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

[Otis Boi]

Also I have some significant criticism I have for him is that he isn't really addressing his critics' point (or at least the most substantial version) in his newest video and it eats up about an hour of time.
When people bring up an objection towards an objective way of valuing or analyzing a movie their essential issue is that any objective approach can be dismissed because of the subjective nature of art. If you want to defeat that point you'll need to make an argument as to why art is not subjective (as in some criteria by which it can be appreciated) or demonstrate the value of your "subjective" standard.
Personally, I would've just ignored your critics in for this series because I don't see how that section adds to your analysis of TFA.

Honestly I think you are right. No amount of analyzing,nitpicking deconstructing is going to influence someone who only views art(video games,movies books ect.) as a form of entertainment or escapism. I think he might not grasp the fact that all of his "DEEP ANALYSIS" can just be hand waved away by some dude saying "I don't know i enjoyed it and though it was good." Objectivity doesn't matter for much when it comes to something that is highly subjective as Art and will subjectivity is subjective. You will always find someone who enjoys a shit movie/video game/book and they will honestly tell you they think it good.

 

[JuanButNotForgotten]

I'm somewhat ok with that. His SOMA vs Amnesia series was very informative, though he could edit it into something shorter.

 

[Agent Nahman Jayden]

I'm gonna chime in and agree with that the length of his videos are good for background while I'm doing other things.

IMO though (hah geddit), I think his most recent video with its whopping hour of deconstructing criticisms towards him and in general is a little superfluous but at least someone else called out Quinton for being a cuck.

 

[Man vs persistent rat]

I think he has a good point in that the more information you dump to support your argument, the less the snarky little tards like hbomberguy can dismiss it without looking like fools (tl;dr lol). I don't think his content is meant to be entertaining in the Plinket sense, I view it more as a way of informing people who have similar views and who themselves might want to dive in with shorter-form argumentative content. Mauler's own content is more special-interest.

 

[Brother Rabbit]

I watched a couple of his videos, while they do tend to be a bit longer than most movie analyst videos I like having them on in the background while I'm doing other stuff. I personally like his The Predator the best (mainly because I'm not a huge star wars fan).

 

[Meowthkip]

If you're going to make videos that fucking long, at least try and make me laugh so that I stick around. Amuse me. Entertain me, goddammit.

There's so much richness going on in the Plinkett reviews by comparison; they're not just film critiques, but also a commentary on the obsessive nature of people who are like Mauler. The reviews themselves become art.

Mauler plays his critiques completely straight. There's not much in the way of fun or whimsy. No matter how substantial his criticisms may be, watching them is just a chore.

 

[Stab You in the Back]

I'm struggling to get through his Force Awakens review because the first hour is nothing but him being a smug douche about objectivity, trashing other reviewers for expressing opinions he disagrees with, and being triggered about the phrase 'Brevity is the soul of wit.'

"My reviews will take exactly as long as it is necessary for them to take," he claims after spending an hour ranting about dumb shit like an idiot.

 

[cecograph]

I listened to a few of his videos while doing other things. I couldn't tell you much about the videos in detail, but I caught a few bits that sounded reasonable. Ironically, I only watched the latest Star Wars films while doing other things, and I'm not really sure what happened in them either. Space ships?

 

[Goku 1000000 O]

I'm somewhat ok with that. His SOMA vs Amnesia series was very informative, though he could edit it into something shorter.

That review of his is great despite its length.
It’s better structured, well researched, and the points made are done in a concise manner.

Looking at his Star Wars reviews give me the impression that he has way more time to work on these projects and that may be why they’re more long-winded. Which is more to its detriment than its benefit.

 

[Man of the Sea]

I'm struggling to get through his Force Awakens review because the first hour is nothing but him being a smug douche about objectivity, trashing other reviewers for expressing opinions he disagrees with, and being triggered about the phrase 'Brevity is the soul of wit.'

"My reviews will take exactly as long as it is necessary for them to take," he claims after spending an hour ranting about dumb shit like an idiot.

You might not have noticed the timecode in the critique saying that you can skip to a specific timecode to skip the stuff that is not related to star wars. And I actually think he's being pretty even handed about objectivity, saying that he can make mistakes and even shows examples of his own mistakes.

 

[Man vs persistent rat]

And I actually think he's being pretty even handed about objectivity, saying that he can make mistakes and even shows examples of his own mistakes.

An example of how his style works so well (using a broad range of details to describe his opinion on a certain element instead of focusing on a zinger point) can be found in the intro to his third TLJ, when he corrects a few mistakes he had made, but after these corrections his points remain much the same, as he had already stated numerous other reasons for feeling how he does about the element in question.

 

[Absolutego]

Look, when you make Moviebob's trademark lack of brevity in his Batman V. Superman analysis look reasonable by comparison, I'm gonna say you are in dire need of better editing. The Last Jedi isn't so intricately terrible that it takes 5 HOURS of discussion to outline what's wrong with it.

Mauler's stuff reminds me a lot of Reetae's reviews of LOST, wherein he kept re-stating and re-proving points he already made. You don't have to point to literally every single example of a given point when you've already made your case.

 

[Stab You in the Back]

You might not have noticed the timecode in the critique saying that you can skip to a specific timecode to skip the stuff that is not related to star wars. And I actually think he's being pretty even handed about objectivity, saying that he can make mistakes and even shows examples of his own mistakes.

How deep into the weeds do you really want me to get? He spends a solid 15 minutes explaining what a title crawl is before going off on an hour long line-by-line rant about why TFA's sucks. Here's the thing: "Brevity is the soul of wit" is not a condemnation of the breadth, depth or meticulousness of one's argument, but merely a call to GET TO THE FUCKING POINT. Its hard to agree or disagree with Mauler's conclusions because by the time he gets to them I'm mentally exhausted from all the endless droning I've had to endure.

 

[Man vs persistent rat]

How deep into the weeds do you really want me to get? He spends a solid 15 minutes explaining what a title crawl is before going off on an hour long line-by-line rant about why TFA's sucks. Here's the thing: "Brevity is the soul of wit" is not a condemnation of the breadth, depth or meticulousness of one's argument, but merely a call to GET TO THE FUCKING POINT. Its hard to agree or disagree with Mauler's conclusions because by the time he gets to them I'm mentally exhausted from all the endless droning I've had to endure.

Can't it just not be your cup of tea rather than being bad? With heavy editing his videos would still be good, and would be more accessible (even more so if he added memes and jokes), but they would be worse at what they currently provide (exhaustive coverage from many angles). He does repeat some observations when relevant to an individual point, but I haven't noticed him doing it unnecessarily, though perhaps I am just more accepting of his manner, repetition and all.

 

[Lensherr]

Look, when you make Moviebob's trademark lack of brevity in his Batman V. Superman analysis look reasonable by comparison, I'm gonna say you are in dire need of better editing. The Last Jedi isn't so intricately terrible that it takes 5 HOURS of discussion to outline what's wrong with it.

Mauler's stuff reminds me a lot of Reetae's reviews of LOST, wherein he kept re-stating and re-proving points he already made. You don't have to point to literally every single example of a given point when you've already made your case.

Which is why I found it odd that in the MovieBob thread, he was rightly raked over the coals for his meandering diatribe, but in that same thread MauLer was praised for his.

 

[verissimus]

@AnAccount You missed the stated point of the upcoming videos then. I'm pretty sure he explicitly stated, he isn't concerned how you felt about watching or enjoying some movie (or what so have you). If he did, then he would be doing the exact thing that he and others blasted people like Patrick Willem were doing (i.e. your watching movies the wrong way).

What I got out of it (other than being too long was), was that there is a generally objective (or put another way, some kind of generally accepted standard) way to observe and/or analyze story-telling especially in regards to The Last Jedi. In particular whether the movie is consistent with pre-established Star Wars rules or if the actions and behaviors of characters at least seem consistent. I will admit, that I think he is way over his head to go even this far since consistency in story-telling isn't something either fans or even creators always desire, but I certainly do think there are guidelines with regards to dealing with those kinds of stories that want to be as consistent with the rules it has or wants to establish as possible.

 

[ure_mum]

Someone on /tv/ (maybe even he himself, who knows) kept shilling his TLJ videos like crazy at some point and for that reason alone I refuse to watch his shit. But also, he can try to justify his 3 hour long introduction to a however long series as much as he likes, but that to me stinks of only catering to a side that hates the movie anyway. And I feel that just feeds into those people only using arguments from this one source, which will eventually mean you can dismiss any critisism by calling them an autistic MauLer fanboy (a version of this can be found with RLM's Plinkett reviews of the prequels). Not entirely his fault, ofc, but it will happen.

 

[Goku 1000000 O]

How deep into the weeds do you really want me to get? He spends a solid 15 minutes explaining what a title crawl is before going off on an hour long line-by-line rant about why TFA's sucks. Here's the thing: "Brevity is the soul of wit" is not a condemnation of the breadth, depth or meticulousness of one's argument, but merely a call to GET TO THE FUCKING POINT. Its hard to agree or disagree with Mauler's conclusions because by the time he gets to them I'm mentally exhausted from all the endless droning I've had to endure.

That whole bit about "Brevity is the soul of wit" is a really great example of him spending way too much time on a point and getting absolutely obsessive about things.
I don't know why he felt the need to defend himself this much or why its in this video series specifically. And if I was him I would just work on making better thorough analysis' of films, and leave it at that.

 

[MarvinTheParanoidAndroid]

He really needs to learn to condense himself. Maybe then I'll watch his videos. Also I find his a-logging of recent Star Wars movies kind of sad.

EDIT: Just to be clear, I have nothing against long-form video essays on movies, TV, and video games. I think RedLetterMedia's Plinkett Reviews are some of the best YouTube videos of all time, but even he manages a certain degree of succinctness.

Plinkett also knows how to write a joke.

 

[Shitassdeaddude]

Seems a little concerned with the size of his e-peen given how he spends an hour bitching about people bitching about him, but at least he provided a timestamp to skip past all of that shit. Still, he could have shaved that hour off and made it into its own video.

I've watched some of his other stuff, but I can't get through any of them if I don't have something else to distract my eyeballs, like a video game or some shit. I treat it like a podcast. Something to listen to while I'm off doing other things. I remember a lot of his points but I couldn't tell you any of his specific arguments, it all sort of blends together into a grey british mish-mosh. He'd definitely appeal to a wider audience if he trimmed down his shit, but he doesn't really seem like he gives a shit about who watches him.