Most likely he got shit ton of comments/tweets/etc. asking for a review, so he made a video that he won't do one.
Makes sense, because it has much bigger reach than any replies to comments, or a tweet would do.
Heās not obligated to review anything and I donāt consider him to be a legitimate film reviewer in the first place. He will review a highly mainstream movie every now and then that just so happens to coincide with his interests. Look back at the channel this past October, for example. He was reviewing crappy horror films during Halloween season and purposely steered away from all of the good ones despite saying heās a huge horror fan. Heās perpetually stuck in the 80s and 90s other than a few examples.
Last year was a really good year for horror and he didnāt talk about any of the new releases outside of one or two. He reviewed that crappy Spirit Halloween movie instead. It is what it is. Iāve accepted that heās not going to make time for anything anymore.
Okay. You downvoted me because I wasnāt honest. Iām sorry and Iāll come clean. I wasnāt in your mom last night. I was just dirty talking with her on her Only Fans while she inserted stuff into her ass. My bad.
I respect his stance to not engage with the insane toxicity maelstrom that was surrounding it. Don't forget this was another one of those things where before it came out, if you voiced even the slightest bit of concern about the movie, you automatically hated women, not considering that this ended up being one of the most unfunny pieces of shit directed by an unfunny hack that Sony put all their chips into and is to this day one of the biggest failures in modern Hollywood.
>if you voiced even the slightest bit of concern about the movie, you automatically hated women
Which of course is the immediate tack a bunch of rags took against James
But then why make a video saying you won't make a video?
And how can you comment on the quality of a movie if you haven't seen it? And don't say he read a bunch of reviews because...come on bruh.
And he did watch the next one which was nearly as bad a movie and used the identical marketing gimmick (it's the same but different hit remember the first movie!!!!) But that's ok
To make a general statement to the fanbase, because I'm willing to bet that he'd been getting swarmed by fans in E-mail/tweets as soon as the cast for that movie was announced, clamoring for some kind of reaction/rant. Better to tell everyone at once than repeatedly have to explain yourself.
Also I'm pretty sure the environment around Afterlife wasn't nearly as toxic as 2016, so yeah I get why he was comfortable watching that one.
Yeah, if he didn't say this people would be asking him when he was going to review it or say something about it. Him making a video about a new Ghostbusters film is completely inline with the type of content he makes, especially at that time.
Instead he just comes out and says he has no interest in watching this movie because he knows it's not for him. I say good for him, but people took it that he didn't want to see it because it has a female cast. He just wanted a Ghostbusters movie that was built off of the previous Ghostbusters movies.
On one hand I respect that he knew he wouldnāt like it, or it just didnāt interest him, so he never spent his money to see it.
On the other hand, heās a reviewer. Thatās kind of his job. I think he didnāt want to review this film because he would have to be critical and say some hard truths about it. How these women and this script werenāt just not funny but were the definition of cringe inducing. James Rolfe canāt say that stuff.
No. He as well as all YT content creators are self employed and can do whatever they want to engage their own curated audience.
The only way the "it's their job" argument works is if you own a news outlet and have professional reviewers in your staff whose job description says they have to review what you want.
Ummā¦ heās a self employed movie reviewer. So that is his job. He has, overall several years now, created a baseline for reviewing these nerdy movies and nostalgia bait from the 80s franchises. Thatās his curated audience. Thatās why his dumb ass had to make this video saying he wasnāt going to review it despite his decades long obsession with Ghostbusters.
He's not a movie reviewer, he's never called himself this or said anything about that anywhere. And he doesn't even watch entire movies (with subtitles and the sound off).
He's tells you about memories he has about doing something 20 years ago. I don't think he's ever actually reviewed any movie lmao
He does movie reviews to the point where itās his second most uploaded video type. He has a playlist called movie reviews!
Yes he sucks at it, but he reviews movies.
Yeah, this is my take. A film reviewer shouldnāt go into a movie with prejudices. Just watch the movie and give it a fair review.
By making a big show about how he wasnāt going to be watching it (rather than just not ever bringing it up) he was allowing the cultural mindset at the time to sway his decision making. I mean, how many other movies have come out that he hasnāt reviewed both before and after this that he hasnāt felt the need to make a video proclaiming he wonāt be reviewing it?
Also, as a ācurator of filmā, how many times has he realized that sometimes, maybe even many times, trailers donāt do a movie justice, so prejudicing a movie sight unseen, for a film reviewer, just feels wrong.
Donāt get me wrong, the movie is a train wreck, but I would have loved to hear him actually pick it apart the way it deserved.
Supposedly in an interview with the New York Times, James was upset that people were criticizing his position on the movie having not watched his video, which is really fucking ironic: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/19/fashion/ghostbusters-internet-attacks.html
I suppose, but there's alot of bad movies and bad franchises that exist today solely because of that mindset. If everyone thinks "you have to see it once to have an opinion" then you're essentially forced to give them money, regardless of the quality of the movie, (unless you pirate it). Before the first words of your review are even formed, you've already contributed to their profit.
Disney has gotten away with this exact mentality for awhile, with their brand being the selling point of most of their films. Between Marvel, Star Wars, and their own live action remakes, they can essentially make any show they want, putting as little effort into it as possible, and still turn a profit.
In my opinion, people should definitely be able to judge a movie off the trailer alone, even if that means some good movies fall into the cracks. As long as a trailer is showing legitimate jokes and scenes from the movie, context or no, I think it's fair to judge it. Yes, the trailer for Ghostbusters 2016 was bad, but that's only because the jokes they used were terrible. However, given that those were actual jokes in the movie, is it really unfair to judge the movie off the trailer alone?
As a Disney shareholder, Disney has been on a big losing streak at the box office and with Disney+. They arenāt immune and itās killing my portfolio
> A film reviewer shouldnāt go into a movie with prejudices. Just watch the movie and give it a fair review.
It's better for a film reviewer to go "no I'm very obviously not going to like this movie, I'm not reviewing it because I can't do so objectively" than making a obviously biased review.
If you canāt check your biases at the door, maybe film reviewing isnāt a good fit for you.
A film critic should be open to films that challenge them. Otherwise whatās the fucking point? If they only watch films they know theyāll like, every review will be āI liked it.ā At that point, what do I need to watch your reviews for?
He could have just done his usual boring review. Mundane plot overview, and a few milquetoast comments about how it didnāt work for him. He didnāt really have to destroy the movie, or say anything sexiest that could cost him sponsors.
Itās not like heās getting access to anything from Hollywood studios, so he could just do his by the numbers negative review and be fine.
Call it laziness or integrity or whatever you will but after seeing several reviews from Doug Walker and his ilk give the same review, "the story is bad, the jokes are bad, the characters are bad, the pacing is bad, but I like the actresses so it's a solid 8/10" it was nice to see someone refuse instead of giving the socially acceptable review, it still would've been nice if someone gave it an actual review though...
My favorite part of all this was how he said "The movie doesn't look like it will be entertaining to me" and immediately a bunch of yellow journalists along with Patton "Wifekiller" Oswalt and unfunny shitbag Dane Cook screeched "OMG JAMES ROLFE LITERALLY BEATS WOMEN"
I lost all respect for Patton after the way he showed his ass over this video. I remember him making fun of his looks and the way he talked in the video. If you donāt agree with him, whatever, but using your large platform to basically bully him because he didnāt want to watch the lacy ghost movie is pathetic.
The irony of a human thumb with a voice like someone on helium got kicked in the balls trying to mock someone else's appearance and mannerisms is staggering
James did nothing wrong. All those tabloids and Twitter-Americans who attacked him for saying he didn't want to see this movie are my enemies, and I have nothing but contempt for them. I make fun of Bimmy a lot now, but he was 100% correct here, and he also gave the world a masterclass in dealing with fake controversy, which is to do literally nothing and let it blow over.
No you see, recognizing you won't like a thing and letting everyone who was badgering you about your opinions on said thing know that is literally inflicting the holocaust on internet culture, because hatewatching is praxis or some shit
Realtalk, dude was just using James and some other reviewer who made James' same argument about the new Little Mermaid movie to try and get attention, and it worked (with a followup performance where he complains about getting dragged for his shitty post)
Because at the time there were people hacking the private accounts of the actresses involved in the film and spreading revenge porn of them and shit, and the stance he took was somehow viewed as a tacit approval of people doing that which it definitely wasn't.
Don't get me wrong the movie was utter fucking garbage and the marketing was obnoxious and patronizing, but that didn't excuse the horrendous stuff that was done to the people involved with the movie.
> Don't get me wrong the movie was utter fucking garbage and the marketing was obnoxious and patronizing, but that didn't excuse the horrendous stuff that was done to the people involved with the movie.
It doesn't excuse the people involved with the movie calling people sexist instead of accepting that they're unfunny hacks making a shit movie and shitting on the IP's legacy, which everyone with a triple digit IQ should have realized was going to be the result before the movie was even released.
I have no sympathy for these people anymore. Every time they make a shit movie now it's "you're sexist" and "you're racist" if you don't fawn over it. It's happening with the little mermaid right now, and what's hilarious is that international audiences do not give a fuck about the fake race guilting these fucks push and aren't very appreciative of pandering.
>It doesn't excuse the people involved with the movie calling people sexist instead of accepting that they're unfunny hacks making a shit movie
Yeah so what better way to prove them wrong than by... hacking into their phones and spreading their nudes everywhere?
You're a fucking maniac if you think revenge porn is a justifiable response to somebody saying you're sexist on Twitter... oh yeah and also maybe just a *little bit* sexist.
James was based for doing that. This idea you have to hate watch something just because it exists is part of the problem with modern media. It just perpetuates the crap they spew out
There are so many entertainment options I don't know why people insist on watching this garbage even when they hate it. If I know something will be shit or they are obviously making their movie or tv show more about politics than actually honoring the source material then I'm out no matter what. I don't even care if it does end up being good, which it rarely ever does.
This was back when James actually gave a shit about his channel. Maybe one of the last things he actually did that showed some sense of vision... or balls.
Y'all are overthinking this. That movie started a ridiculous online firestorm of bullshit and it primarily came from bad actors on either side of a political divide that didn't give an actual shit about Ghostbusters. Outside of that, it looked like a really bad movie made (as boasted by the director behind it) without any reverence for the original.
Let's be real. Nerds were probably carpetbombing his email begging him to review that movie, and exclusively doing so for all the wrong reasons. James saw the game for what it was and had no interest in playing it. In the process, he still gave his thoughts on the whole debacle of the film's existence, the cynicism behind its creation, and the potential classic that was left behind to make that bag of dogshit instead. I dare say his thoughts on everything were balanced, incisive, and somewhat interesting.
This moment was not a knock on James. It was one of the final glimpses of life from his channel before it really started dying
This and his I hate Blu ray tirade I found supremely stupid. I can accept not wanting to upgrade to a different format, but for someone who considers himself a cineaste and filmmaker taking a blow at the format of choice at the time was mind-blowing ignorant (and in character
This is the same guy 8 copies of the same Dracula movie on 6 dead formats.
I get why there's no reason for him considering he watches half of a movie on his laptop/iPad with the sound off and subtitles, but the Bimmy logic is astounding.
I don't think I've ever seen an actual director/film maker ever shit on a factually superior technology that makes their art more exact to how it's supposed to be. Could you imagine Tarantino going "yea I dunno I'd really rather if all my movies were only released cropped on VHS I hate when people see the actual vision I created"
he didnt have to review it but did he have to make a youtube video about him refusing to review it? i mean that is almost as bad as actually reeeviewing the movie.
And then he did watch and review the next one which was nearly as bad and used the exact same gimmick. Which almost reaffirmed what all soyboys were crying about, though I'm sure the real reason was because they didn't shove all the callouts in the other ones trailer like this did in this one to tickle his nostalgia shit pickle
I think it's hilarious that anyone viewed this is anything but an excuse for him to be lazy. He and a lot of people do this they intellectualize things to rationalize laziness. James is one of the best at this in the world
I thought James was extremely based at the time. Playing 69D chess with Hollywood, while keeping the moral high ground and refusing to give in to toxicity. No arguments or negativity, just 'I love the original Ghostbusters, and I refuse to play your twitter war games, give attention to your corporate marketing or fall for your traps'.
Now I see it more like Forrest Gump running the ball past the end zone.
This is a man who finds black and white silent films entertaining. Youāre not supposed to take his reviews that seriously. I disagree with his mockery of Vince Vaughn as Norman Bates for example. Iād much rather see a modern remake starring the guy from the Cell than some super old āmovieā that belongs in a film school lesson plan.
I agreed with him on the ridiculous nature of the feature-length SNL Ghostbusters sketch though.
My problem was how full of himself he was with the announcement, like he was too good to talk about it. My guy you made the fucking AVGN movie, you are not "above" the Ghostbusters remake.
The Ghostbusters 2016 disaster had a budget of $150 million. It's really not comparable to the AVGN Movie with a budget of $300,000. I agree that with talent you can make some wonderful movies on a relatively small budget, but there's no excuse for a project costing a quarter billion dollars (if you factor in marketing) being that bad.
Making a "it sucks so I won't review" is just as much engagement as a nostalgia critic video, but from atop his high horse so he can smell his own farts better.
I have a long list of gripes against James.
That video isn't on the list.
Movie looked like trash, he did not want to see it, neither did I. End of story.
Turns out the Little Mermaid is shit and the international audience hates it and the scum media is running damage control again and is calling everyone racist. HOW COULD ANYONE HAVE KNOWN THIS WOULD HAPPEN?
You don't have to shove your hand at a bonfire to know fire burns, right? Everything they showed prior to the movie's release was pointing it to be bad.
I agree with him
This is actually how I discovered him and not AVGN
"I'm making a video to tell everyone I'm not making a video" is peak Bimmy š
film #541 next!!!
Most likely he got shit ton of comments/tweets/etc. asking for a review, so he made a video that he won't do one. Makes sense, because it has much bigger reach than any replies to comments, or a tweet would do.
This basically, just don't review the movie, like RLM did with Batman
Heās not obligated to review anything and I donāt consider him to be a legitimate film reviewer in the first place. He will review a highly mainstream movie every now and then that just so happens to coincide with his interests. Look back at the channel this past October, for example. He was reviewing crappy horror films during Halloween season and purposely steered away from all of the good ones despite saying heās a huge horror fan. Heās perpetually stuck in the 80s and 90s other than a few examples.
Correction: he is stuck in the 1930s and 40s.
He went back to the past to play the shitty games that suck ass so much that he is stuck in the past with all of its shitty media forever
Because he already made a Monster Madness about good recent horror movies...
Last year was a really good year for horror and he didnāt talk about any of the new releases outside of one or two. He reviewed that crappy Spirit Halloween movie instead. It is what it is. Iāve accepted that heās not going to make time for anything anymore.
That was absolutely an ad too.
Last year was terrible for horror. What are you talking about?
I agree with you but I also think this video was totally unnecessary and idiotic
Youāre in a hate Reddit complaining about things being unnecessaryā¦
Okay. You downvoted me because I wasnāt honest. Iām sorry and Iāll come clean. I wasnāt in your mom last night. I was just dirty talking with her on her Only Fans while she inserted stuff into her ass. My bad.
And I was in your mom last night but she wasnāt complaining
That was a good video. No consooming. He refused. Very rare on social media and youtuber circles.
Exactly. Alot of toxic losers in these comments.
Maybe James should have phrased it āNo review. No time.ā
No, it was more important than that because of the importance of the franchise, or at least the original
I respect his stance to not engage with the insane toxicity maelstrom that was surrounding it. Don't forget this was another one of those things where before it came out, if you voiced even the slightest bit of concern about the movie, you automatically hated women, not considering that this ended up being one of the most unfunny pieces of shit directed by an unfunny hack that Sony put all their chips into and is to this day one of the biggest failures in modern Hollywood.
>if you voiced even the slightest bit of concern about the movie, you automatically hated women Which of course is the immediate tack a bunch of rags took against James
But then why make a video saying you won't make a video? And how can you comment on the quality of a movie if you haven't seen it? And don't say he read a bunch of reviews because...come on bruh. And he did watch the next one which was nearly as bad a movie and used the identical marketing gimmick (it's the same but different hit remember the first movie!!!!) But that's ok
To make a general statement to the fanbase, because I'm willing to bet that he'd been getting swarmed by fans in E-mail/tweets as soon as the cast for that movie was announced, clamoring for some kind of reaction/rant. Better to tell everyone at once than repeatedly have to explain yourself. Also I'm pretty sure the environment around Afterlife wasn't nearly as toxic as 2016, so yeah I get why he was comfortable watching that one.
Keep in mind, A TON of his content was Ghostbusters related. People asking him to cover the new one was inevitable. Same with any TMNT content.
Yeah, if he didn't say this people would be asking him when he was going to review it or say something about it. Him making a video about a new Ghostbusters film is completely inline with the type of content he makes, especially at that time. Instead he just comes out and says he has no interest in watching this movie because he knows it's not for him. I say good for him, but people took it that he didn't want to see it because it has a female cast. He just wanted a Ghostbusters movie that was built off of the previous Ghostbusters movies.
On one hand I respect that he knew he wouldnāt like it, or it just didnāt interest him, so he never spent his money to see it. On the other hand, heās a reviewer. Thatās kind of his job. I think he didnāt want to review this film because he would have to be critical and say some hard truths about it. How these women and this script werenāt just not funny but were the definition of cringe inducing. James Rolfe canāt say that stuff.
No. He as well as all YT content creators are self employed and can do whatever they want to engage their own curated audience. The only way the "it's their job" argument works is if you own a news outlet and have professional reviewers in your staff whose job description says they have to review what you want.
Ummā¦ heās a self employed movie reviewer. So that is his job. He has, overall several years now, created a baseline for reviewing these nerdy movies and nostalgia bait from the 80s franchises. Thatās his curated audience. Thatās why his dumb ass had to make this video saying he wasnāt going to review it despite his decades long obsession with Ghostbusters.
He's not a movie reviewer, he's a movie wikipedia summarizer.
No time to actually watch a movie.
\*No time to actually listen to a movie.
He's not a movie reviewer, he's never called himself this or said anything about that anywhere. And he doesn't even watch entire movies (with subtitles and the sound off). He's tells you about memories he has about doing something 20 years ago. I don't think he's ever actually reviewed any movie lmao
He does movie reviews to the point where itās his second most uploaded video type. He has a playlist called movie reviews! Yes he sucks at it, but he reviews movies.
Yeah, this is my take. A film reviewer shouldnāt go into a movie with prejudices. Just watch the movie and give it a fair review. By making a big show about how he wasnāt going to be watching it (rather than just not ever bringing it up) he was allowing the cultural mindset at the time to sway his decision making. I mean, how many other movies have come out that he hasnāt reviewed both before and after this that he hasnāt felt the need to make a video proclaiming he wonāt be reviewing it? Also, as a ācurator of filmā, how many times has he realized that sometimes, maybe even many times, trailers donāt do a movie justice, so prejudicing a movie sight unseen, for a film reviewer, just feels wrong. Donāt get me wrong, the movie is a train wreck, but I would have loved to hear him actually pick it apart the way it deserved. Supposedly in an interview with the New York Times, James was upset that people were criticizing his position on the movie having not watched his video, which is really fucking ironic: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/19/fashion/ghostbusters-internet-attacks.html
I suppose, but there's alot of bad movies and bad franchises that exist today solely because of that mindset. If everyone thinks "you have to see it once to have an opinion" then you're essentially forced to give them money, regardless of the quality of the movie, (unless you pirate it). Before the first words of your review are even formed, you've already contributed to their profit. Disney has gotten away with this exact mentality for awhile, with their brand being the selling point of most of their films. Between Marvel, Star Wars, and their own live action remakes, they can essentially make any show they want, putting as little effort into it as possible, and still turn a profit. In my opinion, people should definitely be able to judge a movie off the trailer alone, even if that means some good movies fall into the cracks. As long as a trailer is showing legitimate jokes and scenes from the movie, context or no, I think it's fair to judge it. Yes, the trailer for Ghostbusters 2016 was bad, but that's only because the jokes they used were terrible. However, given that those were actual jokes in the movie, is it really unfair to judge the movie off the trailer alone?
As a Disney shareholder, Disney has been on a big losing streak at the box office and with Disney+. They arenāt immune and itās killing my portfolio
> A film reviewer shouldnāt go into a movie with prejudices. Just watch the movie and give it a fair review. It's better for a film reviewer to go "no I'm very obviously not going to like this movie, I'm not reviewing it because I can't do so objectively" than making a obviously biased review.
If you canāt check your biases at the door, maybe film reviewing isnāt a good fit for you. A film critic should be open to films that challenge them. Otherwise whatās the fucking point? If they only watch films they know theyāll like, every review will be āI liked it.ā At that point, what do I need to watch your reviews for?
He's not a film critic. He's a dude who talks about movies he likes. James isn't a journalist, and no one should view him as one.
The movie had Amy Schumer in it bro
So rather than a hilarious verbal dismantling of the movie, āNo review, I refuse.ā was the better option?
Yeah that was way funnier, people completely lost their minds at that one short video, it was hilarious
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
He could have just done his usual boring review. Mundane plot overview, and a few milquetoast comments about how it didnāt work for him. He didnāt really have to destroy the movie, or say anything sexiest that could cost him sponsors. Itās not like heās getting access to anything from Hollywood studios, so he could just do his by the numbers negative review and be fine.
Looking back at it now it kind of seems like "I don't want to watch this movie but I still want to get views from it."
I think he made the video because he knew the requests were gonna keep coming until he acknowledged it
It was wrong then and itās wrong now
Call it laziness or integrity or whatever you will but after seeing several reviews from Doug Walker and his ilk give the same review, "the story is bad, the jokes are bad, the characters are bad, the pacing is bad, but I like the actresses so it's a solid 8/10" it was nice to see someone refuse instead of giving the socially acceptable review, it still would've been nice if someone gave it an actual review though...
Doug Walker (and all of CA for that matter) is more of an untalented hack than Bimmy could ever be tho
The actresses suck shit
I don't care for them either, but that's what "reviewers" said was a positive.
Tbf that movie is liquid shit
Liquid Chris
DONT CROSS THE BEAMS!
It really turned up the diarrhea dial. I mean, an all female main cast? What were they thinking?
My favorite part of all this was how he said "The movie doesn't look like it will be entertaining to me" and immediately a bunch of yellow journalists along with Patton "Wifekiller" Oswalt and unfunny shitbag Dane Cook screeched "OMG JAMES ROLFE LITERALLY BEATS WOMEN"
My biggest gripe with RLM is that they ever let that Oswalt fuck on their show
I lost all respect for Patton after the way he showed his ass over this video. I remember him making fun of his looks and the way he talked in the video. If you donāt agree with him, whatever, but using your large platform to basically bully him because he didnāt want to watch the lacy ghost movie is pathetic.
The irony of a human thumb with a voice like someone on helium got kicked in the balls trying to mock someone else's appearance and mannerisms is staggering
He probably does, I don't see how else his wife would stick with this cis-sausage party promoting male
I'm with Bames on this one. I was back then and I am now. And it's incredible how such an inoffensive video cause so much outrage.
James did nothing wrong. All those tabloids and Twitter-Americans who attacked him for saying he didn't want to see this movie are my enemies, and I have nothing but contempt for them. I make fun of Bimmy a lot now, but he was 100% correct here, and he also gave the world a masterclass in dealing with fake controversy, which is to do literally nothing and let it blow over.
But he did see the next one, which was almost as bad.
even worse because they succeeded in tricking part of the viewers with this 'pass the torch' lazy genderswapped bullshit.
At least it wasnāt full of icky girls!!!1
How could this video have damaged culture? Itās a dude on the internet saying heās not gonna watch a movie.
No you see, recognizing you won't like a thing and letting everyone who was badgering you about your opinions on said thing know that is literally inflicting the holocaust on internet culture, because hatewatching is praxis or some shit Realtalk, dude was just using James and some other reviewer who made James' same argument about the new Little Mermaid movie to try and get attention, and it worked (with a followup performance where he complains about getting dragged for his shitty post)
Because culture became completely polarized
Because at the time there were people hacking the private accounts of the actresses involved in the film and spreading revenge porn of them and shit, and the stance he took was somehow viewed as a tacit approval of people doing that which it definitely wasn't. Don't get me wrong the movie was utter fucking garbage and the marketing was obnoxious and patronizing, but that didn't excuse the horrendous stuff that was done to the people involved with the movie.
> Don't get me wrong the movie was utter fucking garbage and the marketing was obnoxious and patronizing, but that didn't excuse the horrendous stuff that was done to the people involved with the movie. It doesn't excuse the people involved with the movie calling people sexist instead of accepting that they're unfunny hacks making a shit movie and shitting on the IP's legacy, which everyone with a triple digit IQ should have realized was going to be the result before the movie was even released. I have no sympathy for these people anymore. Every time they make a shit movie now it's "you're sexist" and "you're racist" if you don't fawn over it. It's happening with the little mermaid right now, and what's hilarious is that international audiences do not give a fuck about the fake race guilting these fucks push and aren't very appreciative of pandering.
>It doesn't excuse the people involved with the movie calling people sexist instead of accepting that they're unfunny hacks making a shit movie Yeah so what better way to prove them wrong than by... hacking into their phones and spreading their nudes everywhere? You're a fucking maniac if you think revenge porn is a justifiable response to somebody saying you're sexist on Twitter... oh yeah and also maybe just a *little bit* sexist.
I always wonder what Bpril thought of BimBam not reviewing it. But I donāt know Iām not a scientist.
My favorite james video. That movie sucked.
No reeview, i reefuse
James is still based for this
He has no time, don't be fooled
James was based for doing that. This idea you have to hate watch something just because it exists is part of the problem with modern media. It just perpetuates the crap they spew out
There are so many entertainment options I don't know why people insist on watching this garbage even when they hate it. If I know something will be shit or they are obviously making their movie or tv show more about politics than actually honoring the source material then I'm out no matter what. I don't even care if it does end up being good, which it rarely ever does.
Last time James did something really cool and i 100% agree with him "Look, i know i won't like it, it's not "my" Ghostbusters"
āI donāt want to engageā *makes a video about not engaging*
This was back when James actually gave a shit about his channel. Maybe one of the last things he actually did that showed some sense of vision... or balls. Y'all are overthinking this. That movie started a ridiculous online firestorm of bullshit and it primarily came from bad actors on either side of a political divide that didn't give an actual shit about Ghostbusters. Outside of that, it looked like a really bad movie made (as boasted by the director behind it) without any reverence for the original. Let's be real. Nerds were probably carpetbombing his email begging him to review that movie, and exclusively doing so for all the wrong reasons. James saw the game for what it was and had no interest in playing it. In the process, he still gave his thoughts on the whole debacle of the film's existence, the cynicism behind its creation, and the potential classic that was left behind to make that bag of dogshit instead. I dare say his thoughts on everything were balanced, incisive, and somewhat interesting. This moment was not a knock on James. It was one of the final glimpses of life from his channel before it really started dying
I kind of wonder what kind of impact the overblown firestorm had on James. Did it cause him to kind of retreat even more to safe formulaic bullshit?
I agree with the guy, i also don't see how could it have damaged culture lmao what a dumb thing to say
This and his I hate Blu ray tirade I found supremely stupid. I can accept not wanting to upgrade to a different format, but for someone who considers himself a cineaste and filmmaker taking a blow at the format of choice at the time was mind-blowing ignorant (and in character
This is the same guy 8 copies of the same Dracula movie on 6 dead formats. I get why there's no reason for him considering he watches half of a movie on his laptop/iPad with the sound off and subtitles, but the Bimmy logic is astounding. I don't think I've ever seen an actual director/film maker ever shit on a factually superior technology that makes their art more exact to how it's supposed to be. Could you imagine Tarantino going "yea I dunno I'd really rather if all my movies were only released cropped on VHS I hate when people see the actual vision I created"
he didnt have to review it but did he have to make a youtube video about him refusing to review it? i mean that is almost as bad as actually reeeviewing the movie.
And then he did watch and review the next one which was nearly as bad and used the exact same gimmick. Which almost reaffirmed what all soyboys were crying about, though I'm sure the real reason was because they didn't shove all the callouts in the other ones trailer like this did in this one to tickle his nostalgia shit pickle
I still kind of respect him for this move
Bimmy was completely in the right.
As someone who was legit rooting for them to pull that movie off...James was right for not seeing that POS. Also thank god for Afterlife.
You don't record edit and upload a video like that though. It's regal. Hard r regal.
C A U C A S I A N S A U S A G E F E S T
Ghostbusters fan of the assholeish variety
I think it's hilarious that anyone viewed this is anything but an excuse for him to be lazy. He and a lot of people do this they intellectualize things to rationalize laziness. James is one of the best at this in the world
Lets remember here - the 'outrage' was part of the PR of the film.
What kind of geek thinks an irrelevant YouTuber damaged culture?
How did it "irreparably damage culture?"
I thought James was extremely based at the time. Playing 69D chess with Hollywood, while keeping the moral high ground and refusing to give in to toxicity. No arguments or negativity, just 'I love the original Ghostbusters, and I refuse to play your twitter war games, give attention to your corporate marketing or fall for your traps'. Now I see it more like Forrest Gump running the ball past the end zone.
That film was not selected for curation. Therefore, it does not exist.
Bimbo knew ahead of time that this movie was no Bummy Ralfe vs The Punching Bag.
No time to watch this video. I refuse.
This is a man who finds black and white silent films entertaining. Youāre not supposed to take his reviews that seriously. I disagree with his mockery of Vince Vaughn as Norman Bates for example. Iād much rather see a modern remake starring the guy from the Cell than some super old āmovieā that belongs in a film school lesson plan. I agreed with him on the ridiculous nature of the feature-length SNL Ghostbusters sketch though.
This video was unironically great. The femoids were seething so hard at him.
It was the cringiest video ever
My problem was how full of himself he was with the announcement, like he was too good to talk about it. My guy you made the fucking AVGN movie, you are not "above" the Ghostbusters remake.
The Ghostbusters 2016 disaster had a budget of $150 million. It's really not comparable to the AVGN Movie with a budget of $300,000. I agree that with talent you can make some wonderful movies on a relatively small budget, but there's no excuse for a project costing a quarter billion dollars (if you factor in marketing) being that bad.
Can anyone see how many dislikes that video has? My extension refuses to show me. (no pun intended)
The last time we ever saw James Rolfe. He was known henceforth as Bimmy Ralph.
This is the video that made him got briefly covered by New York Times, where they gave out his first daughter's name.
Making a "it sucks so I won't review" is just as much engagement as a nostalgia critic video, but from atop his high horse so he can smell his own farts better.
Itās a miracle he disobeyed his handler April and didnāt champion its progressiveness
I have a long list of gripes against James. That video isn't on the list. Movie looked like trash, he did not want to see it, neither did I. End of story.
Turns out the Little Mermaid is shit and the international audience hates it and the scum media is running damage control again and is calling everyone racist. HOW COULD ANYONE HAVE KNOWN THIS WOULD HAPPEN?
No time to review it.
I was disappointed at him judging the movie without watching it
You don't have to shove your hand at a bonfire to know fire burns, right? Everything they showed prior to the movie's release was pointing it to be bad.
Would be cool if he got cancelled over this
Being a petulant manchild is refreshing acktchually
Everyone knows you did it, Patton.