Why does everybody seem to hate CinemaSins?

[FýrdracaDócincel]

YouTube channel?
"Everything wrong with ((insert movie title here))"?
Ring a bell?

It's getting a bit difficult to find someone who doesn't have some kind of distain for the channel, which is rather concerning to me in terms of both average intelligence and (if I may say so) the "trigger resist" stat.

Now the logical follow-up question to that statement would be, "Whaa? So you're saying people who dislike what you like are stupid and weak?"

In this case.. yeah, pretty much.

Look at the complaints with CinemaSins that people usually make. They can be pretty thoroughly divided into two categories:

1.) Hating on the channel for "nit-picking" (basically the whole point of the channel.. the videos aren't meant to be serious movie reviews).

2.) Crying over the channel being too "negative" (I feel like these are the same people who thought their lives were in danger just from seeing Trump's name on their campus lol).

I may be slightly hypocritical in saying this ((LMAO can't even type that with a straight face)), but this is why I absolutely CAN'T STAND the CinemaWins channel. Because it was created in response to people creating problems with CinemaSins where there are none.

So can somebody PLEASE give me a logical reason for all this bitching?

[Anorack]

1. Cinemasins has a huge tendency to create sins and questions that actually have answers within the works that they're criticising. They'll say something wrong with it despite the fact that this thing they're saying is wrong has been explained at a different point in the same movie.

2. If their criticisms are meant to be jokes, that's made very unclear to their audience. For one, the number of people that think they're serious should say enough about how bad they are at conveying that they're not. But the other thing that should be talked about is the fact that these criticisms that are supposed to be jokes are also mixed in with criticisms that actually have legitimacy. This creates some really bad mix-ups when people wonder if they're actually being legit with their audience.

3. Their jokes just aren't funny. This is more subjective and less logical, but they just continue to recycle the same unfunny jokes to create another tally mark in what would be a somewhat shorter video if they hadn't been trying to drag it out. (i. e. roll credits, that's racist, etc.)

These are a few reasons among many why cinemasins is a bad channel. If need be, I can detail more

[FýrdracaDócincel]

1.) I can give you a bit of credit here as this is the only real issue I have with their channel. Like with their Warcraft video.. I was sitting there the whole time a little annoyed that the video was acting like the rest of the franchise doesn't exist (or is obscure.. which it isn't).

2.) Can't they just like.. figure it out?

3.) You're right.. it is subjective.

[Anorack]

All I have to reply to is 2 and there's a couple points to be brought up with it.

1. If the audience has to "figure out" whether or not someone is joking, the person executing this attempt at satire has gotten it wrong already. Good comedy is something that tells the audience right away that this isn't serious. But if the channel has to come out on Reddit and tell them outright that it's all jokes, they're doing something wrong.

2. One of the co-creators of the channel uploaded a video a few years ago about problems he had about the movie Christopher Robin being announced. This video was not meant as a joke, as was said by him in the beginning of the video. Within this video, he actually confirmed that the cinemasins channel was created as a way to tell Hollywood how they had fallen short and gotten lazy with clichès and tropes. Not once did he say that the channel was created to make jokes about movies or be overly nitpicking for the sake of comedy

[FýrdracaDócincel]

1.) By that logic, all jokes are bad due to the fact that some people are just idiots.

2.) In the video they made about their own channel, they explain why it's in "comedy" and not where it would be otherwise. Also in the same video they say, and I quote, "we're not movie critics.. we're assholes."

[Anorack]

If they really are just assholes and they're self aware of that fact, they would never have felt the need to address times they got things fundamentally and factually wrong. If they really are assholes they shouldn't care about mistakes. In fact, if they really are being asshole characters and executing satire, they would take ridiculously wrong information into their stride and use it to add to the satire. But instead, they went on Reddit and said that they messed up stuff in their videos "because we're human beings." Assholes don't do that

[FýrdracaDócincel]

You're right.. FULL-ON assholes wouldn't do that.

But "asshole" doesn't always mean complete douche-bag in every context.

[Anorack]

And that's the problem. Satire that's supposed to include an asshole character presenting it needs to be crazy enough for people to know that it's satire. Take the website the onion. If they executed their satire in the same way cinemasins does, it would consist of semi serious articles with frequent, purposeful inaccuracies in their information right next to real news stories that were completely accurate, all with nothing presented to tell people which articles are true and which aren't. Can you imagine how much flack the onion would get for presenting their satire like that when people can't figure out whether or not the article they're reading is completely true? That's what cinemasins does with their content and that's why their satire doesn't work.

[FýrdracaDócincel]

And now we come back around to my point of people being able to figure it out.
It's clearly not that hard since lots of people do it.

[Anorack]

And that point would be valid if the people that didn't understand that it's satire and thought it was legitimate criticism were in the minority. But they're not. If the majority of the people watching their content have that thought about it, it becomes much less likely that it's the audience's fault for being stupid and that much more likely that it's the fault of the creator for poorly executing satire

[MovingOnAgain]

For the first category, it could simply be possible that those viewers didn't see enough videos to understand the concept of his channel.

As for the second category, people probably thought he was trying to be fair with all CinemaSins review because they usually have moments where he removes a sin.

It's easy to see the stupidity of some people from your point-of-view, but others haven't necessarily had the same experience as you have. This leads them to have a different interpretation of the channel itself.

[VaIiant]

CinemaSins is hysterical.

[VaIiant]

Thanks for mho JC

[VaIiant]

Fyr* Goddamnt auto

[FýrdracaDócincel]

Of course

[Byakugan]

I like cinema sins. People take that channel waaaay to serious.

[FýrdracaDócincel]

Right?

[SirRexington]

I didn't know people did hate the channel? I like it, I watched the Jurassic Park 3 one that came out just the other day.

[Naditz]

I think they're hilarious.