>Wow, they just like to review shit no one cares about now huh
That's Jay and Beardo. Jay on his own would just review horror films, David Lynch, b-movies, and such. the channel blew up because Mike likes to b***h about Star Wars and Star Trek. You get some sense from the Mike-less ReViews what a Jay centered show would be like. It would be decent views but pretty niche. Likely like 10K views per video.
The frick is this >Beardfat
I'll pass.
I watch their shit at like 3.0 speed to get thorugh it.
Jay's taste in film is at least entertaining and is usually films that could provoke discussion. Mike and Rich are the normiest normies this side of Normieville.
As opposed to what exactly? Modern cinema is in shambles there is nothing out worth seeing
It's all woke shit and children's films genres and subgenres don't exist anymore you aren't getting any Evil under the suns or Shawshank redemptions anymore
Exactly. They've always been "too cool for school" and too good for their own audience. But it finally dawned on me what insufferable, unlikable nerds they were when I was listening to the Ghostbusters 2 commentary where they kept talking about how, even as fricking 8 year olds, they hated everything about it and thought it sucked... in 1989. One trick pony frauds. Muh Star Trak, muh atheism, yet another thing where this board always calls shit literally plebbit. I got bad news for ya Cinemaphile... RLM is LiTeRaLlY plebbit!
She was so sexy in the bee outfit god fricking damn I am SO FRICKING JEALOUS of Mike you know he's rawdogging that every night he doesn't pass out from drinking too much
1. You don't know which if any of them do or do not have kids. Jack has kids, he's talked about them numerous times. Rich has a girlfriend, pretty sure Mike is banging Jessie (I think she really quit because the comments were getting creepy, but she's actually still there. You hear her a couple times in some of the more recent commentary tracks, so she's staying behind the camera.)
2. I honestly think some of them are gay. I'm not going to point fingers, but Jay said in the episode where they review Neighborhood Watch that he's been to gay orgies, and the orgy in the movie wasn't gay so I mean, if the shoe fits... but I think a few of the others attended them with him. It might be how they all met.
>You hear her a couple times in some of the more recent commentary tracks
No you don’t. You hear her very briefly on the Ghostbusters 2 commentary which is from almost a decade ago at this point
Frick you Rich is based and forms a core part of the dynamic between the hosts. The bald dude is also fun and so are the canadians when they show up on occasion.
The fat bearded dude is boring tho.
I hope Redlettermedia dies. They know nobody gives a ratass about this bullshit movie. They know people pestered them to review Batman and even gave their shitty comment a hundred thousand likes. It's almost like a troll on their Patreon fanbase. Give us money so we can haphazardly release videos (4 a month, only...and that's if you're lucky) and do stuff nobody cares about. They can't even do a BOTW anymore because they'll refuse to watch more than one film..frick them
no, I hate these guys NOW...they were great. 2020 was so-so and they kind of said frick it to going out because of COVID..2021 was a bit of a decline..now its shlock. this whole year has been bad. Mike looked drunk out of his mind during those Picard reviews which were utter nonsense
>Cinemaphile in 2012: >"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
>Cinemaphile in 2013: >"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
>Cinemaphile in 2014: >"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
>Cinemaphile in 2015: >"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
>Cinemaphile in 2016: >"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
>Cinemaphile in 2017: >"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
>Cinemaphile in 2018: >"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
>Cinemaphile in 2019: >"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
>Cinemaphile in 2020: >"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
>Cinemaphile in 2021: >"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
You homosexuals have been making the same moronic complaints literally since RLM first started. Is this some sort of coping mechanism? Like you're all so deeply embarrassed to unironically use RLM as a friend simulator that you overcompensate by pretending to hate them (while still watching every video they put out and memorizing every comment they've ever made)?
From 2020 there were obvious changes though, look at the streaming slop, tv shows they review now compared to the big movies they'd see the years before. We saw this coming from Mike saying he hates movie theaters and wish they died, that's also why they didn't review Top Gun because he brought the masses back for non capeshit.
>From 2020 there were obvious changes though
Hm I wonder what was happening in the world in 2020 that would cause a shift in people's lives?
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Hmmm i wonder hehe I’m being sarcastic like my heroes Mike and Jay
Mike was too busy crying about Picard to watch anything else
2 years ago
Anonymous
It's not about the why or its inevitability it's just that it did happen and it made the channel worse unlike previous years where there were no major changes.
bro, i really liked batman but i don't blame them for refusing to review it because of spergs like you. it's good, you already like it, what more can they even tell you about it?
so you want them to tell you what to think about a movie you've already seen and that you already like? why? just form your own opinions, talk about it with your friends if you have any, and then move on with your life.
So you want them to say the same exact shit about star wars they have said for 20 years? Or how about another 40 hours of saying new star trek isn’t episodic and that makes autistic Mike cry?
i don't care. get a grip, quit b***hing about batman and move on you loser.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Just form your own opinions on Star Wars sweatie.
2 years ago
Anonymous
i couldn't care less about star wars, ive never watched a single one. are you just bored or something? why continue to argue for no reason? watch rlm or don't, like them or don't, i don't care. just stop b***hing about the batman, you're making me not like the film now by association.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>I couldn’t care less! MIKE AND JAY ARE MY GODS AND THEY ARE INFALLIBLE
Boring.
When Rich Evans admitted in the Who Framed Roger Rabbit Re:View episode that he hadn't seen Chinatown, I finally realized that any RedLetterMedia opinion could be discarded. Evans is the co-host of one of the most popular YouTube film criticism channels, and he hasn't seen a famous, universally heralded Hollywood classic. This isn't one of those "artsy" movies that they make fun of Jay for liking. It's one of the best movies Hollywood has made in the last fifty years, with a screenplay that is usually considered the best. After Rich casually mentioned not having seen it and that he really didn't care to see it (and Jay just letting that slide), I knew none of them were serious at all about movies.
>Evans is the co-host of one of the most popular YouTube film criticism channels, and he hasn't seen a famous, universally heralded Hollywood classic.
But they're not high brow guys though. They mostly just watch stuff they grew up with and like to reminisce about. Rich isn't very sophisticated at all. That's kind of the appeal? It's very formal and well edited, but it comes down to some guys talking about their favorite movies.
Compared to what Rich and Mike likes? They would never see it in a million years. They mostly just gush about what they're nostalgic about from their childhoods and don't look deeper than that. They have no interest in "classic" cinema.
He's truly a mystery and it's wonderful. He's both annoying and funny, both dull and creative. Sometimes he shocks you with clever rewrites of plots and makes them sound infinitely more hilarious. Sometimes he misunderstands the most basic steps of logic.
This. In fact, I'm gonna go ahead and say that I personally think Rich is the worst member of the crew. Even though Beardfat takes things too seriously, he always sounds like he knows what he's talking about and he showed several times that he has technological knowledge and AIDSmoby offers insightful commentary many times. Rich manages to be both an embarassing nerd and seemingly have no real input into the movies they're talking about and is only there because he's Mike's friend. When Mike isn't around to put him down, he acts like an obnoxious prick and the only real value he offers is that he does the grunt work for them (buying merchandise for videos, building props, etc). He's basically their employee and is only in videos because Mike likes him.
if mike represents the jaded self-aware gen xer and jay is the film dweeb crowd rich evans represents the midwestern working man, wise but not always smart.
I hadn't seen Chinatown when I was a 14 year old arguing with other nerds about how hyperdrive works with other nerds around the lunch table, so however many RLMs see it the lower the fidelity of their simulation of that would become and the less I'd want to watch
What about as a 44-year-old arguing with other 44-year-old nerds about how films were and are being made? Have you seen Chinatown then? Would you consider it lowers your fidelity, you high-tuned turntable?
Their last few re:Views have been for Who Framed Roger Rabbit and new Star Wars crap. So they do some big stuff then the occassional obscure thing. What's the problem?
Okay real talk. Kids in the Hall are deadass lame. They're just not that funny or interesting. It's one of those SNL knock-offs from Canada and I wish it had stayed there. Brain candy is just absolutely dreadful experience on par with the worst SNL films.
Yeah they just aren't that funny. They were an SNL ripoff who really wanted to be the next Monty Python.
I always thought they were generally pretty homosexual.
It's extremely low-brow humor and it's all completely obvious jokes. Every single character actor in the troupe plays the exact same "character" in every single sketch. >the gay guy >the schizophrenic short guy who doesn't blink >the straight-man who wears a suit >the guy who speaks falsetto with curly hair >...there's other guys? I guess?
That's it.
And they desperately try, and reference explicitly, how Monty Python was their influence and how badly they wanted to be revered like those guys. But not only was the sketch comedy poorly written, it was even more poorly performed.
this movie is very unfunny to me. they've already mentioned many times that they are huge fans of tim and eric, which may be the least funny show ever to be made, so i guess i get why they like this drek. still, i would have preferred a review on say, fear and loathing or leaving las vegas or hell, even fightclub, instead of a bad comedy flop only they have seen.
I never found Kids in the Hall to be that funny. Jay and fat guy keep saying "oh this is funny and this is funny oh i laughed so hard!!!" and they play a clip and none of this shit is even making me crack a smile. It's a little bewildering.
I liked it in high school but tried to re-watch it and it's really lame. And Brain Candy is especially dreadful. There is nothing lamer than a comeyd that doesn't make you laugh but thinks it's being very quirky and clever.
So most of the Kids in the Hall sketches are just funny voice characters with simple punchlines and a lot of irony and sarcasm.
I mean. I can see why it was funny in (looks up airdate) 1988, but this is the best they did? A comedy troupe of comedians who write their own comedy and act their own comedy...
... made a sketch about 5 stereotypes where the single joke was contrarian thought about a homosexual only thinking about sex, but he's in fact thoughtful to suggest feeding pets food and discussing problems instead of fighting about them. Literally one-liner thoughts, btw, and just those two. >No, it's funny because it looks like Protestant Christian boys are singing about the myth of a Running homosexual but nothing in the myth depicts his homosexualry. Ironic!
Hysterical.
I can't picture Mike talking to Josh off camera. I can't imagine a single conversation between the two where Mike is able to hide his contempt or bond with him beyond simple platitudes.
He probably would have bullied the bald frick in high school.
Josh is kept solely because he actually tries to 'review' films on BotW. If he didn't, YT would frick them for not actually reviewing the films. So he is essentially the 'straight man' to keep the show 'credible' whilst the others (bar Rich) get drunk.
Also sometimes I want to know what the actual plot of the film is, not see Mike trying to make jokes about a scene I haven't seen to make Rich or Jay laugh. He isn't 'funny' but Josh plays his part.
Hey Super Satan >their pretentiousness anymore
Josh has to act like he knows everything about everything. It was probably his defining characteristic in High School and he never grew out of it.
Jay is probably living in an alternate fantasy land where he made creative and surreal movies that people liked.
Both of them suck at improv and jokes but at least Jay is humble and stays quiet when funnier people are having fun, plus he laughs a lot and has good points sometimes.
>sequel >forth sequel >who knows what fricking number sequel >season fricking FOUR >something nobody has ever heard of
oh boy, theres just a ton of stuff for them to review! thanks for your input.
the movie is actually pretty good too
subversive and ahead of it's time, predicting the mass reliance on medication and how the powers that be would use it nefariously
This vid and the movie they chose to discuss so perfectly encapsulates their personalities. Jay KNOWS he could never earn a living talking about shit like this if it weren’t for the success of Mike and his Plinkett reviews.
So I take it Josh was Jay’s friend and Jay introduced him to Mike?
Cause there’s no fricking way Mike ever liked this guy. In a decade of making videos, Mike and Josh have barely appeared on camera together. They’ve never done a vid to get her.
Yes, he's Jay's friend and they like the same type of films. Think of this as a mini-Jay run film review show that runs under the RLM banner.
Yeah they just aren't that funny. They were an SNL ripoff who really wanted to be the next Monty Python.
I always thought they were generally pretty homosexual.
I liked it as a kid and teen, but looking back it's hella lame. But to be honest a lot of Monty Python doesn't work. But the best Monty Python is still hilarious, and their movies are still lightyears ahead of Brain Candy.
I can tell you're not Canadian. They are probably one of the only real television series that Canada actually produced that had any viability outside of Canada and they were heavily promoted inside Canada.
I've never seen this movie. I guess I'll see their favorite clips as they show and comment on it, right? >See the clips >"...NOTHING is funny? It's all completely straightforward jokes about being buttholes. That's it?"
And they love this, claiming even the first 2/3rds is REALLY REALLY REALLY GOOD! Comparing it to being like Monty Python and The Holy Grail, laughing at the mere appearance of "Kids in the Hall" actors being on screen, not even speaking a line. And they try talking about this movies "plot?"
This movie is not funny. At all.
This "review" is also not funny. At all.
The movie bombed because even fans of the series think it's weird and not entertaining. It also had a very strange premise that was hard to sell. It's not about a bunch of characters doing things.
>Speaking about Dad coming home to kill himself >Asks the son if he did his chores >Yup! >"That is, probably one of my favorite elongated bits in the entire movie!"
This is stupid.
This is really dumb.
>"Most of my favorite things on the original show was the more cinematic things." >"Oh, God! Like, the dream, about the peaches!" >"...I don't remember those." >"Oh, there were about pears, my bad." >*clip is shown about pear dream and being insane* >"So I was excited about the movie! For that!"
This is pointless.
They HAD to be paid or influenced to be talking about Kid in the Hall, right now. This is not funny in the least. It's not offensive, it's literally just plain boring and stupid.
>Jay: "I immediately can recognize the Canadian. All these Canadian character actors. And one of those Canadian actresses who plays a groupie in the film as an actress who is one of the leads in the Canadian movie 'Cube!' They're SO recognizable! And then the other one I know she has a prominent role in George Romero's 'Land of the Dead,' which was shot in Toronto. So." >Other guy: "And wasn't the other one, the brunette, wasn't she also play the girlfriend in the original show? She played Bobby's girlfried!" >Jay: "Oh, okay!"
>Mike inserts the required note about how that "recognizable Canadian actress from so many Canadian parts and roles in movies like the famous "Cube" or a little bit in "Land of the Dead" >IS, FRICKING, "DAX" FROM DEEP SPACE NINE >Nothing "Canadian" AT ALL
Jay and his buddies don't watch Star Trek so they are like cartoonishly ignorant of it. I find it baffling that they haven't even seen like a top 10 eps list provided by Mike and Rich. TNG was so insanely mainstream you pretty much have to of actively avoided it to not know anything about it.
Jay and his buddies don't watch Star Trek so they are like cartoonishly ignorant of it. I find it baffling that they haven't even seen like a top 10 eps list provided by Mike and Rich. TNG was so insanely mainstream you pretty much have to of actively avoided it to not know anything about it.
>IS, FRICKING, "DAX" FROM DEEP SPACE NINE
Dax 2 the boring one.
For a guy who claims to love obscure films and his ability to point out the history of background groupies of girls from the move "Brain Candy" and even what city those movies those girls played in were shot at...
...doesn't know she was also the character "Dax" from "Star Trek: Deep Space 9" is getting really pretentious.
>Y-you know that part in the RLM video where they said the thing? That thing they said was so...stupid. Like, jeez they're boring and stupid. They said something and I thought it was dumb.
I don't think this movie is particularly funny, though it has a few moments, what works for me though is that it feels like a fever dream. It's unlike any other movie. It is so fricking strange that I can't help but like it on that alone.
I didn't know Kids in the Hall made a movie. This was really lame to watch. The only funny part was the idea Jay seems to know a lot about background characters but didn't know she was a named character in the regular cast of Deep Space 9. And by funny, I mean it's mocking and ironic to have to point out something so obvious.
Exactly. It's like, >Jonathan Taylor Thomas, who everybody knew in the 90s as JTT, was so famous and starred in so many things! I recognize his voice as Pinocchio in New Line Cinema's adaptation of the famous myth. I also immediately knew who it was when he showed up in 3 episodes from Fox's In Living Color alongside Jim Carrey, famous for being white on the show! He's also famous for directing 3 episodes of Last Man Standing. And, you might not have known this, but he was ALSO the voice of the lion in that cartoon movie Lion Serengeti or something. >Jay, he appeared in basically every single episode of Home Improvement, where he was the middle son of Tim "The Tool-Man" Tayler. That sitcom aired for almost 10 years straight. He was in 179 episodes. >Oh. I never watched that.
I mean, shit, dude.
I only mean, if Jay is going to pinpoint his (impressively) ranged knowledge that he knew these actress from films like "Cube" or small parts in others, even tossing in the city these films take place in, highlighting his Canadian connection, then it's (impressively) stupid to not be informed enough to be aware of her outrageously most famous casting and appearance.
It's like knowing Bill Clinton was the governor of Arkansas from 1979-1981 and again from 1983-1992, he's a Yale Law School graduate, and it was famous he got a blowjob from Monica Lewinski.
But then, being told he was the President of the United States for 8 years, his shocking response is >Oh. Well, I just knew him as a politician, I guess. The Monica Lewinski thing was his best thing. I've never voted.
Don't tell me Jay has read the credits to every film he's ever watched, remembers the actresses' names and that's how he makes the connection. That his memory is photographic, especially in regards to text, with a brain that recalls even the city a movie he's once watched as a teenager as instantaneously relevant to his film discussion about a woman's acting career, drawing audience-relevant connections to where you could have seen this person elsewhere.
But never knew she was in 25 episodes of Deep Space 9 as Dax, which she is universally most famous for alongside her part in "cult" film Cube.
For a nerd review show famous for its nerd reviews of Star Wars and Star Trek and its strong focus on 80s and 90s "cult" films, to see one of its main hosts bring up obscure role information for unnamed side-characters appearing in a single scene for the Kids in the Hall movie "Brain Candy" all wildly tangential and shockingly inferential... it's not endearing for one of those film review hosts to be genuinely unaware of that very same person's role in dozens of episodes in the main cast of Star Trek.
I enjoy talking tl;dr, so I get your implication I'm "really upset," but I hope some level exaggeration points out just how lame these film-reviews are and must-have-been. It's what they're famous for, and yet are impressively ignorant about.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Jay doesn't watch Star Trek though and he doesn't pretend to. That's Mike and Rich's thing. Why would anyone expect him to recognize a one season character from one of the least known Star Trek shows, a franchise he has no interest in at all?
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Why would anyone expect him to recognize a one season character from one of the least known Star Trek shows, a franchise he has no interest in at all?
Because he explicitly states he recognizes that same "one season" 25 episode character of an enormously famous tv show from the same time period for a role in "Cube" and a small role in "Land of the Dead,"
AND YET
remains completely ignorant of her role as Dax.
Would you like more reasons?
1. To claim he did not garner his information from mild research (looking at her wikipedia page) is massively impressive memory ability taken strictly from reading the entire credits to every film he's ever watched and maintaining its staff's names in a photographic state. A nearly unbelievable claim considering the number of films he also claims to have seen.
2. He's lying about not knowing about her role as Dax.
3. He did look at her wiki page and glossed over anything that he never saw (Star Trek: Deep Space 9) while looking for anything that he did see, like "Cube" & "Land of the Dead." This cementing the idea he did not recognize her, he's simply sharing researched info about her as it relates to his own television and film interests, purposefully overlooking her most famous role in media as Dax because "he has no interest in (it) at all."
Maybe another analogy? >Jay: Did you know Pamela Anderson Lee was in Baywatch, What Are Men Doing 2 and the television show Charles In Charge? I knew that without looking it up because I recognized her from those myself. >Anon: Well, Baywatch, sure, but the other two no, I didn't! That's pretty impressive! It's almost like you're quoting her from something in that October 1989 PLAYBOY magazine issue. >Jay: Huh? Why did you bring up PLAYBOY? >Anon: Jay, Pamela Anderson is the #1 most viewed model appearing for 22 years as a Playmate in the pornographic magazine PLAYBOY. People know her as a porn model. >Jay: Oh. Well, I have no interest in that at all, so I never knew.
2 years ago
Anonymous
This is what no meds does to a mf
2 years ago
Anonymous
That's why I'm trying my hardest to be comprehensive about this perspective, since your lack of meds has made such an obvious disparity seem obscured to you.
Is it helping you? >lol meds! >(You)! >I love Cinemaphile! >I enjoy participating in Red Letter Media discussion threads on the imageboard Cinemaphile with other Anonymous posters!
Oh, and back on point, I'll reiterate this is a terribly boring film review episode they've aired.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>guy who watches weird obscure movies >and doesn't watch star trek >recognises actors from weird obscure movies >does not recognise actors from star trek
Will you please take your medication now? We aren't out to get you.
2 years ago
Anonymous
That generalization is not a difficult concept to grasp.
But the believability of it sure is.
A man claiming to recognize a minor actress for her acting roles in obscure movies is very believable!
That same man claiming to recognize that same minor actress because he's seen those movies is also quite believable!
That same man claiming to recognize that same minor actress ONLY FOR those movies he's seen is becoming less believable, especially considering her fame is wholly dependent on her acting role(s).
That same man claiming to recognize that same minor actress ONLY FOR those movies he's seen WHILE ALSO being completely ignorant of her far, far, far more famous roles in a far, far, far more famous media product is notably ignorant.
Plausible?
Maybe, but he's implying, and it infers that he can recognize that "Canadian groupie" appearing for a brief few seconds in "Brain Candy" by her face alone and instantly make that connection of that face to that very same actress in "Cube" and "Land of the Dead." Impressive memory.
Maybe, but he's implying, and it infers that he can recognize that "Canadian groupie" appearing for a brief few seconds in "Brain Candy" by her name alone thanks to his committed viewership to the credits of "Brain Candy, "Cube" and "Land of the Dead" and picking out her name bringing it up in this review as tangential, yet relevant, information the audience for Red Letter Media would have interest in. Impressive memory.
Likely?
No. He probably looked her up, nitpicked two non-Blockbuster films he's seen once before from her catalog, then closing his browser without noticing she played Dax in DS9. That's far more likely than impressive memory film cataloguing which includes even minor Canadian character actresses from the 90s. It's also ignorant on his part, given he brought up her roles, himself, as unique "Did-You-Know?" tidbits.
Can you tell I enjoy typing my thoughts? Or will this be more insulting commentary in your response?
2 years ago
Anonymous
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
2 years ago
Anonymous
Just stop you fricking lunatic
2 years ago
Anonymous
dude some literal who from a show no one knows is not Pamela Anderson or Bill Clinton
2 years ago
Anonymous
Maybe he just didn’t recognize the obscure actress from Star Trek because he doesn’t watch Star Trek. Maybe it’s literally as simple as that. Just maybe.
But please continue typing up paragraphs of insane autistic bullshit.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Maybe he looked up who she was an what she appeared in because he recognized her on their re-watch of "Brain Candy?"
Maybe, scanning through his look-up, he noticed "Cube" and "Land of the Dead," stopped there and made a note to mention that?
Maybe, be not acknowledging he looked up her filmography to point out this fact, we're to infer her recognizes a literally-who from a literally-what for appearing in other dismissable whatevers... and that he's really unique and respectable for such recognition?
Or maybe Jay isn't as cool with such deep film-skills as "recognize Canadian character actresses in multiple obscure films including 'Brain Candy' and 'Cube'," and all he's done is willfully omit this complete nobody's most noticeable role because it's cooler if he doesn't mention DS9.
dude some literal who from a show no one knows is not Pamela Anderson or Bill Clinton
True enough, but by the same token, how does someone recognize multiple other roles of "the Canadian groupie" in "Brian Candy" but doesn't include her most famous one as Dax from DS9? >'cause he's never seen DS9
Anon. He has an audience, he's not revealing these film-roles to those watching his review because we're unaware of them, he's revealing them to appear cooler.
But, if you haven't noticed, selecting those roles and not acknowledging her other roles is not "cooler," it's "stupider." It's had the reverse effect. >...'cause he's never seen DS9
And you've never seen Top Gear. But I bet you recognize Jeremy Clarkson for appearing in Top Gear. At the very least, you aren't ignorant of it.
2 years ago
Anonymous
have a nice day dude
2 years ago
Anonymous
That generalization is not a difficult concept to grasp.
But the believability of it sure is.
A man claiming to recognize a minor actress for her acting roles in obscure movies is very believable!
That same man claiming to recognize that same minor actress because he's seen those movies is also quite believable!
That same man claiming to recognize that same minor actress ONLY FOR those movies he's seen is becoming less believable, especially considering her fame is wholly dependent on her acting role(s).
That same man claiming to recognize that same minor actress ONLY FOR those movies he's seen WHILE ALSO being completely ignorant of her far, far, far more famous roles in a far, far, far more famous media product is notably ignorant.
Plausible?
Maybe, but he's implying, and it infers that he can recognize that "Canadian groupie" appearing for a brief few seconds in "Brain Candy" by her face alone and instantly make that connection of that face to that very same actress in "Cube" and "Land of the Dead." Impressive memory.
Maybe, but he's implying, and it infers that he can recognize that "Canadian groupie" appearing for a brief few seconds in "Brain Candy" by her name alone thanks to his committed viewership to the credits of "Brain Candy, "Cube" and "Land of the Dead" and picking out her name bringing it up in this review as tangential, yet relevant, information the audience for Red Letter Media would have interest in. Impressive memory.
Likely?
No. He probably looked her up, nitpicked two non-Blockbuster films he's seen once before from her catalog, then closing his browser without noticing she played Dax in DS9. That's far more likely than impressive memory film cataloguing which includes even minor Canadian character actresses from the 90s. It's also ignorant on his part, given he brought up her roles, himself, as unique "Did-You-Know?" tidbits.
Can you tell I enjoy typing my thoughts? Or will this be more insulting commentary in your response?
1. You don't know which if any of them do or do not have kids. Jack has kids, he's talked about them numerous times. Rich has a girlfriend, pretty sure Mike is banging Jessie (I think she really quit because the comments were getting creepy, but she's actually still there. You hear her a couple times in some of the more recent commentary tracks, so she's staying behind the camera.)
2. I honestly think some of them are gay. I'm not going to point fingers, but Jay said in the episode where they review Neighborhood Watch that he's been to gay orgies, and the orgy in the movie wasn't gay so I mean, if the shoe fits... but I think a few of the others attended them with him. It might be how they all met.
>Why would anyone expect him to recognize a one season character from one of the least known Star Trek shows, a franchise he has no interest in at all?
Because he explicitly states he recognizes that same "one season" 25 episode character of an enormously famous tv show from the same time period for a role in "Cube" and a small role in "Land of the Dead,"
AND YET
remains completely ignorant of her role as Dax.
Would you like more reasons?
1. To claim he did not garner his information from mild research (looking at her wikipedia page) is massively impressive memory ability taken strictly from reading the entire credits to every film he's ever watched and maintaining its staff's names in a photographic state. A nearly unbelievable claim considering the number of films he also claims to have seen.
2. He's lying about not knowing about her role as Dax.
3. He did look at her wiki page and glossed over anything that he never saw (Star Trek: Deep Space 9) while looking for anything that he did see, like "Cube" & "Land of the Dead." This cementing the idea he did not recognize her, he's simply sharing researched info about her as it relates to his own television and film interests, purposefully overlooking her most famous role in media as Dax because "he has no interest in (it) at all."
Maybe another analogy? >Jay: Did you know Pamela Anderson Lee was in Baywatch, What Are Men Doing 2 and the television show Charles In Charge? I knew that without looking it up because I recognized her from those myself. >Anon: Well, Baywatch, sure, but the other two no, I didn't! That's pretty impressive! It's almost like you're quoting her from something in that October 1989 PLAYBOY magazine issue. >Jay: Huh? Why did you bring up PLAYBOY? >Anon: Jay, Pamela Anderson is the #1 most viewed model appearing for 22 years as a Playmate in the pornographic magazine PLAYBOY. People know her as a porn model. >Jay: Oh. Well, I have no interest in that at all, so I never knew.
Don't tell me Jay has read the credits to every film he's ever watched, remembers the actresses' names and that's how he makes the connection. That his memory is photographic, especially in regards to text, with a brain that recalls even the city a movie he's once watched as a teenager as instantaneously relevant to his film discussion about a woman's acting career, drawing audience-relevant connections to where you could have seen this person elsewhere.
But never knew she was in 25 episodes of Deep Space 9 as Dax, which she is universally most famous for alongside her part in "cult" film Cube.
I only mean, if Jay is going to pinpoint his (impressively) ranged knowledge that he knew these actress from films like "Cube" or small parts in others, even tossing in the city these films take place in, highlighting his Canadian connection, then it's (impressively) stupid to not be informed enough to be aware of her outrageously most famous casting and appearance.
It's like knowing Bill Clinton was the governor of Arkansas from 1979-1981 and again from 1983-1992, he's a Yale Law School graduate, and it was famous he got a blowjob from Monica Lewinski.
But then, being told he was the President of the United States for 8 years, his shocking response is >Oh. Well, I just knew him as a politician, I guess. The Monica Lewinski thing was his best thing. I've never voted.
This is the saddest shit I've ever seen.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Hello, Jay.
2 years ago
Anonymous
It's simply a point. I don't argue for agreement (or disagreement), just stating something. I only keep responding because people seem to not grasp the point.
The point isn't philosophical or something. The point is noting "why" Jay is inserting obscure parts of an obscure actress during a review of an obscure film, while simultaneously omitting the famous part of this obscure actress from a comically coincidental relevant show considering the audience of RLM.
He would like you to believe it's because of his niche recognition without any research what-so-ever. This way, you're impressed by him. But it's not believable, considering just how small and obscure her name and her roles are while simultaneously claiming ignorance of her considerably more famous role. It would be like claiming you recognize wool for their appearance in sweaters and mittens but being ignorant wool is most known for appearing on sheep.
So, that "why" of inserting niche info is not about giving you neat knowledge, it's to have you think he's neat for knowing it, and it's by recognition-only! Not because he looked it up! Which, again, all things considered, does not line-up and I'm not impressed, I'm annoyed.
It's not like I would have ever known she was Dax, either. I've also never seen DS9 and have no interest in it.
But it's not like I can claim I recognize Desmond Llewelyn for his role as Geoffrey Maddocks ('The Colonel') in the British television series Follyfoot or as the Roman Senator in the film Cleopatra, but remain ignorant he was ever Q from the James Bond series because I've never seen those.
I doubt you're impressed to know of those 2 obscure roles or that you believe me when inferring I didn't look it up just now on Wikipedia to make my point. I'd bet you're annoyed by it for any number of different reasons.
2 years ago
Anonymous
look at those sausages for fingers, it's a wonder he made it to 85
2 years ago
Anonymous
Why did you quote my reply which isn't part of the other chain of comments and is much shorter in the slew of the others?
I never even saw these buttholes before!
2 years ago
Anonymous
Imagine typing all this shit about something g so unimportant and thinking anyone could possibly care.
2 years ago
Anonymous
So ignore him and stop bumping a thread? You don't seem to be adding an rlm thought.
Why does Jay laugh after each sentence he says?
He didn't behave like this in the older videos but I've noticed him laughing after anything he or whoever he's talking says(whether its funny or not)for no reason
Listening to Jay talk is starting to really get tiring. The worst is when he spits out a chuckle like he's blowing a raspberry or when he's gesticulating wildly with each point
They’ve actually gone too far this time. Yes I’m an autist. But their dishonestly, their blatant lying, it’s made my blood boil. I genuinely hate them after this. How dare you stare at me and lie. I know where their studio is. It would be like a 5 hour drive but it would be worth it just to see mikes lying little face crumpled and ruined after I fricking best it to a pulp with a baseball bat, fricking begging on his knees pissing himself and admitting that the sequels were a fricking disaster, than JJ sucks, that he was fricking wrong and the whole endeavour has been a soulless hollow piece of shit worse than the prequels. That’s what I want. The little “I’m an apathetic alcoholic!” Act to just fade away under threat of death, under my wrath, and for him to finally be fricking honest for once in his tiny pathetic life. Tears in his eyes as he realises this is what it came to to admit his pathetic online legacy was a farce. I’d fricking beat the frick out of him for everything he did. Im literally in tears writing this the thought is so cathartic. Id just pummel and pummel screaming at him for what he did, for keeping up the fricking lie. And bloodied and broken he’d admit it, he’d admit the prequels were good, he fricking would. I’d lay down in the exhaustion, emotionally drained, we would cry and embrace. The wound would be healed. But he would have to be harmed to the point of destruction fist. And id frick up jay merely for his smug pseudo intellectual manner, his boring insistence on obscure horror shit nobody cares about. I’d wail about how he isn’t interesting, insightful or clever as I smashed his fricking ribs with a hammer, how wrong he had got life, how desperately wrong he has perceived it all in his nihilistic little box. And rich would get possibly the most honest beating, the beating of a man who simply needs to be beaten.
Everyone being sort of surprised that Rich or even mike are confident in their infantile opinions - have you really not heard of the 'comic book guy' character? This type of person has been around for decades
I still like their videos, but let's face it, the guys are losers.
I'm not sure even if I can call them failed filmmakers, "failed" implies trying. They never made a real movie, other than that stupid thriller crap with a girl, I don't remember the name. "The Repossessed", something like that. "The Re-something". No one cares about that movie. I think not even 1% of their subscribers even know it exists. If that counted as an attempt, it'd be total failure.
If these losers weren't leeching off excess attention from big pop culture garbage franchises they'd still be making shitty wedding videos.
These guys are pushing 50 and getting all snooty about how they don't like some crap movie made for children. Well, duh. You know what 50 year olds aren't suppose to give a crap about either? Star trek and the evil dead. That's for children. Or manchildren too, I 'spouse.
But you see, they're not regular manchildren, they are slightly more discriminating manchildren! Yes! Give these men a badge.
They are just a hipster snooty version of collider. That's why they hate collider so much. They depend on leeching off of pop culture garbage franchises for their livelihood the same way. Do you think people would watch them if they were doing The Gabowskis or whatever still, instead of becoming full blown pop culture parasites?
yo it be true
Wow, they just like to review shit no one cares about now huh
>Wow, they just like to review shit no one cares about now huh
That's Jay and Beardo. Jay on his own would just review horror films, David Lynch, b-movies, and such. the channel blew up because Mike likes to b***h about Star Wars and Star Trek. You get some sense from the Mike-less ReViews what a Jay centered show would be like. It would be decent views but pretty niche. Likely like 10K views per video.
I watch their shit at like 3.0 speed to get thorugh it.
Jay's taste in film is at least entertaining and is usually films that could provoke discussion. Mike and Rich are the normiest normies this side of Normieville.
whatever. atleast i might find a new film to wattch through jay
This. Another video where it’s obvious what they’re going to say.
You're not forced to watch it moron
I pay their fricking salary
As opposed to what exactly? Modern cinema is in shambles there is nothing out worth seeing
It's all woke shit and children's films genres and subgenres don't exist anymore you aren't getting any Evil under the suns or Shawshank redemptions anymore
>modern cinema is dead, let’s watch Kenobi! That’s real cinema!
Kek rlmtards and their pretentiousness about a channel devoted to manchild franchises
Who are you quoting? Certainly not RLM since they didn’t say anything even close to that.
>muh capeshit
no frick off
You guys keep saying this when every other RLM video is about star wars or star trek with a splash of marvel capeshit.
But you or the guy he replied to claimed they talked about shit no one cares about
You're a homosexual and not in a cool way like Scott.
Exactly. They've always been "too cool for school" and too good for their own audience. But it finally dawned on me what insufferable, unlikable nerds they were when I was listening to the Ghostbusters 2 commentary where they kept talking about how, even as fricking 8 year olds, they hated everything about it and thought it sucked... in 1989. One trick pony frauds. Muh Star Trak, muh atheism, yet another thing where this board always calls shit literally plebbit. I got bad news for ya Cinemaphile... RLM is LiTeRaLlY plebbit!
They review less popular stuff that they think deserves more appreciation and I like that.
Thanks Jay and or Mike!
>The return of Beardfat
Based kinda missed him ngl
Cares more than Mike, smarter than Rich
>beardfat
No thanks.
oh boy a beardfat episode
The frick is this
>Beardfat
I'll pass.
>jay and josh
LETS GO OBSCURE SHIT NOBODY EVER SAAAAW
Honestly, I can only stomach Mike anymore. I'll watch a BOTW and hate everyone else who is talking and poorly riffing besides Mike.
Josh owes me sex
What the best BOTW episode?
The one were jessie wears loose clothing
She was so sexy in the bee outfit god fricking damn I am SO FRICKING JEALOUS of Mike you know he's rawdogging that every night he doesn't pass out from drinking too much
The Halloween one where Jack got so drunk that he could barely sit in a chair without falling over.
i miss her bros
Did she and Mike break up or something?
probably hit the Wisconsin Wall and blew up to 400 pounds and can longer fit through the door or her trailer home
Lycan Colony
This
Frick yes
the second len botw
the geteven one with the canadians
the american action movie one with the canadians
My top 3 are
>Very Cannon Christmas
>Rem Lazar
>Surviving Edged Weapons.
ELOISE COLE IS DEAD
I love him so much.
There's never been a more pure moment caught on video.
basically any episode with the Canadians
Any episode that causes Mike to have a mental breakdown
Vampire Assasin and Hack O Lantern. I really like this one a lot.
Top 3 to me:
>The Surviving edged weapon one,
>The shoji tabuchi one
>The show biz pizza bear one
There is also the star wars holyday special part one which is kino as frick.
They should mini-dose LSD (like 20 microgram) then shoot BOTW.
the sad thing is the video would make just as much sense and feature the same amount of laughing at unfunny comments.
>I'll shoot you any one of you, i've got nothing to lose because i have AIDs
Theodore Rex
It's easier to pick individual best films than an entire best episode, but
>Cannon Christmas
>Geteven episode
>Every spotlight episode
TUMS FESTIVAL
No Mike, no like
>Beardfat
>Literally what movie
Okay
Why does the video and audio suck?
Its just been uploaded, takes time on youtubes end to get the quality right
>I'm pretending to not understand the joke for easy (you)s
This is your life, anon.
Thanks for your input Mr Reddit
>40 white men in their 40s
>childless
>sit around discussing children’s movies
>try your hardest to make “memes” so you can get some attention again
Watching RLM is depressing
t. zoomie
>>40 white men in their 40s
There's only 2 men in this video
There’s Mike, Jay, Rich and Beardfat, who are the other 46 guys?
1. You don't know which if any of them do or do not have kids. Jack has kids, he's talked about them numerous times. Rich has a girlfriend, pretty sure Mike is banging Jessie (I think she really quit because the comments were getting creepy, but she's actually still there. You hear her a couple times in some of the more recent commentary tracks, so she's staying behind the camera.)
2. I honestly think some of them are gay. I'm not going to point fingers, but Jay said in the episode where they review Neighborhood Watch that he's been to gay orgies, and the orgy in the movie wasn't gay so I mean, if the shoe fits... but I think a few of the others attended them with him. It might be how they all met.
>You hear her a couple times in some of the more recent commentary tracks
No you don’t. You hear her very briefly on the Ghostbusters 2 commentary which is from almost a decade ago at this point
it´s the life of the consooomer
>Beard Fat and Jerry
pass
Does anyone like beardfat?
Hell no, he's so awkward and always ruins funny moments
I don't hate him but I don't like him
The only one I hate more is AIDSMoby
He’s okay if Mike is there to balance him out. The channel would be infinitely better if it was just Mike and Jay.
Frick you Rich is based and forms a core part of the dynamic between the hosts. The bald dude is also fun and so are the canadians when they show up on occasion.
The fat bearded dude is boring tho.
He seems like a pretty pleasant guy and is probably the smartest of the entire RLM crew but he's basically never funny
I hope Redlettermedia dies. They know nobody gives a ratass about this bullshit movie. They know people pestered them to review Batman and even gave their shitty comment a hundred thousand likes. It's almost like a troll on their Patreon fanbase. Give us money so we can haphazardly release videos (4 a month, only...and that's if you're lucky) and do stuff nobody cares about. They can't even do a BOTW anymore because they'll refuse to watch more than one film..frick them
>I hate these guys
>I wish they made more videos
Maybe go outside for a while?
no, I hate these guys NOW...they were great. 2020 was so-so and they kind of said frick it to going out because of COVID..2021 was a bit of a decline..now its shlock. this whole year has been bad. Mike looked drunk out of his mind during those Picard reviews which were utter nonsense
>Cinemaphile in 2012:
>"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
>Cinemaphile in 2013:
>"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
>Cinemaphile in 2014:
>"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
>Cinemaphile in 2015:
>"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
>Cinemaphile in 2016:
>"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
>Cinemaphile in 2017:
>"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
>Cinemaphile in 2018:
>"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
>Cinemaphile in 2019:
>"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
>Cinemaphile in 2020:
>"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
>Cinemaphile in 2021:
>"Waaaaahhhh RLM used to be better
You homosexuals have been making the same moronic complaints literally since RLM first started. Is this some sort of coping mechanism? Like you're all so deeply embarrassed to unironically use RLM as a friend simulator that you overcompensate by pretending to hate them (while still watching every video they put out and memorizing every comment they've ever made)?
No one use to dislike RLM, its just recently that mentally ill schizo zoomers shit up every thread
>NO ONE CAN EVER DISLIKE RLM
>YOU HAVE TO BE SCHIZO TO FIND FAT GEN X MANCHILD APATHY BORING
Kys
Did i hit a nerve zoomie
>D-DID I HIT A NERVE!!
>STOP MAKING FUN OF MY INTERNET FRIENDS!!! HAHA MIKE SAID HE DRINK THE BEER THIS IS PURE COMEDY!!
Hardly anyone dislikes them now, it's just like 2 posters on Cinemaphile who make 99% of complaints
Office boys make threads about them constantly
touch grass
From 2020 there were obvious changes though, look at the streaming slop, tv shows they review now compared to the big movies they'd see the years before. We saw this coming from Mike saying he hates movie theaters and wish they died, that's also why they didn't review Top Gun because he brought the masses back for non capeshit.
>From 2020 there were obvious changes though
Hm I wonder what was happening in the world in 2020 that would cause a shift in people's lives?
>Hmmm i wonder hehe I’m being sarcastic like my heroes Mike and Jay
Mike was too busy crying about Picard to watch anything else
It's not about the why or its inevitability it's just that it did happen and it made the channel worse unlike previous years where there were no major changes.
hm you're protesting a little too much. I think you like them
bro, i really liked batman but i don't blame them for refusing to review it because of spergs like you. it's good, you already like it, what more can they even tell you about it?
This. They have much more cooler prestigious stuff to talk about. Like the Obi Wan tv show LOL
so you want them to tell you what to think about a movie you've already seen and that you already like? why? just form your own opinions, talk about it with your friends if you have any, and then move on with your life.
So you want them to say the same exact shit about star wars they have said for 20 years? Or how about another 40 hours of saying new star trek isn’t episodic and that makes autistic Mike cry?
i don't care. get a grip, quit b***hing about batman and move on you loser.
Just form your own opinions on Star Wars sweatie.
i couldn't care less about star wars, ive never watched a single one. are you just bored or something? why continue to argue for no reason? watch rlm or don't, like them or don't, i don't care. just stop b***hing about the batman, you're making me not like the film now by association.
>I couldn’t care less! MIKE AND JAY ARE MY GODS AND THEY ARE INFALLIBLE
Boring.
>They can't even do a BOTW anymore because they'll refuse to watch more than one film
Spotlight episodes are kino
have a nice day capeshit homosexual.
Their obstinate refusal to review Batman has made me respect them more
but batman sucked ass and was far too long. i wish i could get my time back. i dont care what anyone has to say about it
I wish they would review Batman so Mike Stoklasa would shit on it.
>batman
Jesus, who gives a shit?
When Rich Evans admitted in the Who Framed Roger Rabbit Re:View episode that he hadn't seen Chinatown, I finally realized that any RedLetterMedia opinion could be discarded. Evans is the co-host of one of the most popular YouTube film criticism channels, and he hasn't seen a famous, universally heralded Hollywood classic. This isn't one of those "artsy" movies that they make fun of Jay for liking. It's one of the best movies Hollywood has made in the last fifty years, with a screenplay that is usually considered the best. After Rich casually mentioned not having seen it and that he really didn't care to see it (and Jay just letting that slide), I knew none of them were serious at all about movies.
You frickers are so dramatic. Jesus, get some real friends
>dramatic
people into movies usually are. i'm not saying thats a good thing. its delusional
>Evans is the co-host of one of the most popular YouTube film criticism channels, and he hasn't seen a famous, universally heralded Hollywood classic.
But they're not high brow guys though. They mostly just watch stuff they grew up with and like to reminisce about. Rich isn't very sophisticated at all. That's kind of the appeal? It's very formal and well edited, but it comes down to some guys talking about their favorite movies.
Chinatown isn't highbrow
Compared to what Rich and Mike likes? They would never see it in a million years. They mostly just gush about what they're nostalgic about from their childhoods and don't look deeper than that. They have no interest in "classic" cinema.
if it was Mike it would be a problem, but Rich is a mongoloid crack baby who's just there as the walking joke.
Rich is somehow a moron and genius at the same time, and somehow smarter than Jay on a regular basis.
He's truly a mystery and it's wonderful. He's both annoying and funny, both dull and creative. Sometimes he shocks you with clever rewrites of plots and makes them sound infinitely more hilarious. Sometimes he misunderstands the most basic steps of logic.
>Rich is somehow a moron and genius at the same time
He’s a textbook obnoxious pseude.
This. In fact, I'm gonna go ahead and say that I personally think Rich is the worst member of the crew. Even though Beardfat takes things too seriously, he always sounds like he knows what he's talking about and he showed several times that he has technological knowledge and AIDSmoby offers insightful commentary many times. Rich manages to be both an embarassing nerd and seemingly have no real input into the movies they're talking about and is only there because he's Mike's friend. When Mike isn't around to put him down, he acts like an obnoxious prick and the only real value he offers is that he does the grunt work for them (buying merchandise for videos, building props, etc). He's basically their employee and is only in videos because Mike likes him.
I literally mute my speakers if Rich is there and someone made a joke.
I cannot stand his laughter. It's a shriek.
if mike represents the jaded self-aware gen xer and jay is the film dweeb crowd rich evans represents the midwestern working man, wise but not always smart.
I hadn't seen Chinatown when I was a 14 year old arguing with other nerds about how hyperdrive works with other nerds around the lunch table, so however many RLMs see it the lower the fidelity of their simulation of that would become and the less I'd want to watch
What about as a 44-year-old arguing with other 44-year-old nerds about how films were and are being made? Have you seen Chinatown then? Would you consider it lowers your fidelity, you high-tuned turntable?
I don't follow the question
ESL
Classic AVGN > Classic RLM > Current RLM > Current AVGN
Correct
>Kids in the hall
Who gives a flying frick. What will they review next? Matlock?
literally what movie
> it's a soi boy fat frick know-it-all episode
no thanks
>still no Batman
Still now views from me. *dabs*
There's some weird cuts whenever Jay is talking
he's obviously editing, and he tries to make himself look good
he's a very self-conscious manlet
Because other RLM videos don't have any editing in them? The frick are you babbling about?
He's done it before, I haven't even seen this. The self-conscious manlet keeps editing himself look good all the time.
>this edited video has editing in it
You sound insane
There's like one jump cut. Who cares?
No, there's multiple
They're probably cutting out thunder because it was raining
>beardfat
>another movie that only 10 people have watched
yawn
>RLM reviews a popular movie
>"They only review capeshit!!!"
>RLM reviews a more obscure movie
>"Why are they reviewing this movie I've never seen???"
Every time.
Their last few re:Views have been for Who Framed Roger Rabbit and new Star Wars crap. So they do some big stuff then the occassional obscure thing. What's the problem?
Okay real talk. Kids in the Hall are deadass lame. They're just not that funny or interesting. It's one of those SNL knock-offs from Canada and I wish it had stayed there. Brain candy is just absolutely dreadful experience on par with the worst SNL films.
Nobody likes you, but that's probably because you've got a cabbage for a head!
Yeah they just aren't that funny. They were an SNL ripoff who really wanted to be the next Monty Python.
I always thought they were generally pretty homosexual.
>Okay real talk. Kids in the Hall are deadass lame
I know you're baiting but this sentence is still gay as frick
It's extremely low-brow humor and it's all completely obvious jokes. Every single character actor in the troupe plays the exact same "character" in every single sketch.
>the gay guy
>the schizophrenic short guy who doesn't blink
>the straight-man who wears a suit
>the guy who speaks falsetto with curly hair
>...there's other guys? I guess?
That's it.
And they desperately try, and reference explicitly, how Monty Python was their influence and how badly they wanted to be revered like those guys. But not only was the sketch comedy poorly written, it was even more poorly performed.
Yup. It was just losers watching it to see other losers on TV.
this movie is very unfunny to me. they've already mentioned many times that they are huge fans of tim and eric, which may be the least funny show ever to be made, so i guess i get why they like this drek. still, i would have preferred a review on say, fear and loathing or leaving las vegas or hell, even fightclub, instead of a bad comedy flop only they have seen.
>this movie is very unfunny to me.
It is dreadful. Dreadful. I think I started to watch it twice in my lifetime, yet could never make my way through it.
I never found Kids in the Hall to be that funny. Jay and fat guy keep saying "oh this is funny and this is funny oh i laughed so hard!!!" and they play a clip and none of this shit is even making me crack a smile. It's a little bewildering.
I liked it in high school but tried to re-watch it and it's really lame. And Brain Candy is especially dreadful. There is nothing lamer than a comeyd that doesn't make you laugh but thinks it's being very quirky and clever.
So most of the Kids in the Hall sketches are just funny voice characters with simple punchlines and a lot of irony and sarcasm.
youre jaded and cynical
this my favorite skit
basically bruce campbell is the best part
more bruce
No not at all, I like comedy but this just doesn't do anything for me it's cringey
>its cringey
see my original post
Why would you make grand judgements like that just because someone doesn't share your comedic preferences
This is one of the big sketches of the show.
Just admit leaf posters made you mad with our shit posting >:->
is this meant to show them as unfunny because running homosexual is a great skit
This is disgustingly outdated. Using derogatory terms is not humor.
>Using derogatory terms is not humor.
get back to plebbit Black person
I mean. I can see why it was funny in (looks up airdate) 1988, but this is the best they did? A comedy troupe of comedians who write their own comedy and act their own comedy...
... made a sketch about 5 stereotypes where the single joke was contrarian thought about a homosexual only thinking about sex, but he's in fact thoughtful to suggest feeding pets food and discussing problems instead of fighting about them. Literally one-liner thoughts, btw, and just those two.
>No, it's funny because it looks like Protestant Christian boys are singing about the myth of a Running homosexual but nothing in the myth depicts his homosexualry. Ironic!
Hysterical.
It’s one of those things losers used to watch
it´s manchild media, what do you expect?
>Josh
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOo
>>Josh
>WOWWWWWW
>Really? No. Noo. No. Noo.
>Rich? Rich? RICH. RICH!! You know that's not what happened!
>Wow really? Uggh.
>WHAAAT? NO.
>Oh Godddd. Ughh.
>MIKE, MIKE, MIKE, you're forgetting this oonnneee plot point!
This unfunny homosexual is improvcancer
I can't picture Mike talking to Josh off camera. I can't imagine a single conversation between the two where Mike is able to hide his contempt or bond with him beyond simple platitudes.
He probably would have bullied the bald frick in high school.
Then why is Josh even at RLM? I guarantee if they picked any random fanboy frick from Reddit they'd still be better than Josh
>why are Mike and Jay friends with someone that I, a complete stranger, have not approved
You think they're friends with him?
He's friends with Jack and Jay and Mike has to pretend to get along with him.
Josh is kept solely because he actually tries to 'review' films on BotW. If he didn't, YT would frick them for not actually reviewing the films. So he is essentially the 'straight man' to keep the show 'credible' whilst the others (bar Rich) get drunk.
Also sometimes I want to know what the actual plot of the film is, not see Mike trying to make jokes about a scene I haven't seen to make Rich or Jay laugh. He isn't 'funny' but Josh plays his part.
Why would YouTube care if they just make fun of movies?
I don't like these guys anymore.
Same. Never thought I'd see the day, jus can't be bothered with their pretentiousness anymore
Hey Super Satan
>their pretentiousness anymore
Josh has to act like he knows everything about everything. It was probably his defining characteristic in High School and he never grew out of it.
Jay is probably living in an alternate fantasy land where he made creative and surreal movies that people liked.
Both of them suck at improv and jokes but at least Jay is humble and stays quiet when funnier people are having fun, plus he laughs a lot and has good points sometimes.
>Cinemaphile doesn't know Kids in the Hall
what the frick?
>Jay and Josh
ok i like RLM and all but holy frick i hate re:view and theyve been pumping them out non stop lately and im sick of it
That's because there's no content to review
they could make more botw
>Top Gunn
>Thor Love and Thunder
>Jurassic World Dominion
>Stranger Things Season 4
>The Black Phone
There’s plenty they could review. They are just lazy.
>sequel
>forth sequel
>who knows what fricking number sequel
>season fricking FOUR
>something nobody has ever heard of
oh boy, theres just a ton of stuff for them to review! thanks for your input.
They already reviewed every other Jurassic World movie. (And they reviewed every Star Wars movie)
Why not finish the saga?
I have literally never heard of this movie or the show.
Okay. So?
So eat a dick
I hate Josh. He's the kind of person that would make me feel really uncomfortable if he was in the same room as me.
>Jay and some literally who
pass
>5 minutes in
>”white people bad”
thanks for the warning, was already on the fence because of fatbeard
why do they let that homosexual on, everyone is usually pretty apolitical but that stupid leftard gay always has to say shit
the movie is actually pretty good too
subversive and ahead of it's time, predicting the mass reliance on medication and how the powers that be would use it nefariously
This vid and the movie they chose to discuss so perfectly encapsulates their personalities. Jay KNOWS he could never earn a living talking about shit like this if it weren’t for the success of Mike and his Plinkett reviews.
I only watch for Rich anyway.
So I take it Josh was Jay’s friend and Jay introduced him to Mike?
Cause there’s no fricking way Mike ever liked this guy. In a decade of making videos, Mike and Josh have barely appeared on camera together. They’ve never done a vid to get her.
Yes, he's Jay's friend and they like the same type of films. Think of this as a mini-Jay run film review show that runs under the RLM banner.
I liked it as a kid and teen, but looking back it's hella lame. But to be honest a lot of Monty Python doesn't work. But the best Monty Python is still hilarious, and their movies are still lightyears ahead of Brain Candy.
Python still mostly holds up for me, but I've yet to see a great Kids in the Hall sketch.
I don't like this. That's...that's going to be a problem for them. I hope they're ready.
I feel like it's tenth time they mention that group and I never heard of them outside of RLM.
I can tell you're not Canadian. They are probably one of the only real television series that Canada actually produced that had any viability outside of Canada and they were heavily promoted inside Canada.
>Canada
The only good things to come out of canadian television were Trailer Park Boys, The RedGreen Show and Reboot. That is all
>beardfat
>sketch comedy troupe - the movie
pass
I've never seen this movie. I guess I'll see their favorite clips as they show and comment on it, right?
>See the clips
>"...NOTHING is funny? It's all completely straightforward jokes about being buttholes. That's it?"
And they love this, claiming even the first 2/3rds is REALLY REALLY REALLY GOOD! Comparing it to being like Monty Python and The Holy Grail, laughing at the mere appearance of "Kids in the Hall" actors being on screen, not even speaking a line. And they try talking about this movies "plot?"
This movie is not funny. At all.
This "review" is also not funny. At all.
The movie bombed because even fans of the series think it's weird and not entertaining. It also had a very strange premise that was hard to sell. It's not about a bunch of characters doing things.
>It's not about a bunch of characters doing things
Literally every movie is about characters doing things
The "strange premise" is one of the most realistic parts of the movie, moron.
You have no idea how “quotemarks” work
>movie is about selling a rushed pharma product that ends up being worse for you in the long run
Oy vey, someone shut this down. You don't question the Pharma gods in 2022.
>Speaking about Dad coming home to kill himself
>Asks the son if he did his chores
>Yup!
>"That is, probably one of my favorite elongated bits in the entire movie!"
This is stupid.
This is really dumb.
>"Most of my favorite things on the original show was the more cinematic things."
>"Oh, God! Like, the dream, about the peaches!"
>"...I don't remember those."
>"Oh, there were about pears, my bad."
>*clip is shown about pear dream and being insane*
>"So I was excited about the movie! For that!"
This is pointless.
They HAD to be paid or influenced to be talking about Kid in the Hall, right now. This is not funny in the least. It's not offensive, it's literally just plain boring and stupid.
>it's literally just plain boring and stupid
Kind of like all the repetative, pointless comments in every single RLM thread
Couldn't get past the first episode of the new Kids in the Hall. Nude 60 years old boomers isn't funny.
>It's let's talk about how great some old bullshit movie is -episode
Nope
KITH's great (the new season too) but Brain Candy is best experienced as occasional Youtube clips. The movie doesn't really stick as a whole.
>Jay: "I immediately can recognize the Canadian. All these Canadian character actors. And one of those Canadian actresses who plays a groupie in the film as an actress who is one of the leads in the Canadian movie 'Cube!' They're SO recognizable! And then the other one I know she has a prominent role in George Romero's 'Land of the Dead,' which was shot in Toronto. So."
>Other guy: "And wasn't the other one, the brunette, wasn't she also play the girlfriend in the original show? She played Bobby's girlfried!"
>Jay: "Oh, okay!"
>Mike inserts the required note about how that "recognizable Canadian actress from so many Canadian parts and roles in movies like the famous "Cube" or a little bit in "Land of the Dead"
>IS, FRICKING, "DAX" FROM DEEP SPACE NINE
>Nothing "Canadian" AT ALL
This is moronic.
Jay and his buddies don't watch Star Trek so they are like cartoonishly ignorant of it. I find it baffling that they haven't even seen like a top 10 eps list provided by Mike and Rich. TNG was so insanely mainstream you pretty much have to of actively avoided it to not know anything about it.
>IS, FRICKING, "DAX" FROM DEEP SPACE NINE
Dax 2 the boring one.
it was syndicated trash on Saturday Night, no one watched it fat losers like Rich lmao
For a guy who claims to love obscure films and his ability to point out the history of background groupies of girls from the move "Brain Candy" and even what city those movies those girls played in were shot at...
...doesn't know she was also the character "Dax" from "Star Trek: Deep Space 9" is getting really pretentious.
This thread is so laughably stupid
>Y-you know that part in the RLM video where they said the thing? That thing they said was so...stupid. Like, jeez they're boring and stupid. They said something and I thought it was dumb.
Brilliant commentary, anons.
I read that in your voice, Jay.
whatever this film is, i must hate it because RLM like it
>give glowing review of suspiria remake
>watch it
>it's an awful movie
not tricking me again
kek the zoomers in this thread are so transparent
>i've never seen this ANCIENT movie before so it must be bad, it doesn't even have Ironman!!!
Brain Candy is not a good movie. It is poorly written and poorly acted. From start to finish. It's a comedy movie, and there's nothing funny in it.
So it's pretty on brand for Kids In The Hall, then
>duuuude le bad is good because nobody ever heard of it until we reviewed!!!!!!!!!!
rlm are a bunch of homosexual hipsters
brain candy didn't rate highly with me when it came out but rewatching it last year it kind of shits on most "comedy" that comes out now
>It's a beardfat episode
Finally, some new content from "The Wizard" !!!! God bless you, RML
I wanna cum in Ezra Dax's pusseh and make alien hapa's.
I don't think this movie is particularly funny, though it has a few moments, what works for me though is that it feels like a fever dream. It's unlike any other movie. It is so fricking strange that I can't help but like it on that alone.
i always liked bruce's monologue sketches, he has great comedy timing
>tfw Jay has "wings" on his hair like Paulie Walnuts
THEY REVIEWED BRAIN CANDY!? oh my goodness
I am shocked they aren’t shilling Thor Love and Thunder.
Guess their Disney check didn’t come in.
Now I know why Red Letter Media is so unfunny.
They get their humor from unfunny garbage like Kids in the Hall and Tim and Eric.
I didn't know Kids in the Hall made a movie. This was really lame to watch. The only funny part was the idea Jay seems to know a lot about background characters but didn't know she was a named character in the regular cast of Deep Space 9. And by funny, I mean it's mocking and ironic to have to point out something so obvious.
Exactly. It's like,
>Jonathan Taylor Thomas, who everybody knew in the 90s as JTT, was so famous and starred in so many things! I recognize his voice as Pinocchio in New Line Cinema's adaptation of the famous myth. I also immediately knew who it was when he showed up in 3 episodes from Fox's In Living Color alongside Jim Carrey, famous for being white on the show! He's also famous for directing 3 episodes of Last Man Standing. And, you might not have known this, but he was ALSO the voice of the lion in that cartoon movie Lion Serengeti or something.
>Jay, he appeared in basically every single episode of Home Improvement, where he was the middle son of Tim "The Tool-Man" Tayler. That sitcom aired for almost 10 years straight. He was in 179 episodes.
>Oh. I never watched that.
I mean, shit, dude.
I don't know if it's that obvious, lot of people didn't see the last season DS9. I don't blame them.
I only mean, if Jay is going to pinpoint his (impressively) ranged knowledge that he knew these actress from films like "Cube" or small parts in others, even tossing in the city these films take place in, highlighting his Canadian connection, then it's (impressively) stupid to not be informed enough to be aware of her outrageously most famous casting and appearance.
It's like knowing Bill Clinton was the governor of Arkansas from 1979-1981 and again from 1983-1992, he's a Yale Law School graduate, and it was famous he got a blowjob from Monica Lewinski.
But then, being told he was the President of the United States for 8 years, his shocking response is
>Oh. Well, I just knew him as a politician, I guess. The Monica Lewinski thing was his best thing. I've never voted.
>why did Jay recognize this actor from other movies that he’s seen but not recognize them from something he’s never seen??
Don't tell me Jay has read the credits to every film he's ever watched, remembers the actresses' names and that's how he makes the connection. That his memory is photographic, especially in regards to text, with a brain that recalls even the city a movie he's once watched as a teenager as instantaneously relevant to his film discussion about a woman's acting career, drawing audience-relevant connections to where you could have seen this person elsewhere.
But never knew she was in 25 episodes of Deep Space 9 as Dax, which she is universally most famous for alongside her part in "cult" film Cube.
You sound really upset about literally nothing.
For a nerd review show famous for its nerd reviews of Star Wars and Star Trek and its strong focus on 80s and 90s "cult" films, to see one of its main hosts bring up obscure role information for unnamed side-characters appearing in a single scene for the Kids in the Hall movie "Brain Candy" all wildly tangential and shockingly inferential... it's not endearing for one of those film review hosts to be genuinely unaware of that very same person's role in dozens of episodes in the main cast of Star Trek.
I enjoy talking tl;dr, so I get your implication I'm "really upset," but I hope some level exaggeration points out just how lame these film-reviews are and must-have-been. It's what they're famous for, and yet are impressively ignorant about.
Jay doesn't watch Star Trek though and he doesn't pretend to. That's Mike and Rich's thing. Why would anyone expect him to recognize a one season character from one of the least known Star Trek shows, a franchise he has no interest in at all?
>Why would anyone expect him to recognize a one season character from one of the least known Star Trek shows, a franchise he has no interest in at all?
Because he explicitly states he recognizes that same "one season" 25 episode character of an enormously famous tv show from the same time period for a role in "Cube" and a small role in "Land of the Dead,"
AND YET
remains completely ignorant of her role as Dax.
Would you like more reasons?
1. To claim he did not garner his information from mild research (looking at her wikipedia page) is massively impressive memory ability taken strictly from reading the entire credits to every film he's ever watched and maintaining its staff's names in a photographic state. A nearly unbelievable claim considering the number of films he also claims to have seen.
2. He's lying about not knowing about her role as Dax.
3. He did look at her wiki page and glossed over anything that he never saw (Star Trek: Deep Space 9) while looking for anything that he did see, like "Cube" & "Land of the Dead." This cementing the idea he did not recognize her, he's simply sharing researched info about her as it relates to his own television and film interests, purposefully overlooking her most famous role in media as Dax because "he has no interest in (it) at all."
Maybe another analogy?
>Jay: Did you know Pamela Anderson Lee was in Baywatch, What Are Men Doing 2 and the television show Charles In Charge? I knew that without looking it up because I recognized her from those myself.
>Anon: Well, Baywatch, sure, but the other two no, I didn't! That's pretty impressive! It's almost like you're quoting her from something in that October 1989 PLAYBOY magazine issue.
>Jay: Huh? Why did you bring up PLAYBOY?
>Anon: Jay, Pamela Anderson is the #1 most viewed model appearing for 22 years as a Playmate in the pornographic magazine PLAYBOY. People know her as a porn model.
>Jay: Oh. Well, I have no interest in that at all, so I never knew.
This is what no meds does to a mf
That's why I'm trying my hardest to be comprehensive about this perspective, since your lack of meds has made such an obvious disparity seem obscured to you.
Is it helping you?
>lol meds!
>(You)!
>I love Cinemaphile!
>I enjoy participating in Red Letter Media discussion threads on the imageboard Cinemaphile with other Anonymous posters!
Oh, and back on point, I'll reiterate this is a terribly boring film review episode they've aired.
>guy who watches weird obscure movies
>and doesn't watch star trek
>recognises actors from weird obscure movies
>does not recognise actors from star trek
Will you please take your medication now? We aren't out to get you.
That generalization is not a difficult concept to grasp.
But the believability of it sure is.
A man claiming to recognize a minor actress for her acting roles in obscure movies is very believable!
That same man claiming to recognize that same minor actress because he's seen those movies is also quite believable!
That same man claiming to recognize that same minor actress ONLY FOR those movies he's seen is becoming less believable, especially considering her fame is wholly dependent on her acting role(s).
That same man claiming to recognize that same minor actress ONLY FOR those movies he's seen WHILE ALSO being completely ignorant of her far, far, far more famous roles in a far, far, far more famous media product is notably ignorant.
Plausible?
Maybe, but he's implying, and it infers that he can recognize that "Canadian groupie" appearing for a brief few seconds in "Brain Candy" by her face alone and instantly make that connection of that face to that very same actress in "Cube" and "Land of the Dead." Impressive memory.
Maybe, but he's implying, and it infers that he can recognize that "Canadian groupie" appearing for a brief few seconds in "Brain Candy" by her name alone thanks to his committed viewership to the credits of "Brain Candy, "Cube" and "Land of the Dead" and picking out her name bringing it up in this review as tangential, yet relevant, information the audience for Red Letter Media would have interest in. Impressive memory.
Likely?
No. He probably looked her up, nitpicked two non-Blockbuster films he's seen once before from her catalog, then closing his browser without noticing she played Dax in DS9. That's far more likely than impressive memory film cataloguing which includes even minor Canadian character actresses from the 90s. It's also ignorant on his part, given he brought up her roles, himself, as unique "Did-You-Know?" tidbits.
Can you tell I enjoy typing my thoughts? Or will this be more insulting commentary in your response?
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
Just stop you fricking lunatic
dude some literal who from a show no one knows is not Pamela Anderson or Bill Clinton
Maybe he just didn’t recognize the obscure actress from Star Trek because he doesn’t watch Star Trek. Maybe it’s literally as simple as that. Just maybe.
But please continue typing up paragraphs of insane autistic bullshit.
Maybe he looked up who she was an what she appeared in because he recognized her on their re-watch of "Brain Candy?"
Maybe, scanning through his look-up, he noticed "Cube" and "Land of the Dead," stopped there and made a note to mention that?
Maybe, be not acknowledging he looked up her filmography to point out this fact, we're to infer her recognizes a literally-who from a literally-what for appearing in other dismissable whatevers... and that he's really unique and respectable for such recognition?
Or maybe Jay isn't as cool with such deep film-skills as "recognize Canadian character actresses in multiple obscure films including 'Brain Candy' and 'Cube'," and all he's done is willfully omit this complete nobody's most noticeable role because it's cooler if he doesn't mention DS9.
True enough, but by the same token, how does someone recognize multiple other roles of "the Canadian groupie" in "Brian Candy" but doesn't include her most famous one as Dax from DS9?
>'cause he's never seen DS9
Anon. He has an audience, he's not revealing these film-roles to those watching his review because we're unaware of them, he's revealing them to appear cooler.
But, if you haven't noticed, selecting those roles and not acknowledging her other roles is not "cooler," it's "stupider." It's had the reverse effect.
>...'cause he's never seen DS9
And you've never seen Top Gear. But I bet you recognize Jeremy Clarkson for appearing in Top Gear. At the very least, you aren't ignorant of it.
have a nice day dude
This is the saddest shit I've ever seen.
Hello, Jay.
It's simply a point. I don't argue for agreement (or disagreement), just stating something. I only keep responding because people seem to not grasp the point.
The point isn't philosophical or something. The point is noting "why" Jay is inserting obscure parts of an obscure actress during a review of an obscure film, while simultaneously omitting the famous part of this obscure actress from a comically coincidental relevant show considering the audience of RLM.
He would like you to believe it's because of his niche recognition without any research what-so-ever. This way, you're impressed by him. But it's not believable, considering just how small and obscure her name and her roles are while simultaneously claiming ignorance of her considerably more famous role. It would be like claiming you recognize wool for their appearance in sweaters and mittens but being ignorant wool is most known for appearing on sheep.
So, that "why" of inserting niche info is not about giving you neat knowledge, it's to have you think he's neat for knowing it, and it's by recognition-only! Not because he looked it up! Which, again, all things considered, does not line-up and I'm not impressed, I'm annoyed.
It's not like I would have ever known she was Dax, either. I've also never seen DS9 and have no interest in it.
But it's not like I can claim I recognize Desmond Llewelyn for his role as Geoffrey Maddocks ('The Colonel') in the British television series Follyfoot or as the Roman Senator in the film Cleopatra, but remain ignorant he was ever Q from the James Bond series because I've never seen those.
I doubt you're impressed to know of those 2 obscure roles or that you believe me when inferring I didn't look it up just now on Wikipedia to make my point. I'd bet you're annoyed by it for any number of different reasons.
look at those sausages for fingers, it's a wonder he made it to 85
Why did you quote my reply which isn't part of the other chain of comments and is much shorter in the slew of the others?
I never even saw these buttholes before!
Imagine typing all this shit about something g so unimportant and thinking anyone could possibly care.
So ignore him and stop bumping a thread? You don't seem to be adding an rlm thought.
dafungulus
that was her only role anyone knows
hipster duduk
Why does Jay laugh after each sentence he says?
He didn't behave like this in the older videos but I've noticed him laughing after anything he or whoever he's talking says(whether its funny or not)for no reason
Listening to Jay talk is starting to really get tiring. The worst is when he spits out a chuckle like he's blowing a raspberry or when he's gesticulating wildly with each point
Because they believe their own hype now. They think they are geniuses.
They’ve actually gone too far this time. Yes I’m an autist. But their dishonestly, their blatant lying, it’s made my blood boil. I genuinely hate them after this. How dare you stare at me and lie. I know where their studio is. It would be like a 5 hour drive but it would be worth it just to see mikes lying little face crumpled and ruined after I fricking best it to a pulp with a baseball bat, fricking begging on his knees pissing himself and admitting that the sequels were a fricking disaster, than JJ sucks, that he was fricking wrong and the whole endeavour has been a soulless hollow piece of shit worse than the prequels. That’s what I want. The little “I’m an apathetic alcoholic!” Act to just fade away under threat of death, under my wrath, and for him to finally be fricking honest for once in his tiny pathetic life. Tears in his eyes as he realises this is what it came to to admit his pathetic online legacy was a farce. I’d fricking beat the frick out of him for everything he did. Im literally in tears writing this the thought is so cathartic. Id just pummel and pummel screaming at him for what he did, for keeping up the fricking lie. And bloodied and broken he’d admit it, he’d admit the prequels were good, he fricking would. I’d lay down in the exhaustion, emotionally drained, we would cry and embrace. The wound would be healed. But he would have to be harmed to the point of destruction fist. And id frick up jay merely for his smug pseudo intellectual manner, his boring insistence on obscure horror shit nobody cares about. I’d wail about how he isn’t interesting, insightful or clever as I smashed his fricking ribs with a hammer, how wrong he had got life, how desperately wrong he has perceived it all in his nihilistic little box. And rich would get possibly the most honest beating, the beating of a man who simply needs to be beaten.
Is this pasta?
No it's pizza
They barely talk about the content of the movie and half of what they say is about a workprint no one has seen.
This was terrible.
Genuine.
ehhh. what else is on...
>people actually watch best of the worst
huh. I guess I'm the weird one.
Everyone being sort of surprised that Rich or even mike are confident in their infantile opinions - have you really not heard of the 'comic book guy' character? This type of person has been around for decades
I enjoy Beardfat/Jay Re:Views
he's a good soundboard to let Jay talk about odd stuff he can't with Mike or Rich
wow, they finally reviewed an actual good movie
paid to talk about movies
hate talking about movie
displaying contempt for your audience
I love Red Letter Media
So I'm watching Ash vs Evil Dead now, I didn't even know it existed, but Youtube told me it's a thing after watching this dumb RLM video.
And it's fricking shit.
Who are these redditors?
Liberal Disney Shills
Kinda like Moviebob
I just want to tickle Josh for hours. Watching that belly jiggle and those toes wiggle. Oh what a whimsical time we'd have. Teehee!
has a perfect face for it
Why do 45 year old men dress like this?
I grew out of thinking I had to trick chicks into fricking me. I dress for comfort and utility homosexual.
>Jay Re:View
Shit I have to
>with beardfat
Nah
Imagine having unironically created Space Cop and thinking you have any right to criticize film as art.
>Jay stopped lifting
it's over
>it's a Josh episode
Beardfat is so boring and milquetoast
sometimes it's better than more contrarianism
I still like their videos, but let's face it, the guys are losers.
I'm not sure even if I can call them failed filmmakers, "failed" implies trying. They never made a real movie, other than that stupid thriller crap with a girl, I don't remember the name. "The Repossessed", something like that. "The Re-something". No one cares about that movie. I think not even 1% of their subscribers even know it exists. If that counted as an attempt, it'd be total failure.
If these losers weren't leeching off excess attention from big pop culture garbage franchises they'd still be making shitty wedding videos.
These guys are pushing 50 and getting all snooty about how they don't like some crap movie made for children. Well, duh. You know what 50 year olds aren't suppose to give a crap about either? Star trek and the evil dead. That's for children. Or manchildren too, I 'spouse.
But you see, they're not regular manchildren, they are slightly more discriminating manchildren! Yes! Give these men a badge.
They are just a hipster snooty version of collider. That's why they hate collider so much. They depend on leeching off of pop culture garbage franchises for their livelihood the same way. Do you think people would watch them if they were doing The Gabowskis or whatever still, instead of becoming full blown pop culture parasites?
NEVER PUT SALT IN YOUR EYES
IT'S UP
So is my interest them.
Bye.
Where the frick can I find a download of the workprint? Can't find it anywhere