reaching out to the other side doesn't sell, you need to be an EXTREMIST and DEMONIZE the other side. No one wants to hear that institutions actually do work pretty well, and that voting is the best means you have to affect real change. Everyone wants to hear that THE INSTITUTIONS ARE ALL CORRUPT AND ONLY KEEP GETTING WORSE AS TIME GOES ON; THE AVERAGE PERSON IS BEING SLOWLY CRUSHED BY FACELESS, MALICIOUS SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS; YOU CANNOT TRUST ANYTHING YOU HEAR FROM MAINSTREAM MEDIA OR ACADEMIC STUDIES; A GIGANTIC CATASTROPHE IS GOING TO HAPPEN VERY SOON!!! [THEY] DON'T WANT YOU TO SEE THIS!!!!!
How is he in the political sphere ? He's an extremist paranoid hysterical bitter person ? Wow I would love for you to explain that you clearly very kind stable person
I’m so sick and tired of critical drinker’s woman this, man that. Woman can’t do this, woman can’t be that. Like damn, is it that hard to just criticize the story itself without being overly sensitive? His fixation on gender is so so annoying. Just view them as human beings for fks sake
Even the spy novel he wrote he has a woman who has been incarcerated and tortured for years is kicking more ass and more skills than the main character. He is not a good writer.
Drinker has always been a really fascinating figure to me. Despite his facade of being this rambling alcoholic who just “speaks what’s on his mind,” it’s pretty clear that he’s very calculated in what movies he covers and what criticisms he makes of them His negative reviews are very formulaic- you can basically map his criticisms as: - Woman doesn’t face enough adversity or is a “Mary sue” - White man gets mocked or replaced by woman or minority - something is promoting “the message,” which could be just about anything with enough editing and mental gymnastics His positive reviews are more interesting, however, because they really show just how meticulously crafted his channel is. Each movie the “drinker recommends” fit neatly into this backpedaling narrative that he is the apolitical, “common sense” critic. Take arcane for example- a movie he deemed had “woke” in it, but because it’s good (especially to his specific audience) it’s the token “woke movie” that he can point to without his core audience being upset but also still continuing the facade of being apolitical. His other recommends are a little more obvious in their pandering. Chernobyl has got the anti-communist stuff, Alien/Terminator 2 have good women protagonists, sound of freedom is well… the sound of freedom, so you can really start to see just how crafted this narrative is on the channel through these positive reviews He’s very careful when he talks to not “cross the line” into alt-right territory. Even as a leftist I used to watch his vids and sorta see some of the stuff he was talking about, but as you watch him more you begin to realize just how much he manipulates the reviews to always follow the same narrative for each movie
I remember Critical drinker’s critique of Birds of Prey and while he did have good points, I specifically remember him thinking it was absurd that Harley could beat several grown men since she was a woman. Does he not know it’s a superhero movie? Or does he think it’s totally realistic for a single man to beat several other men in combat as if that isn’t just as absurd? He certainly hasn’t been nearly as harsh on the actual Batman movies.
I said to myself..."If he can get 2 minutes in without complaining that a Black actor got paid, I'll keep watching." The fact that I had to say that to myself made me never watch dude again.
On the earliest part of the stream, I think the term Adum's looking for is that Drinker's perspectives are reductive. He's easily accessible to people who don't know much about film because his takes are both very simple and very reductive of the overall film industry, focusing almost solely on Hollywood as representative of the global film industry
Seeing people complain about “wokeness ruins everything” is the same sort of trite criticism as, say, a video game reviewer who can’t talk about games without comparing them to other games. It’s a crutch. How about describing the movie and trying to communicate it’s merits/flaws in a more articulate fashion than just “strong female character bad because ghostbusters 2016”
I think the issue is more, they (producer/directors ect) were willingly went out and made a remake that disregards why the original was better but instead not only makes a terrible script but also replaces a male centered story with a female one, disregarding the original audience that just just wanted to see the same story but with better CGI LOL 😂
@@CreationSGame01 it’s not a bad movie because they replaced a male printed script with a female oriented one, it!s a bad movie because it sucks and every part of it is torture.
I adore the people in gaming who are like 'keep your woke modern day bullshit out my videogames!!' And their favourite video game franchises are like COD, GTA and Fallout 💀
I was subscribed to the Critical Drinker for a while and even stuck up for him to some extent. I enjoyed how funny and entertaining his channel was. As for the criticism of woke stuff, I believe everyone is entitled to their own opinion. However, I eventually unsubscribed because he just wouldn't shut up about "the message." It reached a point that it seemed like even just having a black character in a movie would cause him to go on a rant about woke Hollywood. It was getting so annoying. Nearly every video would bring it up. My theory is that he realized his audience and really began leaning hard into the political stuff to appease them.
I can't think of any specific example since I unsubscribed over a year ago. But I do know that it seemed like every time a character showed up that wasn't a straight white male or a female love interest, he made a point of commenting on it, whether positively or negatively.
Same here. He claims a movie's woke if there's a female character that isn't a damsel in distress has humiliated or emasculated the main male character. Funny how a lot of right wingers shit on left wingers for complaining when they complain just as much.
this is exactly what happened with me. i used to enjoy his videos because he actually put thought into his criticism, i sometimes rolled my eyes when he would make a lame culture war joke, but eventually his videos became almost completely focused on culture war bullshit.
I got one of Drinker's video's recommended to me at one point, I assume because I watch a lot of youtube film analysis/criticism vids. Knowing nothing about him, I watched the video for about 5-10 minutes before I was like "oh, he's one of THOSE guys". I looked through the thumbnails of some of his other vids out of curiosity and saw one where he talks about how "modern movies don't write men properly", and he just un-ironically sounded like Tony Soprano asking "Whateva happened to Gary Coopah? Da shtrong, shilent type?" Yeah I realized pretty quickly he wasn't my cup of tea.
I thought his takedown of the last season of Game of Thrones was hilarious. Then I saw his other videos and realized what a one-trick pony he is. His Midsommar review was one of the most juvenile-incel takes on a movie I've ever seen.
36:40 this was 100% proven right. Drinker and his audience don't pursue or watch any original movies with elements they want. Drinker couldn't even get his own audience to watch his movie, because neither of them actually care about good cinema. They just want to complain
The criticism that Hollywood just rehashes ideas ironically is a really old complaint. Siskel and Ebert complained back in 1989 that Hollywood was just retreading old ground. It's still a valid criticism, but it is in no way profound the way Russel brand makes it seem
Or Little Mermaid/Live Action version. "Pride and Prejudice/Romeo & Juliet" has been retold 100 times... "Terminator" isn't as replicable Real life animals CANNOT be as expressive as cartoon ones - making a "lesser version" benefits whom?
This is purely me judging a book by its cover, but first first glance impressions of this guy's brand with the sunglasses, chugging a big bottle of booze, the hair and the beard just comes across as so performative and boring. It's like an alpha male Nostalgia Critic, I hate it
I love that Adum keeps wanting to give Critical Drinker the benefit of the doubt, only for Drinker to dig himself into a deeper hole ("movies used to be better back when they weren't so political", "we already had strong female characters with Ripley and Sarah Connor", "if you don't support Sound of Freedom you are a pedo")
To be fair there has been a shift in the way female characters are portrayed and it's definitely for the worst, Ripley, Sarah Connor and even leia to a degree are much cooler and interesting compared to modern blockbuster heroines that lack substance, plus the politics angle, movies have generally been politically on the left side, promoting anti-war, anti-facism, it's just the social commentary over the last decade has been a lot more heavy handed, and I'm not bias towards CRITICAL DRINKER, even when a great and fair example of social commentary is made he will say some shit about it being lazy and all about the MESSAGE, but there's definitely roots in what he's saying
1:45:1 That's hard to believe on Drinker's part He definitely did not forgive Ryan Johnson for what he did on the sequels, and his review of Glass Onion makes that REALLY clear
Lol the height of Russell Brand's career was starring in the failed attempt at an Easter movie franchise "Hop," and now he's complaining about the quality of modern movies, huh? That's as hypocritical as it would be for him to criticize someone else for being a sex predator.
I always thought that the height of his career was when someone thought that he had the talent to fill the shoes of Dudley freakin' Moore and greenlighted a remake of Arthur, but Hop works quite well too.
Also I can’t help but wonder if movies are worse nowadays because movies take up less real estate in your mind as you get older. Good and bad movies just come and go a lot faster over time, you know. Maybe that’s why ‘old films are better.’
@@HobanProductionSo did he ever see The Handmaiden? Considering it's directed by the same guy who did Oldboy? He'll complain about Spoilers: The two females characters wanting to kill off the "bad men" characters.
Other than the part where the monolith turns Jupiter into a sun 2010 was pretty boring. Which makes sense since the book is also meh and the 3rd book 2063 was more interesting.
Doubt it - not unless the action is badly choreographed with lots of jump-cuts to hide the actresses' inability to perform the moves. Which doesn't happen in The Handmaiden. Nor are the "bad men" characters simple caricatures. At least represent the guy's points properly, like Adum does.@@Nightmarewrath
wow this video was cathartic, I've had these issues too but of course dissenting discourse in his comments is impossible and easily drowned out. This is why we love you Adam
The Critical Drinker is like a guy who only eats fast food claiming that "no one makes good food anymore" because Burger King bought all his favourite fast food chains and he has no interest in eating anything else. Like, he's not completely wrong but he's only looking at one slice of the industry that's really always been mediocre compared to the better stuff that's out there.
What if you really really loved that fast food and it was a big part of why you even enjoy food but then with time it all got kinda shit and you don't like it anymore? That's pretty upsetting and no amount of "oh, why don't you try this exotic cuisine?" is going to make that fact feel better. Absolutely broaden your horizons, but when something you love becomes trash to you, you're 100% allowed to complain about that.
I think the point is how can you then condemn all of cinema if you're only staying within your limited scope and Adam makes the point that the kinds of films that Drinker wants to see DO exist and in my view are not even in the 'exotic cuisine' distance of travel from his very slim 'film diet' and are more just the KFC to his Burger King. If anything outside of pure mainstream hollywood blockbuster is considered 'exotic' then it might be time to reevaluate what you consider to be cinema and how you criticise it.
That's going to happen when the average cinema experience especially in other countries is whatever slop hollywood serves up on a plate compared to the film festival circuit. Like I'm fucking shocked how many of YMS audience are like "He doesn't go to film festivals so he's a neo nazi chud"
39:45 Arnold has lived entirely in America for over 50 years, and Americans tend to perceive him as both Austrian and American now. Honestly, it's a good thing that permanent residents/citizens can get viewed that way here.
That beginning portion about having a "healthy diet of media" I empathize so much with when it comes to the games industry. There's so much out there to experience for games and you just need to look beyond what is so heavily advertised.
I really liked the drinker. I really tried to like him again after a decent break. I remember going to one of his newer videos about why he was cautious about some upcoming movie, and his first sentence had the words "Identity politics" in it as if it was just a thing that existed and not a misinterpretation of several complex concepts and ideas... I used to avoid any of his vids that seemed outwardly *yikes*, but now it seemed the two were bleeding together. My break from his content was during my transition, and I realised he was not a creator I wanted to return to. About a year later, I was writing a comparative essay on violence in dystopian fiction using A Clockwork Orange and Watchmen, and I realised something... the drinker once mentioned Ozymandias portrayal in the tv show as being disrespectful. he is shown farting, and generally being an old, bigoted cult leader, in comparison to the new, black female protagonist, while he was once the smartest man in the world and a good character. This is what drinker points out... but with a re-reading of watchmen... no. Ozymandias is a character you are meant to hate. he's an arrogant, deluded narcissist who thinks his intelligence entitles him to divine power, to control the fate of humanity. he kills Rorschach, strips away the freedom of people who were meant to be his best friends, and is revealed to have been charismatic and manipulative, never thinking anyone was anything more than a tool for him to use in saving the world. obviously his actions fall into a moral grey area, this is Alan Moore's writing after all, but he is obviously an awful character, written to be as hate-able as possible. It's such a blatant misinterpretation of one of my favourite novels, and all to somehow prove that a minority lead wasn't just a creative decision, but a plot from "Big Gay" to ruin a fictional character just because he's a white guy. and honestly, I think it says more about the drinker than anything, to ignore the flaws of and identify with a character obviously meant to criticise hubris and self-righteousness that ignores any possibility they may be wrong. An ironic self-own, like redditors who identify with rick sanchez as an atheist and nihilist, not realising that rick's character is a criticism of extreme nihilism and close-mindedness.
I completely agree with your take that people saying this just need to be exposed to more and less mainstream art. I used to have this mentality of "everything today sucks, modern music is all trash" etc and would watch critical drinker videos and other similar channels. Once i got a little older, started studying music composition for my career, moved to a city and went to live performances of non mainstream musicians, my perspective completely changed; i think we're in one of the best eras of music in history, simply because so much music ranging from garbage to absolute *masterpieces* are so easily accessible and are created every single day, the same to an extent with films as well.
Interesting take honestly. I really push back against the modern music is trash position too. However modern films, as in modern big budget Hollywood films, have, I believe, gone down the toilet in quality. I would say that TCDs videos are mostly about those types of films. And I feel like YMS did a horrible job in this video because almost everything he said, Drinker would agree with. But YMS is talking to his audience as if him and drinker disagree, but they really don’t. Most of this video is YMS talking as if Drinker doesn’t know that indie movies exist and some are good. (btw Adum didn’t bring up that obviously the MAJORITY of indie films now are also terrible and he’s cherry picking in his mind like he says others do when they talk about how older films used to be better)
He'd lost almost all of his audience, who are only onboard for the white/straight/male grievance bullshit, which can be exploited way more effectively by talking about pop-culture shit. Those people aren't interested in movies.
The reason why I gave up on CD was because he went from doing Production Hell series to doing annoying rants that pretty much repeat the same rhetoric over and over again. You don't have to make multiple videos complaining about everything being woke all the time.
I mean, you can make that argument, but at the same time I'd argue I'd rather know if and what main stream content keeps being pumped full of hypocritical politics than to have him go radio silent for 5 years because the industry doesn't change. It's quite possible that the popularity of his channel and his continued reporting on these issues is contributing to changes in the industry and consumer trends. If nothing else, I am grateful to have watched a 10 minute video rather than spend my hard earned money and setting aside a full evening at the cinema to being told men and white people are the roots of all evil. If I wanted to spend money to be insulted, I would go find a findom streamer.
"Imagine if the female lead was [Spoilers for the ending] drugged and coerced into sex. Don't think that would have been seen as bad behaviour on her part" No one said it was his fault either.
@@brycelovescoom4155It’s not, Critical Drinker fans don’t succeed in the marketplace of ideas, so when they see their king getting deconstructed for his illogical they have no choice but to practice mental gymnastics. The person you replied to will not answer your question.
I love this guy's thing of "writers are so prickly and defensive of writing female leads, they have to be independent and self-reliant and great at everything" Yeah, tell that to all the horror movies since early slasher films having female leads/focuses where THE WHOLE THING IS THEM BEING WEAK AND FRAGILE/USELESS. Imagine if people starting making horror movies with strong male leads. You could probably do it in a way that isn't boring. But no one does. It's ALWAYS weak-portrayed females. Dude is making a wide argument and trying to cover ground he doesn't even pay attention to/has no idea about. Every time I read a horror movie description I roll my eyes at the first sign of "she" or "her" in the description. There are really terrifying movies that have male leads, young boys, teenagers. It doesn't have to always be some re-used for the 4000th time female-in-her-30s who lives alone. A lot of genres need an update to the way they're designed and lot of the more "important" ones like action films, CGI giants and other stuff got more of the "feminist" treatment, it feels like, because it's more directly in the public eye.
I'm gonna disagree with Adum about it being bad faith to ask Drinker on a stream to back up a claim he made and laughing when he doesn't. The dude was saying how Japanese movies are dunking on American films. He was asked for an example and couldn't provide. Not even an anime. I think thats a greenlight for some ribbing.
Honestly the only films I can confidently say that I preferred much over American films this year alone is Shin Ultraman and Shin Kamen Rider. Saw them both in theaters and immediately wanted to rewatch them again even though it was one night only. Even then, I'm just a huge fan of Hideaki Anno. His works are just amazing and I really enjoy them all. Everything else is mostly anime and Godzilla films. So not much that I can really say are dunking and more just personal preference. Plus if Japan truly is dunking on American films then the upcoming Godzilla Minus One film, that's in subtitles, should be doing a one month sweep.
There's a reoccuring trend amongst right-leaning figures (not just in film and TV but also video games) who have this idealized view of Japan as this bastion of "non-woke" culture. As woke means absolutely nothing what this exactly means is up to the individual standpoint of whomever claims it, but I've seen it happen too many times to not at least notice that it does happen.
@@SylentVoidkeeperAnd every once in a while a "woke" japanese work shows up like Kamen Rider Black Sun just to throw a big cold shower on these people
@@BlazingOwnager maybe. this isn't a new thing tho. I feel movies have had many "preachy" moments throughout history and feels dishonest to say "Hollywood has been taken over by the wokies". I can't think of a single timeline when movies weren't pushing progressive ideas. I get countered with "not like today" followed by assuming filmmakers intent and motivation in "getting the kids to be woke".
Why does no one talk about Annihilation as a movie that shows good female characters. It's a 2018 film and the people talking about "no female representation in films" didn't even prop up this film.
Critical Drinker did a video about that. He mentioned that if you want to make a sci-fi led by women that doesn't alienate male viewers it is the best way you go about it. But in the end said that it is dumb, pretentious and should have an intelligent story with a clear satisfying payoff that ties everything together. Critical Drinker seems to have a real struggle with subtext or anything that is not clear and obvious.
@@Thebluespiritx he literally said in his midsommar review that he thinks analyzing themes is a waste of time 😂no wonder he couldn't understand that movie either
@@Vulgarth1 The main theme of the movie is about change, both inward and outward. I haven't seen the movie in quite a while but what i remember is there is talk of cancer, one character has cancer. Cancer changes things in your body as does the shimmer change the planet and it's nature. Natalie Portmans character cheats on Oscar Issacs character they are changed by that experience, in the end they are not the same persons and their relationship has changed as well.
Adum's having a hard time describing what is essentially just "culture war". Just say that and everything is explained. It's just "culture war" content. It's a very profitable brand of content that discusses every type of popular entertainment through the current cultural-political lens. That's it.
I think the more appropriate word is "dog whistle" in that some of Critical Drinker's content is a "dog whistle" for socio-cultural issues. I'm 99% certain that Drinker is NOT actually a social conservative (maybe a fiscal conservative, but it doesn't really matter what label best suits his ideologies). Yet I'm 99% certain he's aware that some of his opinions of popular media overlap with the opinions of socially conservative people who watch his videos. Despite that, Drinker pretends as if he has followed the same track of reasoning as those individuals, trusting that those people are too stupid to realize that two people can hold the same stance on something while disagreeing on the premises of that stance. The live action Little Mermaid movie that came out a while back was actually so easy for Critical Drinker to exploit. While most people who disliked the live action Little Mermaid movie were not bigoted, most bigots disliked the live action Little Mermaid movie.
@@youtubeviolatedme7123It's actually very easily explained by the algorithm. Most youtubers started out doing content they themselves believe in, then once they see what kind of content helps them grow, they'll inevitably lean towards that kind of content. That's why it's extremely hard for even the most principled creators to stay true to themselves and not go further and further into one echo chamber or another. In the case of Drinker, I gave him a LOT of credit for going in-depth to praise Arcane as being very socially conscious, political and diverse, but done right. I used to follow quite a few youtubers on the "antiwoke" side, and as soon as Arcane dropped, I knew it was going to be the best litmus test to tell apart those who were genuine when they said they welcome diversity and political themes that are done right, and those who are actually opposed to diversity as a concept and hate anything that may tackle progressive political themes, even if done right. Without fail, every channel just chose to ignore Arcane, except Drinker and the efap crew with Mauler. So I dropped every other channel, because they had proven themselves lacking basic principles. Kind of sad to see Drinker leaning to heavily into the overtly conservative-pandering side though.
@@GeneralTaco155555a u dont need to be arguing in good faith to be dismissive of things that are very clearly cynical political cash grabs. im not speaking in bad faith when i say ghostbusters is just a bunch of bad feminism takes masquerading as a movie like 3 kids in a trench coat at the R-rated movie. for the sake of our mental health, we dont need to dignify such buzzbartbreitfeed garbage
I think it's really funny that Russel Brand is continuously asking about examples for his 6 year old daughters and Critical Drinker replies: Ripley and Sarah Conner as if your going to show a 6 year old Alien or Terminator.
I think his point about there not being any "movie stars" any more is that studios would trust stars to be able to guide an original concept or character into profitability. So in that way, more original ideas and scripts got made if they thought they could bank on a big name star. Today, they're more likely to bank on a famous character than a celebrity.
@@tevenpowell8023 That's true, but did they really need to fill it with celebrities? It's impossible to know for sure, although I don't think that swapping out a few of them with unknown voice-actors would have made much of a difference in its success.
@@Jumbleman5 I think my point was to show that, while the line is moving, Hollywood isn't completely comfortable banking solely on character recognition yet. They could have saved alot of money and probably gotten better performances hiring professional voice actors, and it might not have effected the sales numbers at all. But even with a brand as recognized as Mario they spent boatloads of extra money for that extra Actor Star Power boost
So did I...and this channel too.. The voice...oh my God, this guy's voice is something else...I used to get headaches for days on end..😢 Clicked this up to just watch this Buzz between them..
OMFG the drinker has such trash takes that are based on a crumb of material conditions thereby seemingly making them legitimate. It's all just anti-woke brainrot. I do appreciate Adam criticizing him and get why walking on eggshells might help mitigate backlash, but this felt almost too kind.
The thin crop of movies he pulls from is what bugged me more than the anti-woke post-GamerGate stuff. If you wanna be a cynical shithead about movies turning evil and woke, you should at least watch stuff other than the MCU.
I’ve always liked how Adam does reaction videos. It’s nice to see someone going in depth with discussion instead of just letting a video play while they go to the toilet
HES SUPPOSSED TO AN ALLIE NOOOO!!!! You see this why John wick needed to bet pounded out from behind by Bill skarsgard in the end credit scene. So many bigoted little anti expression nazis
@@jonbaxter2254nobody is saying he can't. Stop crying oppression when there is none. I got sick of that with liberals, and now you conservatives sound the same way.
@taliad.1020 while I don't disagree with you that it's terrible, one should point the elephant in the room and point out that it's his bashing of the Star Wars sequels that made his channel what it is today. It's actually how I found him back in 2017
A non-biased summary for anyone who doesn't have time for the whole 150 minutes:
- Adum agrees with the Drinker that the way that major studios are approaching film is a soulless, people-pleasing cash grab that does a disservice to the artform.
- Adum disagrees with the Drinker that most modern movies are bad, arguing instead that it's specifically the blockbusters that are bad, and that smaller/independent/foreign films are often good or great. He points out that the Drinker could use his platform to promote these movies, rather than recommending only well-known movies and shows, but that the Drinker seems to have no interest in seeking out movies that he might enjoy.
- Adum disagrees with the Drinker that movies used to be better, arguing that only the good ones have any kind of legacy, so those are the ones that we still know about today. He also disagrees with the Drinker's belief that modern writers are worse than they used to be.
- Adum agrees with the Drinker that people won't really see a movie based on the main actors alone anymore (though other statements from Adum suggest that he doesn't think this is universal; for example, he thinks people only saw Red Notice for its cast). However, Adum argues that this is actually a good thing, as it reflects a moviegoing audience that understands more about the film industry and what determines the quality of a film.
- Adum agrees with the Drinker that a movie should be judged on its own merits and not for whatever political or social arguments it makes. However, he points out the hypocrisy in the Drinker's stance on The Sound Of Freedom, as the Drinker argues that the movie is good because of its political message. Adum's consensus seems to be that the Drinker isn't applying this logic to everything, just to the things that he dislikes.
- And, be honest, you're here for the identity politics stuff. Adum agrees that identity politics shouldn't replace the substance in a film, and agrees that they sometimes do, but disagrees that their presence is innately detrimental. Adum also argues that identity politics are nothing new, but that previously they were celebrating the 'straight white male' culture, so they were less noticeable to straight white males.
- Also of note is Adum talking about the Drinker's strange status as a movie review channel for people who aren't very interested in films, and are more interested in the identity politics surrounding them. Adum briefly touches on MauLer here, dismissing the idea that MauLer represents everything wrong with modern day film criticism.
- Adum requests that, should the Drinker choose to respond to this video, he does it at length so that he can address every point that Adum makes. Adum feels that this would be the most constructive approach for all parties.
- And yes, there's a point where Adum starts complaining about the video quality of the Russell Brand video, but you don't need me to tell you that.
TL;'DR Adum partially disagrees with the Drinker's approach to film criticism, but doesn't attack the Drinker as a person. He's interested in debating the Drinker, but doesn't want to start any beef with him.
Honestly I would love to see a respectable debate between the two. I love watching Adam and critical drinker review movies because they both go into detail on what makes a movie good and bad, but from different perspectives on the industry.
Thank you for your service.
@@thatnerdj God forbid someone gets out of their echo chamber eh?
Thanks man :)
I’d say adum pretty much completely disagrees with TCD’s approach to the film industry, they just happen to agree on a few superficial points while the way they each get to those points is completely opposed
It's wild that the Critical Drinker seemingly thinks there can only be so many movies with female leads before it becomes 'too much' while the thousands of movies with male leads is just fine with no complaints about being over represented.
Exactly. This double standard permeates the entire perspective.
@@CloudMountainJuror It's especially wild too because despite what Drinker might think, plenty of male led stories could be replaced with females and nothing really changes. Its not the character being a male that makes them interesting, it is them being an interesting character and there are plenty of good female leads beyond just Ripley but Drinker will never see any of them.
Because he's misogynistic and doesn't see women as human people. Even now, people will see a female lead and think "oh who cares, it's a chick movie" but movies with male leads are treated like default and for everyone. Also these reviewer guys will see any female lead and nitpick every single character trait to justify saying "omg she was so stupid and annoying" Bonus points if it's a woman of color!
@@rubyrose312And even if he did his own bias would completely change the characterisation, anything he loved in a “strong male lead” is now “cliche, woke and unrealistic” in a female lead.
More than just being painfully stupid, I find it hysterical he doesn’t realise this makes his opinions completely one sided and therefore impossible to take seriously.
@@morganfarrell2442 He always uses the only two examples that he knows of because everything else that features a female lead is 'woke garbage' and he hates it simply on the premise of having a female lead who isn't solely focused on getting a man.
"even if you don't like it, it's important to understand why other people like it" this perspective resonates with me very strongly.
You can basically apply that to Sound of Freedom in a nutshell. You so much as criticise it, you get called a Pedo, Groomer, or support trafficking.
@@Nightmarewrath except hollywood is filled with pedos and groomers and have been caught with hand inthe trafficking jar soooooo, really no leg to stand on.
Why do you think ppl like the drinker?
This is exactly why i liked Barbie. Im a straight black guy. And im no fan of "redpill" culture. I laughed and cringed at Ben Shapiros response. But i also felt a little "attacked" for lack of a better word at alot of the commentary on men in that movie. But i still really liked it because even though i disagreed with points, what i 100% understood is that "thats how ALOT of women feel". And that resonated with me.
@awhellnah__No it isn't. There's a reason why analysis and understanding are the basis of research and criticism.
You are completely valid to see what people like about something and still not like it.
These guys refuse to acknowledge that their favorite decade, the 80s, was so informed by nostalgia for the 50s
The Critical Drunkard fans in their way to flex how the Critical Drinker has more views which to them is the same as how valid you are
This is a great context point mostly lost on watching media from that time now. It’s like watching movies from the early 2000s post 9/11 with no frame of reference for what 9/11 is. The 80s definitely took a lot of inspiration and influence from 50s nostalgia, from movies to music and even style.
Adum sometimes does that joke where when a black person shows up in something he says “wow whys it have to get so political?” The critical drinker actually takes that seriously.
Black people in Africa?! Wow, I can’t believe they went woke.
Adum is too woke for the critical drinker audience because he's not serious XD
@@heroicgangster9981 why is it when someone gets criticized. The response is "he wasn't serious" that's strange, if he wasn't serious why are people taking it seriously?
@@Dolavin just because you can't understand nuance. Doesn't mean everyone else doesn't see it
@@benjaminasmus3980 I’m *objecting* to a take that lacks nuance, ya goof!
The Your Movie Sucks guy criticises the Modern Movies Suck guy (2023, colorised, still not in 4K)
This video at least goes up to 1440p and 60fps.
Versus Your Movie is woke guy.
Fixed for you
Modern blockbusters definitely do suck now.
There are still some good smaller films.
@@glenstortroen1286shit comeback
@@callumblakeney7935 comeback? No it's actually just a better label. Truth can be painful
This isn't a highlight, this is a feature length film.
this is cinema
My body I mean popcorn is ready
Adumheimer
It's longer than Die Hard. And almost as erotic!
critics are raving about Denis Villeneuve's "YMS Criticizes the Critical Drinker"
I'm 53 years old, and for literally my entire life people have been saying "There are no good movies anymore" and "there's no good music anymore."
Literally, for my entire life, that's been a part of the culture. It's just part of the background noise of life, people saying "When I was a teenager and everything seemed new, things were better."
Because when we are teens we are on the wave of the latest, and other parts of life take over adn suddenly, NOW, what the kids are doing is stupid.
It will never not blow my mind how often people think the the shit kids are doing now like terrible pranks, is new; with jackass existing.
@@MabansAllDayjackass were the butt of the joke themselves 90% of the time, now its mainly being a nuisance to people and harassing minimum wage workers
These guys confuse the nostalgia of when their pipi was still able to get hard with some structural change in society
@@brillcommunication Fucking BINGO! People forget their era of "She loves me yeah yeah yeah" shit.
The crazy thing is that argument always is based on sheer ignorance. Their proof for why music is bad now is always the top 40s. It just shows they dont even know music exists outside the Top 40s.
Thats like complaining that "art is bad now" and pointing to a coca cola billboard ad as "evidence".
Did Adam get drunk to watch this so that he and Critical Drinker would be on an equal playing field?
I just noticed that and maybe your right.
It's the only way to do it without his fans coming at you and tearing up what little self esteem you have.
Yes.
"I'll fight you on your own level!"
Every time the critical drinker has said "T H E M E S S A G E" I actively cringe on command.
His obsession on the wokeness of Hollywood is in-itself insanely cringe.
If you think that's bad, look at his subreddit. Every once in awhile you'll find someone defend Drinker's stance on "THE MESSAGE"
@@Rebelrose He has a subreddit!? 😭
Ikr?? he feeds of that shit as much as Hollywood does
@@Rebelrose To be fair, whenever a film perceptibly stops in its tracks to brag about some ID-pol element of itself, criticism does become warranted.
@@Wired4Life2fair enough, but how often does that actually happen? I’m sure it does happen, but I doubt it’s frequent enough to make a whole generalization of Hollywood about
And now Drinker seems to have abandoned all pretense of not being a right-wing culture war grifter by sitting down to talk with freaking Ben Shapiro about the movies Daily Wire is producing.
Now he is unreliable because he has to say that there movies are good if he wants to stay on good terms.
I don't really know how you can think there was any pretense in the first place when he's here, sandwiched between Tucker Carlson and Ron DeSantis
@@Kay-im6ht I'm sorry, I just read your "sandwiched in between" comment and immediately thought that it was a tongue-in-cheek sex joke. Long-explanation-short, I got a good laugh.
True art aficionados who lean right now recognize that The Daily Wire's mediocre offerings demonstrate the cost of the right surrendering the arts, entertainment media, and pop culture to the left.
Also, Steven Crowder's decision to not join The Daily Wire ages better and better.
@@Kay-im6ht Tucker Carlson might never not be iconic, while Ron DeSantis should never, ever run for POTUS again.
I remember when he completely shat all over Fleabag being femenist tripe despite admitting in the _same sentence_ that he hasn't watched it, which is extremely oreitating because i saw Fleabag as such an entertaining femenist series that despite what people would think a feminist series would do, it didnt shit on male society in the slightest and even jokes on the main female characters for being terrible femenists. And then he tried to sort of wind his words back when a fair portion of his viewers told him otherwise, but eh not really gonna invest time on a critic who makes a judgement on a thing they havent even seen it 😅
I feel like the characteristics of the things people like critical drinker don’t like are shared by many people who might call themselves feminists.
The rabid strain of phemoid male haters isn’t exactly popular .
Even if they do well on twitter sometimes.
He said the same thing about the Angry Video Game Nerd movie, while in the same breath admitting that he had never watched it and didn't care to know a thing about it.
Drinker is currently working on a short film adaptation of his own spy novel series, Ryan Drake, and I bet he expects people to actually watch it rather than rate it based on third-hand opinions found on twitter. Methinks Will Jordan needs to stop smelling his own farts.
The nicest person on that show is a man.
Dude I loved fleabag it’s so funny
I remember when Phoebe Waller was brought in to help write No Time To Die.
The drinker kept complaining that she was brought in to make Bond look incompetent and make the female characters look better than Bond.
And he was basing this opinion off of Fleabag. A show he hadn't even seen.
And I was there thinking. Both Fleabag and Killing Eve(2 Shows she created) do not indicate her to be someone who would write Mary sue characters and shit on male characters.
She just seems like a very good writer.
And lo and behold. When the show actually came out Bond was in fact not overshadowed by any female character and was front and center.
Turns out Phoebe was only brought in to write some comedy bits.
I love that he uses the spice girls as an example, its literally one of the groups that the previous generations were pointing to and saying 'see all this new music is the same and shit and soulless'
Not to mention ''Girl Power' was like a huge part of its brand
All I can hear is Homer's dad.
"I used to be 'with it', but they changed what 'it' was. Now what I'm with isn't 'it', and what's 'it' seems weird and scary to me... *It'll happen to **_you..!_* "
It is terrifying how Golden Age Simpsons ages so well in so many ways.
@@saltystick_99 Yeah, the creen writers were quite clever on this one. And it's right, every generation has it's "Things were better in my days" moment.
@@sathrielsatanson The Simpsons itself is a good example of things getting worse, though.
@@DumbIdeaPresentedStupidly"manpower" is labour...
The reason people don't get into broader art is because you always need to wade through a couple shit movies, games, shows in that category before developing your tastes and knowing how to find the good stuff. Basically you need to put in work up front to get into the niche stuff unless you have a guide, and most people don't want to do that.
Adum's having the same meltdown I have whenever people say the game industry is dying and I'm internally screaming, "There's 30 games coming out every single day! Play an indie game you fuck!"
What are you even talking about here?
@@assassin8636 That good movies/games exist.
@@assassin8636When people claim that they don’t.
The problem with Critical Drinker I think is that he's kind of become one-note. He did a series for a short while about disastrous movie productions that was very entertaining, but he doesn't seem to make those anymore. He just complains about new releases being woke. True or not, I can only listen to the same shit a number of times before I can predict what he's going to say decades before he says it.
I think that's actually a great breakdown, I was scratching my head for words to bring to this, and you pretty much said how I feel better than I could.
This is probably the main reason why I've liked his stuff genuinely before, but I find him to be unfairly cheap now in his criticism.
That series was put on the back-burner because we suddenly got a massive dump of huge movies.
His videos are right wing propaganda disguised as film criticism. I remember watching his video on bad comics, a subject I actually agreed with, but couldn't stop thinking - Why did he have to make the rhetoric so fascistic?
@@luismarioguerrerosanchez4747 That’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard, I’ve seen most of his videos, and I can say with certainty, that the most right-wing Drinker has ever been is not liking Barbie.
He’s EXTREMELY one-note. And his schtick has been done many times and in much better ways before.
There's literally a writers strike happening right now, because studio producers don't think writing matters as an art form and want to replace writers with AI who will just regurgitate "sure thing" scripts. Like why do people always blame the creators and not the people who dictate whether those creators are allowed to make anything original. It's so frustrating.
Because it's easier to just go "the writers suck +woke", instead of an analysis that is actually informed about the structures and factors that create the current movie landscape.
The real question is will the AI race swap classic characters and shoe horn in LGBT messaging into children's movies. Yea I think the writers can go too.
Not to mention there’s also an Actors strike happening at the same time.
@@NameSpaceVoid you only care about identity politics and not actually about quality, that's a sad life
@@ranzu3138 Believe it or not I actually care about BOTH but maybe that's too much for a pretentious YMS enjoyer to comprehend
Saying "modern movies suck" based off the big hollywood releases
Is no different than saying "modern music sucks" basing your opinion off the top 200 list
@@NDenizen not really. There's a crap ton of bad old Hollywood films. The issue? Only the best ones get remembered, so people who grew up in modern day think that movies back then were overall better when all we can reference is stuff that's heralded as classic
@@ColombianThundervery much agree except with one clarification: it is entirely possible to reference and find all the shit that’s fallen to the wayside, especially with how much more access the internet and streaming has given to older media, just people don’t think to/feel like putting in the work to do it. I definitely think in 10-20 years time younger people will have a similar reverence to some 2010 films as people do now to 80s-90s ones, though since everything has been documented much more extensively for like the past 20 years or so it’ll come with some caveats. Like, “now obviously it had its fair share of issues and a lot of bland generic stuff, but the 2010s were an amazing decade for movies,” which is probably the same way people would talk about any decade had they received the amount of coverage the internet offers present events. It’s funny, cause people don’t realize when the masses groan about sequels and remakes and comic book movies that the same complaints were being made like 60-70 years ago only about musicals and westerns. And as far as the sequel stuff goes, that’s been a criticism leveled at Hollywood since franchises got big in the 80s. “Wait, you’re telling me there’s a FOURTH Jaws and a FIFTH Rocky!? That’s it, Hollywood’s officially out of ideas.” But now look at how fondly that time was viewed.
@@plasmasnake4774 that's actually a great point about the Internet. The fact everything is being documented, the future consensus might be a bit different, especially since it could be easier to see how people felt since videos and articles can be found very quickly, whereas it's a little harder now without searching through an archive for old videos and scanned magazines/newspapers. You're very right
Modern music does suck, based on the top 200 list... Do you know what the top movies were in 1940s? The top music in the 1950s/60s? Modern media is absolutely in the tank compared to what was ‘popular’ back then.
@@TheCapedWanderer you know the billboard is made because regular people keep listening to that stuff right? Modern music doesn't suck at all. An argument to be made that popular modern music sucks, that's fair, but there is so much good stuff out there. Literally just have to find it and be open minded about what you find. I'm so tired of this disingenuous attitude that art is no longer good. It's out there. Go explore. If you really truly cared about having a meaningful, purposeful experience with art, you would find it instead of waiting for it to be dropped on your feet.
Fun fact: When the trailer for "House of the Dragon" first dropped, he made a video titled "Why nobody cares about House of the Dragon," but once the trailer started getting a positive reception, he changed the video's title to "House of the Dragon Trailer Breakdown."
It's almost as if instead of giving his actual opinion he just says what he thinks his audience wants to hear...
The initial reactions to the trailers for House of the Dragon and Rings of Power were equally negative. But then it turned out that House of the Dragon was amazing… especially when compared to a dumpster fire like Rings of Power… so he officially changed his mind and praised House of the Dragon.
Just like an adult.😂
@@ramigilneas9274why change the title of the video then? That's straight up dishonest.
It's not QUITE that simple.
You follow the popular narrative, of course, but you do, most importantly, be able to come up with some reason for why the thing people didn't like was "woke", and why the thing people did like definitely was not woke.
That's how one thing can be woke propaganda because it has one black woman in it. But something will not be woke propaganda even though it contains criticism of police violence, prison labour, colonisation...
Because you've acquired an audience that is completely story illiterate but very passionate they'll eat up anything that seems to support their opinion.
@@ramigilneas9274 An adult would admit that they changed their mind, explain why that happened, and then move on. Changing the title, on the other hand, is what a cowardly, pathetic child who's deeply afraid of his audience not thinking he's cool would do.
He did this all the time. He called these movies bad and woke before it release and when it’s turn out it’s good he be like “amazing movie with flaws” blah blah blah
The three examples of "good" female characters the drunk guy gives
Ripley/connor: movies by a guy that would be an eco terrorist if he wasnt directing movies
Trinity: movie done by two transwomen while they were figuring out their gender identity
But yes, keep repeating "duh message" in your reviews, mr drunk
Connor even goes on a rant about how all men can do is destroy in T2. We all know that if that film came out today the anti woke gallery would have a field day with that little rant. But fortunately for them it came out during their formative years so they have massive nostaligia goggles.
You know what’s the most annoying thing when he says “the message.” The message is called the Theme. Like…yeah. A movie is usually going to have a message. All good stories have one. Because we use art to say stuff. Like…dude. Did he even go to a literature class?
@viridiana😊cortes9642
I stopped watching the Critical Drinker because he just seemed to hate everything at some point. Even finding criticisms that weren’t there imho. I stopped listening to everyone actually and did this crazy thing called making my own opinion on things.
I watch these types of videos for laughs but it became too obnoxious
So many seem to miss that CTD actually does "CTD recommends" and explain why he recommends those things & why they are good. Sure, they are fewer, but he has a series of those videos.
@@vincentgraymore And that’s fine but I don’t need his recommendations. I don’t need him to tell me what I should like. I’m done with online movie critics and critics of every nature. These people NEED content. And you can’t have a channel if you like everything. But shitting on everything is a great way to keep spitting out episodes. Naw I’m good.
@@viperrecords3288you should never make decisions on what to like or dislike based off of what someone says. Some people listen to the Critical Drinker because they agree with his sentiments.
@@scottf5791 Yeah I used to watch Siskel & Ebert because I’m old. In my day being a critic meant something. Now not so much.
What you said about bias towards the past is 100% correct. We just have this nasty instinct to dismiss the idea that our nostalgia for something isn't as close to the truth as we want it to be.
@@BlazingOwnager You're so blinded by nostalgia that you start to make up conspiracies about it that don't even make sense according to their own logic. Fucking hilarious 😂
@@BlazingOwnagerYou clearly haven't seen a lot of movies from the seventies. They did the same thing, but way more on the nose.
@@youcanthandlethetruth8873 You could look at the same thing happening in Comics in the 50s-60s. Look at the Comics Code Authority (or the Hayes Code if we wanna stay in movies).
@@AlinaAniretake Yes, actually. They get praised all the time.
@@ronmastrio2798 I'm struggling to fathom how anything you just said has even the slightest bit of relevance to movies and cinema
I love how they say "movies weren't political" and then, in the same breath almost say how Arlond Swarzeneger movies were about "big buff American man" and about "America dominating the world". Like it isn't politics. It's like a lot of people say, when critizing this approach. It's not that these critics/circles want a-political movies. They're just angry that not all movies, main-stream movies that is, have the political messages THEY agree with.
The big buff Austrian man. Lol.
But the difference is that there's been a total overhaul in how we approach political messaging these days. Today, there's a stronger belief that the political messaging of our media will 'move the needle', and have an impact on our culture directly. You can't say that there isn't a much, much bigger focus on using the politics for movies as a force for social change. These days, you literally cannot be nominated for an oscar if you aren't hitting a requirement on diversity and inclusion.
Of course, there have always been movies with / about politics. But people who use this "Movies were ALWAYS political" argument are sidestepping the point. Political messaging has become more important then the films themselves. They didn't used to try and shove it down your throat like they do now.
@@kaygirl5160 Oppenheimer literally swept the awards season and it has the whitest cast of all time. Also, what films are forcing their “political” message down your throat other than that non-whites and non-straights exist?
@kaygirl5160 no one is shoving anything down your throat, there is no diversity/inclusion check point for the Oscars, you need to go outside and watch independent films because you clearly stay in an echo-chamber
Jdbdbsbs
@@kaygirl5160I just don’t see that, dude. You can only believe that if you don’t actually watch old movies. The entire medium is designed to reflect the attitudes of the time and old movies were just as geared towards political/moral/spiritual messaging as anything today.
They’ve been making movies about class struggles since before movies existed. They were called plays. Read a few of those, Plato wrote a ton of them. Exceedingly political and status-quo defying.
The problem with “woke” movies isn’t the wokeness, it’s the cynicism. The people making them don’t care about the message, they’re just trying to make money. Same as it ever was.
People like the Critical Drinker aren’t lying to you because they say bad movies are bad, they’re lying to you because they’ve convinced you that the commodification of art is a new problem. And one that depends on a vast conspiracy of cultural decay rather than the obvious and inevitable result of making art into an industry.
It’s sort of well known that the character of Ripley was written without the actors gender in mind and she was picked solely off of her performance.
Is it? Adum couldn't even remember Sigourney Weavers name in one of the Adum and Pals videos, probably watch 15 minutes of Alien and moved on.
The movie was written for a cast of men (the original script by Dan O'Bannon uses only surnames). I think it was Ridley Scott who decided to change the genders. According to an interview with Veronica Cartwright (Lambert) that I read ages ago, Sigourney was chosen to play Ripley because her family was influential in film and television. I believe the quote was something like "her daddy was a bigwig in the industry".
It’s ironic cause whenever that might happen now people call it out as virtue signaling blah blah
Ripley will always be the best female action hero in my opinion.
Well, to be fair, he is called the Critical Drinker, not the Critical Thinker.
And who's the other guy, to be fair?
@@Sum_Yousah I'm well aware who Brand is, it's YMS I'm referring to.
@@ymca4547Adam, the critical thinker
Well, He is drinking....not really thingking
Says someone who's never seen one of his videos. Go watch his review of the original blade runner. He understands storytelling and explains it beautifully and poetically. The guy also wrote a couple novels and is making a film right now...
ffs i hate the way people talk about the bechdal test. It's not an analytical tool, it's a punchline first and a rhetorical tool second. "haha isnt it funny how few movies pass this incredibly low bar but also isn't kinda fucked up?" not "here's a list of that divides the morally pure movies from the sinful movies"
There is also the theory that the bechdel test is actually about queer films.
Criticism is fine, garbage movies should be called out but people like Crifical Drinker and their non anti-SJW variants too, don't know anything about movies or cinema, they're totally unqualified to give opinions and just serve up mundane commentary that random people off of the street could have made.
I love how Adum dissects the sound and production of movies like the Lion King remake. I like how Ralph the Movie Maker explains film making concepts with angles, lense filters etc
Redlettermedia don't just dunk on B movies, they'll elaborate on the craft too, I feel like I'm gaining insight, not just a cheap laugh.
I don't need some opinionated nerd with nothing to offer, telling me tabloid level commentary. They're a dime a dozen and not even half as intelligent they seem to believe that they are.
Even The Nostalgia Critic, whose primary shtick is getting irrationally over-the-top angry at shitty movies, and who by this point is pretty much universally agreed to be cringe, occasionally talks about things he likes and even sometimes says positive/constructive things about things he doesn't like.
There are two channels I love that dive deep into the thematic elements of stories, and I always feel like I learned something after watching them.
Pillar of Garbage makes really, _really_ good videos. I'd recommend his video on Smiling Friends and Prey, and his channel as a whole.
I'd also recommend The Media Zoo. Her videos on The Pale Man and Robert Egger's "The Witch" sent chills down my spine when I watched them. Cannot recommend her enough.
@@jakek1735You mean just like the critical drinker also does? He has videos recommending films, he also recommends lesser known films sometimes also. There is nothing inherently wrong with him mostly focusing on the big films of today. That is what most people watch and are interested in so it makes sense to cover that more then anything else for some channels.
@@jakek1735I'm not a regular watcher, but Nostalgia Critic is way better now than he was a couple of years ago. He has finally embraced the criticism.
@@Gabi-bv9uxYou're focusing on the wrong aspect of the comment. The problem isn't that he just focuses on big movies, it's that his criticisms are surface-level and inconsistent, and his conclusions don't hold up to scrutiny.
46:14 I’m literally so pissed by not only the wilful ignoring of Russel Brands question but in the answer he does provide, he completely ignores historical context. For someone that continually preaches ‘blockbusters in the 70s and 80s were better’, you would think he would be knowledgeable about their production contexts. In the 70s the major film studios took a big financial hit due to changes in law to ‘4 wall screening’ (the ability for a production company to buy out a cinemas exhibition space to remove competition), numerous entertainment industry strikes and general economic hardship as a result of Vietnam War. This coincided with americas introduction of films schools which the likes of Scorsese and De Palma attended, and out of film school they were able to work through people like Roger Corman, who ran a model of making a shlock film a week. Along with Spielberg and Lucas, they were able to break into mainstream due to the afar mentioned financial hit to studios, which led to auteur led cinema influenced by foreign cinema they were shown in film school. A lot of their films critiqued American values and focused on flawed characters due to many soldiers coming back with PTSD from Vietnam. This era became known as the ‘soft body films’ (which entirely debunks the critical drinkers claim that characters used to be hardened warriors and are now ‘softies’). In fact it was due to this very vulnerability that Reagan initiated a turn towards ‘hard body films’ in the 80s; leading to more hyper masculine displays of power to counter act the soft body films. It was a literal government incentive which is the basis of propaganda. This isn’t new, it’s been engrained in cinema back to its rootes in vaudevilles.
This isn’t to say that you need to know your history to review media but for the critical drinker to continually criticise contemporary production contexts and persistently condemn modern media for ties to political ideology it's outright hypocritical and wrong.
He also clearly doesn’t care about foreign media unless it happens to break into popular discourse
Well said, his talking about cinema is just like someone filibustering
Thanks for the insight!
Is there another term used to name "soft body films"? I tried looking up "soft body films" and couldn't find any results. I would love to learn more about this topic but can't find any thing as exact as "soft body films"
A lot of war films from this period were strictly anti war and anti American foreign policy. I mean the rebels in Star Wars as stated by George Lucas are a allegory for the Vietcong. George Lucas himself stated the palpatine in the prequels is based on George bush and where he thought his administration was going, which is really extreme but that was a lot of films during that time like V for Vendetta which is why Alan Moore hates it because it took away the British context and turned it into a criticism of George bush. Films always had political subtext in them, whether It was more subtlety done is the question and whether it was subtext rather than the focus.
He's clearly just an alt-right grifter disguised as a media critic, no surprise there.
Critical drinker is the movie equivalent of gamers saying modern video games are garbage when they play exclusively AAA live service slop games
Yep. Both industries have become very risk averse at the top of the pile but it's not hard to find what's going on outside of that bubble.
He's a Critic.. "Critical" Drinker.
What do you expect him to do?
Yea but triple a games used to be really good and now they are trash in comparison and that should be pointed out so I think your point isn't pointing here.
@quintonbackhand2519 The system under which these games and movies are made requires infinite growth. That means it isn't enough for these companies to be profitable. They need to make more money this year than last year, and they'll need to make more money next year than they made this year. If their profits stop growing more and more every year, investors pull out and the company dies.
This is why these big mainstream games and movies seem to be made by committee to try and capture the largest audience possible while cutting as many corners as possible. Because they literally are.
Understand the circumstances these things are created under and then maybe you'll have something worthwhile to contribute to the conversation. Or, you can be like the critical drinker and just screech and whine about everything being "woke" while collecting fat paychecks from your audience of mindless drones.
I used to watch Critical Drinker. The wake-up call was seeing his Loki review, and on seeing a black woman he commented, “captain diversity,” and realising oh no, this isn’t a bit, he’s genuinely a racist.
Duh he's white. Of course he's racist.
When he put up an image of trump and said, "pay attention to what they're doing instead of criticizing everything they do." I started backing up.
Then recommended vomit inducing trash like tango and cash and willys wonderland.
@@upthecreek9784 That's racism in of itself thinking a whole race is racist.
This is what I’ve come to appreciate about Adam. He doesn’t simplify his thoughts, he accepts that this shit is complicated and works to talk about it. Even when I disagree with him he’s always willing to discuss opposite opinions from himself. This is the kinda discourse we need about our media lol
He's making an effort, but I think he made some garbage arguments like saying people who watch drinker don't understand film critique
@@quatreraberbawinner2628yeah that's absolutely a garbage take. That's like saying film critics who watch pop culture movies don't understand "real" movies.
@@SpiceCh i think he said it because Drinker doesn't understand film critique, which I agree, Drinker only really cares about the emotions a movie wants to share when it's from a saga of movie he already likes, otherwise he watches movies as if they were excel spreadsheets where the plot and characters needs to follow certain patterns or else the movie is "objectively bad", it's a trap many right wing media critics fall into, being fair about superficial criticism but dismissing the themes of the movies they're watching entirely, especially if he deems the movie "woke", and if you go to the comments section you can see a lot of Drinker fans thinking the same way
@@b_delta9725i don’t think you’re familiar with drinker if this is your assessment of him
@@Dolavin been watching him for like four years, less and less each year, at first i liked it because he was against bad marvel movies and all that stuff, but it's like he cherrypicks when to have a soul, and when to review a movie like it's a social failure or something, especially if the movie has "too much inclusiveness" cuz in that case he can't recommend the movie and has to find mistakes on it, my favorite example is midsommar, a movie he interpreted as woman empowerment because he couldn't comprehend basic plot points
Sound of freedom IS the largest and more expensive Dhar mann type video ever
I used to not like YMS very much, because he crapped all over a movie I was (and still kind of am) very passionate about: "The Strangers." That was the first thing I ever saw from him. Now seeing him crap all over this joker, The Critical Drinker, I have much respect and admiration.
I am genuinely curious, what are you passionate about in that movie? What did you get out of this movie that you didn't get in, lets say, When a Stranger Calls, that did everything the strangers did 30 years prior to the strangers, while also having one of the most bone chilling stomach dropping moments in film history with a killer twist that everybody knows to this day. Or the last house on the left that basically did the entire strangers plot, including the whole "because you were home" vibe, but that was just the first half because a plot like that isn't enough to sustain an entire film. Or the hundreds of other home invasion thrillers, including "Them" which the strangers may as well be a remake of, but without the actual unique scares the movie came up with.
Funny games
Martyrs
Inside
Halloween
Was it your first home invasion movie? Have you seen any home invasion movies since? Really not dunking on you, or saying the movie is the worst thing ever, it's average at best, but no matter what angle I look at the movie from, I can't see anything somebody could latch on to be "passionate" about this.
@@nicklafleur7620 I was passionate about it. Not really any more, though i still like it. I remember watching it when I was about 12 and being scared enough that I had a hard time getting to sleep that night. Movies rarely frightened me then (less so now that I've matured) so I grew to love the movie, because being scared is a fun experience.
I like the sense of ambiguity in that you never see the strangers' faces or who they are. It makes you fill in the blanks in your head, which I enjoy. Also the sense that they are still out there in the end to do it to someone
else is creepy to me.
The main part that got to me is that famous scene on the poster of the masked man watching Liv Tyler's character when she has no idea. That is the scene that kept me up at night because I imagined that man was watching me from my doorway when I lay in bed.
Most of those other movies you mentioned I've also seen and I like them too
I liked the Critical Drinker at first cause he hated on a movie I didnt like and I watched 2 more videos and was like "yeah these movies suck hes right". Then I watched his reaction to a movie I never watched. At it became clear exactly what perspective he goes through.
He was funny at first then I slowly tend to see his political bias
(Also he reviewed Godzilla vs Kong as a bad movie so without even watching it so there's that)
The videos that made me like the Drinker at first was his 2 parter of ripping apart Justice League (the Joss Whedon cut) but nowadays I rarely watch him not because of his political views but it’s the same repetitive stuff he says both negative and positive.
@@ammagon4519Well Godzilla vs Kong WAS a bad movie, but it's not fair to say it's bad without watching it.
I used to respect the Critical Drinker back when he released his Black Panther review. Most people avoided disparaging the movie because they didn't want to be associated with the very small group of bigots who also detracted the movie. Despite that, Critical Drinker made some valid criticisms which have been more or less vindicated over time, as today most people concede that Black Panther is a B-tier Marvel movie. I don't agree with everything Drinker says in his review, and he can be a bit (okay, very) nitpicky, but I could totally see where he was coming from and at the very least I respected his honesty, because he didn't shy away from praising aspects of Black Panther when he thought those aspects were praise-worthy (e.g. Chadwick Boseman's acting).
I don't think it's unfair to point out that the Black Panther review might have been an accidental dog whistle for some bigoted audience members, but at least Drinker made an effort to talk about parts of the movie he liked despite the review having an overall negative slant, which to me indicates that, deep down, he himself is not a bigot, nor is he trying to harbor such an audience. Today, it seems like Drinker tries so hard to cater to the particular fanbase he has developed. He's more than happy to homogenize his opinion by only voicing his criticisms of a movie when he dislikes it, and only praising a movie when he likes it. There's no longer any middle ground with him. A movie is only either good or bad, and it seems to fall in line with what the small group of bigoted people in his audience might believe, even if that group might have different reasons than Drinker's to have the same opinion on a movie. This to me demonstrates that Critical Drinker is perfectly aware of what kind of people are in his audience, and is willing to adjust his opinions to validate their opinions, but he also doesn't want to associate himself with them so he doesn't actually speak opinions he doesn't hold, rather he omits opinions which contradict what that section of his audience believes. And generally, when someone has only either positive or negative things to say about a movie, they are usually being dishonestly reductive.
@@youtubeviolatedme7123 Im not reading that, Im sorry that happened to you or glad to hear it.
It's funny they always mention Ripley and Sarah Connor because James Cameron should definitely be considered woke by their standards
Aliens is unironically about a woman who walks up to a group of a bunch of overly macho hyper-masculine manly men and gets ignored because she's a woman even though she's 100% right about everything, and then the rest of the film is everyone realizing that Ripley was right and she's the most competent and badass member of the group as all the dude-bros die off one at a time as they struggle to deal with the exact situation Ripley literally tried to warn them about beforehand.
There's no way in hell they wouldn't call that movie woke if it came out today, people would unironically be trying to nitpick how Ripley's a Mary Sue for knowing how the forklift exoskeleton works and crap, lol! Like, unironically, I don't know if I could even think of a single notable flaw that character has off the top of my head. But because we all recognize it's a good movie they just HAVE to pretend Ripley's just special and she's the one time they got female characters right despite falling into every single criticism they shove at every woke female protag they latch onto in media.
@@dracocrusherit’s not because she’s a woman. It’s because she’s not a soldier. They have a woman with them and she’s the one who is most dismissive of Ripley.
They think they can handle anything because they’re all tough soldiers.
@@elvickRULES You say that, but let's not kid ourselves, right? It seems pretty obvious that that type of toxic masculinity is absolutely the intention.
@@dracocrusher Sorry, but this isn't a counterargument. The person you're replying to gave reasoning for why the dismissiveness of the people around her isn't gender related and you completely ignore that and continue on with the narrative you formed and are condescendingly all "yeah, but it really is, that's obvious." despite evidence being shown to the contrary.
@@Pik3rob I think you're insane if you actually believe people wouldn't call a woman being right and effective against a group of hypermasculine almost exclusively male 'experts' incredibly woke if it came out today.
You would absolutely get that predictable big Ben Shapiro video where he calls her a Mary Sue that's emasculating men and all the other usual anti-woke talking points. Unironically the only reason it doesn't happen is because the movie's old, so the discussion ended before it could become a big dumb internet reactionary culture war thing.
I agree. It's why I've stopped watching channels that purely focus on negative movie reviews. It's also why I stopped watching Cinema Sins. It is simply unhealthy to have this idea that media is just garbage nowadays. There are so many good pieces of media that are much more worthy of peoples time. Criticism is important, but when that's all there is, it's just exhausting and sad.
Honestly, I stopped watching Cinema Sins because the "nit-picking" joke got old really fast.
Which is funny given that I feel like most people from the outside think that's what Adum is.
@@michaelstrong5383 I stopped watching because it became incredibly boring and predictable. The same five jokes (roll credits when the name of the movie was said in the movie itself being one of them) in every single video that after a while it felt like the videos were coming out of a factory instead of something that was carefully worked on.
I can see the other side of the coin too. If you just watch overly positive movie reviews, they tend to not represent the films very well either and oversell
@@patricksnoring4739Yeah, Chris Stuckmann is that bad side of positivity. Specially when it's so transparent why he does it after that fiasco with his script for Batman v Superman. Also because he does movies now and doesn't want to piss off people in the industry.
That's the thing that drives me crazy about people who are "mad" about everything being so "political" and how companies are just including elements to score cheap points with people, then go crazy for a movie that is transparently using its subject matter as a political cash grab like Sound of Freedom. "It's about child trafficking, you guys, so if you don't buy a ticket, you hate children" is awfully convenient for the studio that stands to make money from it, and a pathetically small-brained take. If you hate when studios capitalize on liberal talking points to make money, you need to also hate it when they do the exact same thing with QAnon nonsense if you're going to even pretend to have a shred of intellectual honesty. Otherwise, don't say you hate politics. Say "I wish there was more propaganda that I personally agree with!"
But anyway, I really appreciate how you mentioned that of course a person's opinion of modern media is going to be low if they only watch blockbusters. It's the same thing when I pull up any 70s or 80s prog rock whatsoever on RUclips and always see the comment of "this was back when they knew how to make music! Today it's all crap!" No, no it isn't, and shame on you for insulting all the phenomenally talented musicians out there for only committing the sin of not being famous enough for you to notice them. Of course if you wait 40-50 years for society to come to a consensus on what was the best of a particular era and point it out to you, you will have no trouble finding those things and consuming them. Don't act like things were objectively better a generation ago because you're too lazy to seek out the good things that exist today.
It is agonizing to see someone who identifies as any kind of critical thinker to say big dumb 80s action movies were the height of cinema as an art and the peak of clever writing. Maybe they made certain kinds of people FEEL smarter, because a major 80s blockbuster motif was an average joe sticking it to intellectuals by just charging forward blindly and succeeding through dumb luck. Despite what people like these two will say, it is not "elitist" to know what you're doing, or to get annoyed by people who don't have a clue what's going on when they insist they know what's best.
And he's not a fan of "erasing history" and "sanitizing things" to pretend they were different, but he's a fan of Ron "Slavery was beneficial, actually" DeSantis. Okay. I absolutely do think he's either a bad-faith actor or he has never even once examined his own beliefs critically for even a second.
Really, art is subjective.
Like, there is no 'high art' or 'low art,' art is anything. Like, it's that open, it's a vague term. What matters with the art is the execution, does it conjure up something to the viewer.
Yes, a lot of blockbusters these days pander to the audience for the sake of getting in as much money as possible with cheap nostalgia or 'people pleasing' stories/endings. But, Drinker is absolutely doing the same thing by pandering to people who hate 'modern movies' for the sake of getting in as much viewership as he can.
I'm sure he doesn't like these movies, but he's most definitely using his persona to push up the negativity into a steady income of clicks. And he sure as shit can't actually articulate these ideas effectively, because the man's just a terrible essay writer pretending to know what 'high art' is.
Not to mention that a big movie a lot of these "me hate politics" people love is Captain America Winter Soldier, which is a VERY political movie that is effectively the superhero equivalent of the Patriot Act lmfao
@@JustSomeDinosaurPerson The whole "I don't want politics in my X" thing has always been a bunch of BS. Damn near everything is political anyways.
People who hate "politics"
and "propaganda" in modern movies are absolutely hypocritical and they're aware of it
@@JustSomeDinosaurPerson they love Winter soldier because it's a very political movie, but it doesn't pinpoint certain politics as bad. As an example, the new Batman isn't nearly as political, but it has batgirl calling out the rich white men in one scene, so a lot of people took it as an offense to not only capitalism, but right wing people in general, saying the movie was woke shit
Winter soldier has the USA government conspiring to do some Nazi shit, but the entire political spectrum fears/theorizes about that all the time, there's nobody blamed as guilty because it's all part of the Powers that B wanting their world domination as usual in these movies, and Captain america is the one who saves the day. Fallout is another good example of this, the world goes to shit due to nuclear war but you don't have to pinpoint that as a fault of capitalism, but a fault of humanity wanting to bring war, or a fault of stupid governments who kept manufacturing nuclear weapons, but not capitalism in general, so a lot of right wingers are fans of the game
As far as remembering only the good art, it's called the Sieve of Time, and all art goes through it. We really do only remember the best of each time period, even though terrible art is made all the time, too
I don't think that's necessarily true. I think we remember the best AND the worst art. And it's everything in between that fades away.
@@RenegadeVileNowadays we remeber the worst stuff, but even now a lot of meh-bas stuff is fading away
@@RenegadeVileI think this is definitely true for certain people, but more broadly speaking I think we compare new things we watch to cultural milestone movies like Star Wars or Terminator, etc.
We don’t watch movies and think about it in comparison to idk the Ewok movie or whatever other terrible films we’ve watched, we compare it to things we like and therefore we remember those things more.
@@notapplicable6985 that is true. negative things stick with you but in the case of movies and music the situation is different since the good pieces are more likely to reruns and plays for decades into the future. All of that makes it waay more memorable than its bad counterparts.
Survivers bias
2:19:52 there's something so funny about the Drinker finishing a passionate tirade about artistic integrity, and for Russell Brand to respond with a disinterested "yeah, nice one mate" before moving to the next part of the interview.
I think it has something to do with the fact that Russell Brand is actually intellectually a lot more capable than he is.
So like despite the fact that Russell Brand is a quack, his notable disinterest speaks volumes. It also doesn't help that he says it in his cool casual accent lol.
@@glenstortroen1286 I think it's also notable to point out that Brand asks him the same question twice because he noticed that Drinker pretty much didn't answer the question. He probably just didn't press on him too much cause he's just a guest and not a professional critic really.
@@glenstortroen1286 why is russell brand a quack?? I never watched the vidoe in question but I have seen russell brand in other videos.
@@burrybondz225lol is that a serious question. Stop it.
@@ColombianThunder lmao professional critic. You're about as useful as the writers concerned with ai. Critics are usually pompous clowns as yourself who ingest fecal matter
Critical Drinker: How can people not be supporting 'The Sound of Freedom'?! It deals with important, serious subject matter that everyone needs to be made aware of!!
Didn't I hear this guy arguing not five minutes ago that a movie's politics shouldn't overshadow things like its writing, story, and characters? That the reason movies suck now is because Hollywood cares about shoving" woke" messages in your face more than focusing on good storytelling/filmmaking?
Scotland>America
Fair point but SOF was about politicly neutral subject matter, its marketing aside.
I think there's an obvious difference between a movie being about political or ideological topics vs the writer or producer's personal politics/ideology corroding a project, and thus tanking its quality(or tanking it further).
@@iamthewizardwhoknocks2845 nah, when you look at this in reality one side controls the conversation on trafficking inaccurately like this film does
The problem is both sides criticize the other when their side is losing and stay silent when they win
They always mention Sarah, Ripley, and Trinity but mever mention movies like Annihilation, Arrival, or Mad Max.
Probably because that would fly in the face of the false narrative Drinker and his colleagues have created about how "modern movies suck because of wokeness." If they actually admitted there were good current movies with well-developed female main characters in them, it would completely dismantle the story they've been pushing to their viewers.
The "Ripley/Sarah deflection" is essentially the "I'm not racist, I have black friends"
@@BulgarianReaper yep
@@noahvance6160 theyre so disingenuous
You don’t know wanna know what this guy thinks about Annihilation…
The calling out of Russell Brand made me feel nice. Thank you. The man is intolerable.
I find him ironically funny.
The irony of him here saying "pedophilia is more popular than I imagine it was" after what just came out is unreal.
@@lingy69
Allegations are always taken as truth, just look at the Kwite situation, sure Kwite was at a much smaller scale, but his career om RUclips was nearly ruined by a narcissist that took an opportunity to accuse someone of something awful to ruin them.
My consensus is if he likes it then it's not "woke".. If doesn't.. It's "woke".. I didn't hear him give one example of a true "woke" film. His definition of woke is anything not centered on a straight, white man obviously. Nobody called Nutty Professor (remake) woke.. He absolutely would today.
I used to watch the Drinker a few years ago because I'm obsessed with film critique, and I like to hear all interpretations, especially ones I disagree with. Mostly because if someone off the internet says something along the same lines as drinker, I can refute it with some actual back up and practice haha.
That being said, his "opinions" are dangerously close to the alt-right pipeline, and after a couple years I started to get recommendations for videos under his that have titles like "Does Spiderman NEED to be black?" *soy face*" SO yeah I hopped off that train, even if I was there ironically. He can be dangerous.
He's absolutely dangerous.
One of these freaks is going to inspire an active shooter one of these days.
@@sirchadiusmaximusiiiwas that even English?
I like your Stocking Anarchy pfp
The drinker’s view on movies is so pessimistic and irrational that it seems like he’s doesn’t know that he has juvenoia towards new material. And doesn’t seem to realize that this new generations tastes are wildly different than 40 years ago
It’s so weird that two movies he recommends are The Whale and The Menu, two very political films (The Menu more so, but The Whale has a lot to discuss with religion and American social structure), and also he’ll rant about Indiana Jones because there’s a woman in it. Does he actually not get it? Or is he assuming he can talk about these movies to his audience because he doesn’t think they’re smart enough to figure out the themes if the lead is a white man?
personally ive come to the conclusion that a lot of woke film criticism can boil down to “I dont know why I dont like it so here’s something more obvious to me that’s a trend so that’s why its bad”. Dont know enough about critical drinker to say personally. but I get that vibe especially with marvel/disney critics that see wokeness as the primary issue.
Do you think The Whale and The Menu are on par with Indy 5?
@@NDenizenThat’s not at all what she’s there for in Indiana Jones. She’s a foil for Indy. She’s there to make him feel like a relic, while also having an emotional connection that compels him to keep her safe. And she’s knowledgeable about the Dial and propels him to go on the adventure in the first place. She’s not supposed to be right, she has a character arc and grows at the end to become a more compassionate person. And I don’t even like the movie! Or her character! But to reduce her role to being “woman” is factually incorrect. She contributes a healthy amount to the film. I mean damn, if you want to talk about a character existing just for the sake of it, her kid sidekick is right there.
@@thatnoobnextdoor Logically speaking, he should be complaining about both equally. Dial of Destiny isn’t very good, but he doesn’t think it’s bad for any substantive reason other than it’s woke. The Whale opens with fat Brendan Fraser masterbaiting to gay porn. How much more woke do you get?
@@NDenizen did you even watch indy 5? it wasn't a good movie, but if you think her role was just "a women in charge" you must've slept thru most of it
I don't think the Critikal Drinker has made a single video where he didn't complain about the "strong female character". I haven't watched him in years but I see that he is STILL doing it to this day. Unbelievable
He's right, though. We've had strong female characters in media for a century now and the "strong female characters" that have been written in a lot of major productions today, mostly from Disney, are not well-written because they're bad caricatures of how hypermasculine, insecure men behave, or they're blank slates with little to no character.
We can find lots of good examples of strong female characters in media today, but it's usually in smaller productions that don't get the same level of visibility as things like Rings of Power or Marvel flicks. The reason why he focuses on those is precisely because they have a lot of visibility. But I'll admit I'd like him to do more reviews of things he liked to promote more positivity and to give eyeballs to productions that deserve them.
He's too weak to get a strong female of his own smh
The saddest revelation from the entire reaction was the fact that Adum didn't finish Arcane, it's such a good show :(
Not sure how far he got into the show, but the beginning of the show does have kind of basic and templated conflicts, because the main priority is exposition, and those basic conflicts mostly exist to string the viewer long enough to get them comfortable with the setting and characters. Until those conflicts begin to invert, and the show catapults into something else, I don't blame Adum for abandoning the show since he watches a lot of media, and it's easy to think that the entire show is going to be bland and basic, even just based on the first fifteen minutes of the first episode.
@@youtubeviolatedme7123 Adum ain't got no taste then if that's why because that reasoning makes no sense to me. If he couldn't get on board with the show in the first 15 minutes or whatever, he's not gonna get into the show period, because I fail to see how the beginning of the show is any less brilliant than the rest of it.
@@youtubeviolatedme7123 oooh yes this. Like if it wasn’t animated, I don’t know if I would have stuck with it.
In hindsight, he did the correct thing. No matter how good Arcane is, it always has the flaw of being a Riot IP.
Critical drinker isn’t even the worst . That’s the problem . He enables people who are even worse
Like Mauler. 🤢
Exactly. This problem also applies to other grifters as well. Matt Walsh may have never shot someone or directly threatened a hospital himself, but he has acted as an enabler of people that have preformed those criminal acts.
@@berrybluebird3842 how are they "grifters"? I don't understand why I keep seeing this exact term used
@@TheRealGaucelmI’m late to this but they’re grifters because they don’t hold actual opinions, they say what gives them the most money, many people have pointed this out but critical drinker often bashes a movie before it comes out like Prey, but when it comes out he changes the title as if he didn’t
Mualer, Nerdrotic, Geeks & Gamers, HeelvsBabyface, etc
Remember when Adam said that dumb stuff about Citizen Kane, then everyone dunked on him and he acknowledged his mistakes and admitted he knew little about old Hollywood?
Imagine if Adam had the same ignorance about every single aspect of cinema, refused to ever correct himself, added dogshit reactionary politics to his reviews and had zero self awareness, then you’d get the CD
That must be why YMS has nearly 2M subscribers.
@@ymca4547 Having a lot of subscribers doesn't mean you're automatically more correct than a smaller youtuber. Don't be a freaking tool, please.
@@ymca4547CD has more appeal to the regular Joe. Easy to consume, to digest.
Big number is good doesnt mean Something is actually good
@@ymca4547CD appeals to the lowest common denominator.
Easy to peddle and sell crap people want to hear
"Forcing your politics into films is woke nonsense!"
"You should support this film because of its politics ALONE!!"
the hypocrisy of The critical drinker 😂😂😂
"You should support this film because of its politics ALONE!!"
Except he never said that.
@@matthewlaneyou’re right he said “the message alone.” Semantics.
Being fair, I'm assuming the politics we're discussing here is The Sound of Freedom, which I think is delving into something beyond just the insane world of wokeness and is getting into something increasingly serious in the world right now. There are literally (check the numbers), more slaves in the world right now than at any other time in history.
@@ZerogunRivale Did you watch this video?
The whole "movie star" thing is so insufferable to me. Why do people want for there to be mega celebrities who absolutely dominate the film industry? Why is that a good thing? The old "movie stars" didn't dominate because they were uniquely gifted at acting, they dominated because Hollywood as an industry was hyper exclusive and stagnant.
Movie stars gave audiences reliable brands that they can trust to not deviate too harshly. Denzel Washington persists, for example, because of the movie star brand he built up over the decades.
And I guess, partly thanks to no social media at the time.
all of these reviewers endlessly acting like they’re under some obligation to rant about the latest studio junk for hours while ignoring the ocean of great stuff coming out in the specialty/indie scene reminds me of that meme of the guy ‘drowning’ before showing he’s literally sitting in two feet of water
Its called passion
I feel like even if I was a conservative “anti-woman, gay, lgbt, pink, Barbie,” guy, I would still be exhausted and depressed by the constant negativity and bitching. They whinge about literally everything.
Hell, I doubt these guys have ever watched anything outside the English language either.
They hate it, while at the same time mainstream Hollywood movies are everything these people talk about.
Adum actually missed out on the Sound of Freedom theater experience. When the credits roll in, a 2 minute countdown appears for a "special message". The special message is Jim Caviezel talking to the audience about how this film is so revolutionary and how everyone needs to see it. Then a QR code pops up and they say that it's our way of doing our part: scanning the code, and buying a ticket for someone who can't afford it. Not a charity, information or organizations dedicated to stop the crimes in the movie, but a way to generate more revenue for the film.
From Montreal, and my theater was packed and all the old people stayed and tried figuring out this QR code.
This can't be real, what the fuck lmao
@@TheMjolnirThunder it was the most surreal thing ever I swear 😭
If you google 'sound of freedom ticket pay it forward' the first thing that pops up is Angel Studio's campaign for this. It's set up like a GoFundMe
Just like at the end of “Gods Not Dead,” the Duck Dynasty family told everyone to text 100 of their friends “Gods Not Dead.” Just to spread the word of God, I’m sure in no way to promote the movie with the same name.
@@zacharykaiser5910 that is hilarious
This is kinda what happens when you're someone who gets into the political sphere and make content online surrounding it: you dip further into extremism because that's what gets eyeballs and keeps viewers entertained. I've been seeing this happen a lot lately with people I follow. People who go from having moderate and decent takes to then becoming hysterical, bitter, and paranoid about the people and world around them.
Yep! This is the archetypal story of online politics. Hesitating on breaking news means you lose viewers to other commentators who have no issue jumping to WILD conclusions while information is still coming in. Maintaining a high standard of steady, balanced, nuanced commentary just leaves viewers bored, and makes them think you're stagnating. Reaching out to the other side doesn't sell, you need to be an EXTREMIST and DEMONIZE the other side.
No one wants to hear that institutions actually do work pretty well, and that voting is the best means you have to affect real change. Everyone wants to hear that THE INSTITUTIONS ARE ALL CORRUPT AND ONLY KEEP GETTING WORSE AS TIME GOES ON; THE AVERAGE PERSON IS BEING SLOWLY CRUSHED BY FACELESS, MALICIOUS SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS; YOU CANNOT TRUST ANYTHING YOU HEAR FROM MAINSTREAM MEDIA OR ACADEMIC STUDIES; A GIGANTIC CATASTROPHE IS GOING TO HAPPEN VERY SOON!!! [THEY] DON'T WANT YOU TO SEE THIS!!!!!
“Audience Capture”
How is he in the political sphere ? He's an extremist paranoid hysterical bitter person ? Wow I would love for you to explain that you clearly very kind stable person
Sargon is the shining example.
@@ConnorwithanOany example?
Critical Drinker gives me the vibes of someone that would say "Oh this movie was alright, there's just too many black people in it"
He doesn't care about Kubrick's 2001 but loves the 2010 sequel.That sums it up about his taste
Woof, did he actually say that? lol
i have never heard of either of those films
you are not a flim person@@james656-k8e
I just rewatched the first 15 minutes of 2001. Does it sum up your taste in film?
They are both good tbh, 2010 is not revolutionary but it has great ideas, sets, acting, music, etc.
I’m so sick and tired of critical drinker’s woman this, man that. Woman can’t do this, woman can’t be that. Like damn, is it that hard to just criticize the story itself without being overly sensitive? His fixation on gender is so so annoying. Just view them as human beings for fks sake
Even the spy novel he wrote he has a woman who has been incarcerated and tortured for years is kicking more ass and more skills than the main character. He is not a good writer.
@@dalekrenegade2596 Wow, what a hypocrite.
Drinker has always been a really fascinating figure to me. Despite his facade of being this rambling alcoholic who just “speaks what’s on his mind,” it’s pretty clear that he’s very calculated in what movies he covers and what criticisms he makes of them
His negative reviews are very formulaic- you can basically map his criticisms as:
- Woman doesn’t face enough adversity or is a “Mary sue”
- White man gets mocked or replaced by woman or minority
- something is promoting “the message,” which could be just about anything with enough editing and mental gymnastics
His positive reviews are more interesting, however, because they really show just how meticulously crafted his channel is. Each movie the “drinker recommends” fit neatly into this backpedaling narrative that he is the apolitical, “common sense” critic.
Take arcane for example- a movie he deemed had “woke” in it, but because it’s good (especially to his specific audience) it’s the token “woke movie” that he can point to without his core audience being upset but also still continuing the facade of being apolitical.
His other recommends are a little more obvious in their pandering. Chernobyl has got the anti-communist stuff, Alien/Terminator 2 have good women protagonists, sound of freedom is well… the sound of freedom, so you can really start to see just how crafted this narrative is on the channel through these positive reviews
He’s very careful when he talks to not “cross the line” into alt-right territory. Even as a leftist I used to watch his vids and sorta see some of the stuff he was talking about, but as you watch him more you begin to realize just how much he manipulates the reviews to always follow the same narrative for each movie
I remember Critical drinker’s critique of Birds of Prey and while he did have good points, I specifically remember him thinking it was absurd that Harley could beat several grown men since she was a woman. Does he not know it’s a superhero movie? Or does he think it’s totally realistic for a single man to beat several other men in combat as if that isn’t just as absurd? He certainly hasn’t been nearly as harsh on the actual Batman movies.
“…bUT WoMeN aRE pHYsiCallY WeaKER tHaN MeN!” Critical drinker cried. “FemInisT pRoPagAnda!”
Adam every two seconds "I'm not calling him a conservative, he's just saying the conservative thing"
Adam is being nice by not calling CD what he is…A conservative brain dead moron…
I said to myself..."If he can get 2 minutes in without complaining that a Black actor got paid, I'll keep watching." The fact that I had to say that to myself made me never watch dude again.
As a Scottish person, he does not represent us.
Especially hiding his shrimp-stalk eyes behind flight instructor sunglasses indoors.
On the earliest part of the stream, I think the term Adum's looking for is that Drinker's perspectives are reductive. He's easily accessible to people who don't know much about film because his takes are both very simple and very reductive of the overall film industry, focusing almost solely on Hollywood as representative of the global film industry
Seeing people complain about “wokeness ruins everything” is the same sort of trite criticism as, say, a video game reviewer who can’t talk about games without comparing them to other games. It’s a crutch. How about describing the movie and trying to communicate it’s merits/flaws in a more articulate fashion than just “strong female character bad because ghostbusters 2016”
Except there's many examples of people doing that?
I think the issue is more, they (producer/directors ect) were willingly went out and made a remake that disregards why the original was better but instead not only makes a terrible script but also replaces a male centered story with a female one, disregarding the original audience that just just wanted to see the same story but with better CGI LOL 😂
@@CreationSGame01 it’s not a bad movie because they replaced a male printed script with a female oriented one, it!s a bad movie because it sucks and every part of it is torture.
I adore the people in gaming who are like 'keep your woke modern day bullshit out my videogames!!' And their favourite video game franchises are like COD, GTA and Fallout 💀
@@newdelhiman3083 “no politics in video games!” Goes to play wolfenstein
I was subscribed to the Critical Drinker for a while and even stuck up for him to some extent. I enjoyed how funny and entertaining his channel was. As for the criticism of woke stuff, I believe everyone is entitled to their own opinion. However, I eventually unsubscribed because he just wouldn't shut up about "the message." It reached a point that it seemed like even just having a black character in a movie would cause him to go on a rant about woke Hollywood. It was getting so annoying. Nearly every video would bring it up. My theory is that he realized his audience and really began leaning hard into the political stuff to appease them.
Do you have an example in mind where he called a movie woke just because it had a black character?
I can't think of any specific example since I unsubscribed over a year ago. But I do know that it seemed like every time a character showed up that wasn't a straight white male or a female love interest, he made a point of commenting on it, whether positively or negatively.
Same here. He claims a movie's woke if there's a female character that isn't a damsel in distress has humiliated or emasculated the main male character. Funny how a lot of right wingers shit on left wingers for complaining when they complain just as much.
this is exactly what happened with me. i used to enjoy his videos because he actually put thought into his criticism, i sometimes rolled my eyes when he would make a lame culture war joke, but eventually his videos became almost completely focused on culture war bullshit.
@@Tabor19 Ok, but was in a history setting where they shouldn't have been in? I doubt he complained about black characters in downtown new york.
I got one of Drinker's video's recommended to me at one point, I assume because I watch a lot of youtube film analysis/criticism vids. Knowing nothing about him, I watched the video for about 5-10 minutes before I was like "oh, he's one of THOSE guys". I looked through the thumbnails of some of his other vids out of curiosity and saw one where he talks about how "modern movies don't write men properly", and he just un-ironically sounded like Tony Soprano asking "Whateva happened to Gary Coopah? Da shtrong, shilent type?" Yeah I realized pretty quickly he wasn't my cup of tea.
I thought his takedown of the last season of Game of Thrones was hilarious. Then I saw his other videos and realized what a one-trick pony he is. His Midsommar review was one of the most juvenile-incel takes on a movie I've ever seen.
36:40 this was 100% proven right. Drinker and his audience don't pursue or watch any original movies with elements they want. Drinker couldn't even get his own audience to watch his movie, because neither of them actually care about good cinema. They just want to complain
I think a short of just that section would be great
The criticism that Hollywood just rehashes ideas ironically is a really old complaint. Siskel and Ebert complained back in 1989 that Hollywood was just retreading old ground. It's still a valid criticism, but it is in no way profound the way Russel brand makes it seem
Strangers on a Train/Throw Momma from the Train
Not exactly Ghostbusters/Ghostbusters 2016
Or Little Mermaid/Live Action version.
"Pride and Prejudice/Romeo & Juliet" has been retold 100 times...
"Terminator" isn't as replicable
Real life animals CANNOT be as expressive as cartoon ones - making a "lesser version" benefits whom?
This is purely me judging a book by its cover, but first first glance impressions of this guy's brand with the sunglasses, chugging a big bottle of booze, the hair and the beard just comes across as so performative and boring. It's like an alpha male Nostalgia Critic, I hate it
You aren't that far off from the truth
I love that Adum keeps wanting to give Critical Drinker the benefit of the doubt, only for Drinker to dig himself into a deeper hole ("movies used to be better back when they weren't so political", "we already had strong female characters with Ripley and Sarah Connor", "if you don't support Sound of Freedom you are a pedo")
Plenty of pedos in the Hollywood bubble, and even some in this comment section. Dear God.
“It’s okay for movies to have politics as long as they’re politics that I support” critical drinker probably
To be fair there has been a shift in the way female characters are portrayed and it's definitely for the worst, Ripley, Sarah Connor and even leia to a degree are much cooler and interesting compared to modern blockbuster heroines that lack substance, plus the politics angle, movies have generally been politically on the left side, promoting anti-war, anti-facism, it's just the social commentary over the last decade has been a lot more heavy handed, and I'm not bias towards CRITICAL DRINKER, even when a great and fair example of social commentary is made he will say some shit about it being lazy and all about the MESSAGE, but there's definitely roots in what he's saying
Princess Leia is the most based feminist ever .
I love how that last “quote” was barely even mentioned by him, so nice strawman attempt
1:45:1 That's hard to believe on Drinker's part
He definitely did not forgive Ryan Johnson for what he did on the sequels, and his review of Glass Onion makes that REALLY clear
Sounds very immature. That's why I don't watch psuedo youtube movie critics like him
Yeah a lot of this type of RUclipsr loses every brain cell they still had when Rian Johnson comes up.
Lol the height of Russell Brand's career was starring in the failed attempt at an Easter movie franchise "Hop," and now he's complaining about the quality of modern movies, huh? That's as hypocritical as it would be for him to criticize someone else for being a sex predator.
I always thought that the height of his career was when someone thought that he had the talent to fill the shoes of Dudley freakin' Moore and greenlighted a remake of Arthur, but Hop works quite well too.
that's not fair, he also had a cameo in Big Time Rush
Also I can’t help but wonder if movies are worse nowadays because movies take up less real estate in your mind as you get older. Good and bad movies just come and go a lot faster over time, you know. Maybe that’s why ‘old films are better.’
Great insight
The fact he said *2010: The Year We Make Contact* improved on *2001: A Space Odyssey* told me all i needed to know about him
@Sinisterlizards 1. Proof of this pls
2. Battle Royale IS a Japanese movie, so wtf are you talking about?
@@HobanProductionBut isn't Oldboy (not the Spike Lee version,) technically based on a pre-existing Japanese manga?
@@HobanProductionSo did he ever see The Handmaiden? Considering it's directed by the same guy who did Oldboy? He'll complain about Spoilers:
The two females characters wanting to kill off the "bad men" characters.
Other than the part where the monolith turns Jupiter into a sun 2010 was pretty boring. Which makes sense since the book is also meh and the 3rd book 2063 was more interesting.
Doubt it - not unless the action is badly choreographed with lots of jump-cuts to hide the actresses' inability to perform the moves. Which doesn't happen in The Handmaiden. Nor are the "bad men" characters simple caricatures. At least represent the guy's points properly, like Adum does.@@Nightmarewrath
wow this video was cathartic, I've had these issues too but of course dissenting discourse in his comments is impossible and easily drowned out. This is why we love you Adam
The Critical Drinker is like a guy who only eats fast food claiming that "no one makes good food anymore" because Burger King bought all his favourite fast food chains and he has no interest in eating anything else.
Like, he's not completely wrong but he's only looking at one slice of the industry that's really always been mediocre compared to the better stuff that's out there.
What if you really really loved that fast food and it was a big part of why you even enjoy food but then with time it all got kinda shit and you don't like it anymore? That's pretty upsetting and no amount of "oh, why don't you try this exotic cuisine?" is going to make that fact feel better.
Absolutely broaden your horizons, but when something you love becomes trash to you, you're 100% allowed to complain about that.
I think the point is how can you then condemn all of cinema if you're only staying within your limited scope and Adam makes the point that the kinds of films that Drinker wants to see DO exist and in my view are not even in the 'exotic cuisine' distance of travel from his very slim 'film diet' and are more just the KFC to his Burger King.
If anything outside of pure mainstream hollywood blockbuster is considered 'exotic' then it might be time to reevaluate what you consider to be cinema and how you criticise it.
That's going to happen when the average cinema experience especially in other countries is whatever slop hollywood serves up on a plate compared to the film festival circuit. Like I'm fucking shocked how many of YMS audience are like "He doesn't go to film festivals so he's a neo nazi chud"
@@TopTwom And so I would contend that you’re a snowflake- because we’re all better off with salads anyway.
39:45 Arnold has lived entirely in America for over 50 years, and Americans tend to perceive him as both Austrian and American now. Honestly, it's a good thing that permanent residents/citizens can get viewed that way here.
That beginning portion about having a "healthy diet of media" I empathize so much with when it comes to the games industry. There's so much out there to experience for games and you just need to look beyond what is so heavily advertised.
I really liked the drinker. I really tried to like him again after a decent break. I remember going to one of his newer videos about why he was cautious about some upcoming movie, and his first sentence had the words "Identity politics" in it as if it was just a thing that existed and not a misinterpretation of several complex concepts and ideas... I used to avoid any of his vids that seemed outwardly *yikes*, but now it seemed the two were bleeding together. My break from his content was during my transition, and I realised he was not a creator I wanted to return to.
About a year later, I was writing a comparative essay on violence in dystopian fiction using A Clockwork Orange and Watchmen, and I realised something... the drinker once mentioned Ozymandias portrayal in the tv show as being disrespectful. he is shown farting, and generally being an old, bigoted cult leader, in comparison to the new, black female protagonist, while he was once the smartest man in the world and a good character. This is what drinker points out...
but with a re-reading of watchmen... no. Ozymandias is a character you are meant to hate. he's an arrogant, deluded narcissist who thinks his intelligence entitles him to divine power, to control the fate of humanity. he kills Rorschach, strips away the freedom of people who were meant to be his best friends, and is revealed to have been charismatic and manipulative, never thinking anyone was anything more than a tool for him to use in saving the world. obviously his actions fall into a moral grey area, this is Alan Moore's writing after all, but he is obviously an awful character, written to be as hate-able as possible. It's such a blatant misinterpretation of one of my favourite novels, and all to somehow prove that a minority lead wasn't just a creative decision, but a plot from "Big Gay" to ruin a fictional character just because he's a white guy.
and honestly, I think it says more about the drinker than anything, to ignore the flaws of and identify with a character obviously meant to criticise hubris and self-righteousness that ignores any possibility they may be wrong. An ironic self-own, like redditors who identify with rick sanchez as an atheist and nihilist, not realising that rick's character is a criticism of extreme nihilism and close-mindedness.
I completely agree with your take that people saying this just need to be exposed to more and less mainstream art. I used to have this mentality of "everything today sucks, modern music is all trash" etc and would watch critical drinker videos and other similar channels. Once i got a little older, started studying music composition for my career, moved to a city and went to live performances of non mainstream musicians, my perspective completely changed; i think we're in one of the best eras of music in history, simply because so much music ranging from garbage to absolute *masterpieces* are so easily accessible and are created every single day, the same to an extent with films as well.
Interesting take honestly. I really push back against the modern music is trash position too. However modern films, as in modern big budget Hollywood films, have, I believe, gone down the toilet in quality.
I would say that TCDs videos are mostly about those types of films. And I feel like YMS did a horrible job in this video because almost everything he said, Drinker would agree with. But YMS is talking to his audience as if him and drinker disagree, but they really don’t. Most of this video is YMS talking as if Drinker doesn’t know that indie movies exist and some are good. (btw Adum didn’t bring up that obviously the MAJORITY of indie films now are also terrible and he’s cherry picking in his mind like he says others do when they talk about how older films used to be better)
Even if he canceled his Disney+ subscription and joined the Criterion Channel, it wouldn't change a thing.
He'd lost almost all of his audience, who are only onboard for the white/straight/male grievance bullshit, which can be exploited way more effectively by talking about pop-culture shit. Those people aren't interested in movies.
@@junzeroni You aren't representing your deemed opponents fairly. Imagine that.
@@ArthurDent_42 what?
@@ArthurDent_42if the person sits infront of 1,000 action figures and has 100+ videos about star wars is too woke, they are probably dumb
Like voting?
The reason why I gave up on CD was because he went from doing Production Hell series to doing annoying rants that pretty much repeat the same rhetoric over and over again. You don't have to make multiple videos complaining about everything being woke all the time.
I mean, you can make that argument, but at the same time I'd argue I'd rather know if and what main stream content keeps being pumped full of hypocritical politics than to have him go radio silent for 5 years because the industry doesn't change.
It's quite possible that the popularity of his channel and his continued reporting on these issues is contributing to changes in the industry and consumer trends. If nothing else, I am grateful to have watched a 10 minute video rather than spend my hard earned money and setting aside a full evening at the cinema to being told men and white people are the roots of all evil. If I wanted to spend money to be insulted, I would go find a findom streamer.
It's hard not to see most movies from the 80s as a product of the Reagan era. Most of them had a heavy anti-liberal message.
lol I remember when this guy called Midsommar feminist propaganda. Talk about misreading text.
There are many ways to describe a movie like Midsommar. "Feminist propaganda" isn't one of them.
@@michaelstrong5383but woman character, therefore woke.
"Imagine if the female lead was [Spoilers for the ending] drugged and coerced into sex.
Don't think that would have been seen as bad behaviour on her part"
No one said it was his fault either.
Yeah i stumble upon the same video, and to this day i still baffled on how someone could make that connection
Media literacy part: I'm not counting anymore.
Funnily enough YMS review and Critcal Drinker review of Opphenheimer were actually pretty similar in the positives and negatives they found with it.
Team up when?
@@partypooper737 how is that hypocritical?
@@brycelovescoom4155It’s not, Critical Drinker fans don’t succeed in the marketplace of ideas, so when they see their king getting deconstructed for his illogical they have no choice but to practice mental gymnastics. The person you replied to will not answer your question.
@@za-ir5niwell it is a movie about a toy that says patriarchy like a dozen times. That's a little silly.
@@aaronjustice9020 i can also boil down oppenheimer to a film about a guy that makes a bomb and then is upset about making a bomb
his honesty started out as refreshing until it veered too far into misogyny… the Sound of Freedom narrative was the last straw for me
I love this guy's thing of "writers are so prickly and defensive of writing female leads, they have to be independent and self-reliant and great at everything"
Yeah, tell that to all the horror movies since early slasher films having female leads/focuses where THE WHOLE THING IS THEM BEING WEAK AND FRAGILE/USELESS.
Imagine if people starting making horror movies with strong male leads. You could probably do it in a way that isn't boring. But no one does. It's ALWAYS weak-portrayed females. Dude is making a wide argument and trying to cover ground he doesn't even pay attention to/has no idea about.
Every time I read a horror movie description I roll my eyes at the first sign of "she" or "her" in the description. There are really terrifying movies that have male leads, young boys, teenagers. It doesn't have to always be some re-used for the 4000th time female-in-her-30s who lives alone. A lot of genres need an update to the way they're designed and lot of the more "important" ones like action films, CGI giants and other stuff got more of the "feminist" treatment, it feels like, because it's more directly in the public eye.
I'm gonna disagree with Adum about it being bad faith to ask Drinker on a stream to back up a claim he made and laughing when he doesn't. The dude was saying how Japanese movies are dunking on American films. He was asked for an example and couldn't provide. Not even an anime. I think thats a greenlight for some ribbing.
Honestly the only films I can confidently say that I preferred much over American films this year alone is Shin Ultraman and Shin Kamen Rider. Saw them both in theaters and immediately wanted to rewatch them again even though it was one night only. Even then, I'm just a huge fan of Hideaki Anno. His works are just amazing and I really enjoy them all. Everything else is mostly anime and Godzilla films. So not much that I can really say are dunking and more just personal preference. Plus if Japan truly is dunking on American films then the upcoming Godzilla Minus One film, that's in subtitles, should be doing a one month sweep.
There's a reoccuring trend amongst right-leaning figures (not just in film and TV but also video games) who have this idealized view of Japan as this bastion of "non-woke" culture. As woke means absolutely nothing what this exactly means is up to the individual standpoint of whomever claims it, but I've seen it happen too many times to not at least notice that it does happen.
@@SylentVoidkeeperAnd every once in a while a "woke" japanese work shows up like Kamen Rider Black Sun just to throw a big cold shower on these people
@@BlazingOwnager I think your problem is with marketing.
@@BlazingOwnager maybe. this isn't a new thing tho. I feel movies have had many "preachy" moments throughout history and feels dishonest to say "Hollywood has been taken over by the wokies". I can't think of a single timeline when movies weren't pushing progressive ideas. I get countered with "not like today" followed by assuming filmmakers intent and motivation in "getting the kids to be woke".
Why does no one talk about Annihilation as a movie that shows good female characters. It's a 2018 film and the people talking about "no female representation in films" didn't even prop up this film.
Critical Drinker did a video about that. He mentioned that if you want to make a sci-fi led by women that doesn't alienate male viewers it is the best way you go about it. But in the end said that it is dumb, pretentious and should have an intelligent story with a clear satisfying payoff that ties everything together. Critical Drinker seems to have a real struggle with subtext or anything that is not clear and obvious.
@@Thebluespiritx he literally said in his midsommar review that he thinks analyzing themes is a waste of time 😂no wonder he couldn't understand that movie either
Annihilation isn't exactly riddled with subtext and deep theme-ing, let's be real.@@Thebluespiritx
@@Vulgarth1 The main theme of the movie is about change, both inward and outward. I haven't seen the movie in quite a while but what i remember is there is talk of cancer, one character has cancer. Cancer changes things in your body as does the shimmer change the planet and it's nature. Natalie Portmans character cheats on Oscar Issacs character they are changed by that experience, in the end they are not the same persons and their relationship has changed as well.
Adum's having a hard time describing what is essentially just "culture war".
Just say that and everything is explained. It's just "culture war" content. It's a very profitable brand of content that discusses every type of popular entertainment through the current cultural-political lens. That's it.
Because he is arguing in good faith, and also isn't deep in the weeds like the terminally online "anti-woke" freaks like Brand and Drinker.
I think the more appropriate word is "dog whistle" in that some of Critical Drinker's content is a "dog whistle" for socio-cultural issues.
I'm 99% certain that Drinker is NOT actually a social conservative (maybe a fiscal conservative, but it doesn't really matter what label best suits his ideologies). Yet I'm 99% certain he's aware that some of his opinions of popular media overlap with the opinions of socially conservative people who watch his videos. Despite that, Drinker pretends as if he has followed the same track of reasoning as those individuals, trusting that those people are too stupid to realize that two people can hold the same stance on something while disagreeing on the premises of that stance.
The live action Little Mermaid movie that came out a while back was actually so easy for Critical Drinker to exploit. While most people who disliked the live action Little Mermaid movie were not bigoted, most bigots disliked the live action Little Mermaid movie.
@@youtubeviolatedme7123It's actually very easily explained by the algorithm. Most youtubers started out doing content they themselves believe in, then once they see what kind of content helps them grow, they'll inevitably lean towards that kind of content. That's why it's extremely hard for even the most principled creators to stay true to themselves and not go further and further into one echo chamber or another.
In the case of Drinker, I gave him a LOT of credit for going in-depth to praise Arcane as being very socially conscious, political and diverse, but done right.
I used to follow quite a few youtubers on the "antiwoke" side, and as soon as Arcane dropped, I knew it was going to be the best litmus test to tell apart those who were genuine when they said they welcome diversity and political themes that are done right, and those who are actually opposed to diversity as a concept and hate anything that may tackle progressive political themes, even if done right. Without fail, every channel just chose to ignore Arcane, except Drinker and the efap crew with Mauler.
So I dropped every other channel, because they had proven themselves lacking basic principles. Kind of sad to see Drinker leaning to heavily into the overtly conservative-pandering side though.
@@GeneralTaco155555a u dont need to be arguing in good faith to be dismissive of things that are very clearly cynical political cash grabs. im not speaking in bad faith when i say ghostbusters is just a bunch of bad feminism takes masquerading as a movie like 3 kids in a trench coat at the R-rated movie.
for the sake of our mental health, we dont need to dignify such buzzbartbreitfeed garbage
@@youtubeviolatedme7123he's not a social traditionalist, but hes definitely a conservative, in that his ideas ARE the status quo. he's a reactionary
I think it's really funny that Russel Brand is continuously asking about examples for his 6 year old daughters and Critical Drinker replies: Ripley and Sarah Conner as if your going to show a 6 year old Alien or Terminator.
@@BlazingOwnager current modern wokeism is very corporate and capitalistic, that's the problem. It's not genuine.
Terminator 2 was the first movie I ever saw and yeah I'm in jail but I turned out fine
They don't know or care to know any other examples, it's the misogynist movie goer's equivalent of "I have a black friend"
Except guys like Drinker did see these characters at that age. Parents and older siblings were a lot more lax about T2 or Aliens at the time.
Drinker was asked live and gave an answer off the cuff, seems rather unfair to get on his case.
I think his point about there not being any "movie stars" any more is that studios would trust stars to be able to guide an original concept or character into profitability. So in that way, more original ideas and scripts got made if they thought they could bank on a big name star. Today, they're more likely to bank on a famous character than a celebrity.
You say that. But even in the Mario Movie the filled the cast with big names. And Mario has astronomically more star power than any actor
@@tevenpowell8023 That's true, but did they really need to fill it with celebrities? It's impossible to know for sure, although I don't think that swapping out a few of them with unknown voice-actors would have made much of a difference in its success.
@@Jumbleman5 I think my point was to show that, while the line is moving, Hollywood isn't completely comfortable banking solely on character recognition yet.
They could have saved alot of money and probably gotten better performances hiring professional voice actors, and it might not have effected the sales numbers at all. But even with a brand as recognized as Mario they spent boatloads of extra money for that extra Actor Star Power boost
RedLetterMedia says the same thing…
@@ringbearer1420 Do they actually go into why it's a bad thing? Or do they do what Drinker does, and just kinda imply it's a bad thing?
This guy talks about mary sues like action heroes in the 80s werent.
I'm sorry, what?
I don’t hate Critical Drinker, but I did unsub him a while back. Channels like his and Endymion really feel like one trick pony’s.
Oh Endymion
So did I...and this channel too.. The voice...oh my God, this guy's voice is something else...I used to get headaches for days on end..😢
Clicked this up to just watch this Buzz between them..
OMFG the drinker has such trash takes that are based on a crumb of material conditions thereby seemingly making them legitimate. It's all just anti-woke brainrot. I do appreciate Adam criticizing him and get why walking on eggshells might help mitigate backlash, but this felt almost too kind.
The thin crop of movies he pulls from is what bugged me more than the anti-woke post-GamerGate stuff. If you wanna be a cynical shithead about movies turning evil and woke, you should at least watch stuff other than the MCU.
I’ve always liked how Adam does reaction videos. It’s nice to see someone going in depth with discussion instead of just letting a video play while they go to the toilet
Hasan chair won this debate.
What she he do d00d DIE?!?!?. Man he is such a crybaby. He's like a Leftist Elon
Hey man, Hasan's chair is very insightful. It certainly has more brain cells than he does.
@@thatnoobnextdoor I like his soup bowl better
@@thatnoobnextdoorbro you have noob in your name quit talking shit like you got the right
Let's not forget Chad Stahelski (director of the John Wick franchise) admitted to watching The Critical Drinker on the Joe Rogan Experience.
Oh my God, send him to prison! He can't do that!
HES SUPPOSSED TO AN ALLIE NOOOO!!!! You see this why John wick needed to bet pounded out from behind by Bill skarsgard in the end credit scene. So many bigoted little anti expression nazis
@@jonbaxter2254 I'm not trying to incriminate Chad lmao. Just pointing out the Drinker's reach.
@@bovinejoannie9429the fuck? I just had a stroke trying to read your comment.
@@jonbaxter2254nobody is saying he can't. Stop crying oppression when there is none. I got sick of that with liberals, and now you conservatives sound the same way.
I knew it! These people are still so friggen mad about The Last Jedi! Another thing to add to the list of conservative triggers
Love to see it.
It does suck, though.
@taliad.1020 while I don't disagree with you that it's terrible, one should point the elephant in the room and point out that it's his bashing of the Star Wars sequels that made his channel what it is today.
It's actually how I found him back in 2017
Anyone with that haircut outside of the military is such a red flag lol