http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videolinks/thatguywiththeglasses/nost algia-critic/34498-thomas-and-the-magic-railroad
2 ma hataz!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eB-1k0kYhY
That was an interesting review to see. I'm shocked that they butchered Thomas so badly with all the unnecessary plots, not to mention the tacked on edition of "Sparkle, Sparkle". Why couldn't they just make a movie that only featured the trains? At least that would've solved most of the movies problems and produced something true to the spirit of the series.
shareBecause America are not content with bullying other contries to be like them they find it just as apt to rape their classic literature and television. Seriously America, *beep* you!
"Well I didn't expect a kind-of Spanish Inquisition!" - Monty Python
I enjoyed it, though I'll admit I was dissapointed at how little he knew about the actual show it was based on. While he nailed a lot of the horrible things about the film there is so much material that could have come just from comparing the film to the original show. Some of his few remarks about the original show were kinda insulting actually, like his claim about how the reason the mouths moved was because of a low budget (when in fact it probably had something to do with the storybook format the episodes were written in), and his early claims that Thomas was just a show that would be put on instead of Clifford the Dog. Then of course there was his remark about how he didn't even want to see the show because of how bad the movie is (anyone who grew up on the real show knows he's missing out on a lot).
I don't know, I'm maybe just being picky, but if he really didn't know the original show he should have actually done some research, or brought in someone who did know a thing or two about it.
If Clint Eastwood and Chuck Norris got into a fight, Clint Eastwood would probably win.
I don't like this movie but his bashing of the original show in the beginning was uncalled for. Also, the whole review he just comes across as a nitpicking douche. Again I don't like this movie but that review was not really that funny compared other NC episodes.
share
It is a shame too, since this was actually something I really wanted to see him do a review for. I don't know, hopefully Doug will learn his lesson from all the comments. I myself posted a comment in which I provided a link to a YouTube channel which specializes in posting the original, good episodes, and from what I could gather I wasn't the only one who felt that way. Maybe he'll at least do a commentary in which he'll apologise for that bit. Don't get me wrong I hate this movie, and it's a crap movie, but the main reason I hate it is because it literally butchered my childhood and from what I can gather quite a few others.
If Clint Eastwood and Chuck Norris got into a fight, Clint Eastwood would probably win.
Yes, NC fanboys need to realize we bash this review because he ignorantly bashed a show that many loved and cherished and then said he never watched it. They don't realize that the movie is a disappointment to fans of the show. Its kind of like in Follow that Bird if he actually bashed Sesame Street
shareActually, now that I think about it, even his remarks about Peter Fonda's acting are somewhat off. I mean I can see where he'd be led to think his acting is unneccessarily depressing but the show wasn't just happy-go-lucky trains; it actually could and did at times get very dark (that infamous episode where Stephney is nearly murdered by 'Arry and Bert in the scrapyard quickly comes to mind, not to mention the episodes where Stephney and Oliver are first discovered, actually a number of episodes where the diesels get involved, since they're basically the railway equivalent to the Ku Klux Klan), so that actually would have been one of the few things that came even romotely close to the style of the show.
Also normally even if he personally doesn't like what he's making fun of the Nostalgia Critic normally at least respects the fanbase. Moulin Rouge he deliberately blew his thoughts out of proportion and had people arguing against him. James and the Giant Peach he had the clever inside joke of being forced to do a positive review by his fans. Here, there's literally nothing, not even one cameo by someone representing the fanbase which he apparently never realized existed.
If Clint Eastwood and Chuck Norris got into a fight, Clint Eastwood would probably win.
take a look at the NC fanboys comments here on the video of the review. They act really defensive over him
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gz0i3zSO2U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDNMGmUDvrc
they just don't seem to realize why some people were turned the wrong way by the NC's review.
I see what you mean. Now I'm stuck in an argument with a stubborn NC fan who just doesn't seem to get in the comments for that first one your posted.
If Clint Eastwood and Chuck Norris got into a fight, Clint Eastwood would probably win.
I actually started thinking about it lately, and especially seeing his latest review of Transformers got me thinking in a slightly different light. Now I'm not saying this in any way justifies the things he said about Thomas, but attempting to see it from his point of view, the reason why he might have had that impression becomes more clear.
People like us grew up on Thomas. We've watched most of the show and got to know and love the characters. Doug on the other hand, did not grow up on the show, and his experience with it would have been from seeing bits and pieces and maybe some promotional material (and in this day and age 99% of promotional material, i.e. tie-in books and such, is based on modern Thomas, and in fact the Critic's remarks would match that version quite accurately), and let's face it, when you say the premise out loud it does sound somewhat silly. Don't get me wrong, because it works due to great execution but if you had never seen the show and someone came up to you and said "Hey check out this awesome show about a bunch of talking trains doing train things" you probably wouldn't get too excited.
Now let me provide an allegory of sorts, one that I started to realize after his review of the Transformers cartoon. I started to realize that Doug probably looks back at shows like Transformers, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, and so on very much the same way people like us look back at Thomas the Tank Engine, and by extent other shows we grew up with (in my case things like Pingu, Fireman Sam, Noddy, Theodore Tugboat, ect.).
Now unlike Doug I didn't grow up with Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles or Transformers, and in fact to me they never really meant anything. To be honest, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles always seemed incredibly stupid to me, but I never actually sat down and watched a full episode, I only saw bits and pieces through other people who liked the show.
Now let's say for the sake of argument that I'm an internet reviewer, and I find myself looking at a particularly bad Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Movie. I don't have the context of the original show, so everything I know comes from the few bits and pieces I've seen and this awful movie that I'm reviewing. Naturally, my impression of the show is not very high. I don't find it that hard to imagine making a few rather cruel jokes directed towards the show.
Now let's imagine that Doug is watching my show. He gets mad at me for insulting his favorite TV show and not really understanding it. I'm not totally sure how to react.
Now, again, I'm not defending his actions. I'm not saying that this gave him the right to insult Thomas. I'm simply putting myself in his shoes and trying to understand his point of view.
If Clint Eastwood and Chuck Norris got into a fight, Clint Eastwood would probably win.
I really don't get why people think this review was under-researched. Just like with Doug's 1st Movie, it's not like the knowledge of the show would have helped the movie or the review in any way. It was released in the theatres, and when you get released there, any accusations of "you need to watch the show" are null and void.
2 ma hataz!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eB-1k0kYhY
well for one thing he kept going on about how why big name actors would appear in a movie like this, if he looked it up he would realize that people like Ringo Starr and George Carlin were narrarators of the original show
he should have also found out that people who were fans of the original show were disappointed in the movie and reject it. The movie is not a representation of the original show anymore than something like the Inspector Gadget movie is like the original show people loved or that Batman and Robin is like the Batman people loved
there is more, I'll get into it later
Not to mention what he pointed out as a major flaw in that the mouths don't move. If he'd watched the original show he would have seen that it wasn't just because of a low budget as he claimed but because the episodes were written in a storybook format with one narrator providing dialogue for all the characters. In fact if he'd done even more research he would have found that the efforts to "fix" that have only made the show worse.
If Clint Eastwood and Chuck Norris got into a fight, Clint Eastwood would probably win.
Wow, I'd hate to see what you thought of Roger Ebert's review, considering he also had a problem with the mouths not moving.
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20000726/REV IEWS/7260301/1023
2 ma hataz!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eB-1k0kYhY
Here's what Rob said on Facebook about the "mouths not moving" comment:
I'm with Doug. If you're going to release something in a multiplex, you have to up your game. Did their mouth's move in the show? No. Probably because they didn't have a budget. But if I'm shelling out bucks to go see this with my kid on the big screen, you'd better at least make it visually interesting. This film didn't. It has cheap, Cheap, CHEAP written all over it. Alec Baldwin talking to flowers just doesn't cut it.
But the mouths not moving is honestly just part of the charm. It would be like in the recent Muppets that came out in theaters to make the muppets CGI creations to make them more "realistic" instead of using puppets.
shareI'm sorry but comparing Muppets to Thomas the Tank Engine is apples and oranges. In the show, their mouths didn't move probably because the stories were told with a narrator and most of the dialogue comes from their thought. It's not the case in the movie. They are directly speaking on their own so it's not absurd to say their mouths should move.
Who Is Driving?! Oh No! Bear! Bear Is Driving! How Can That Be??!!
As stated the Critic did not watch the TV show and apparently is not a fan of trains in general
Ironically he was in Lancaster PA recently where some of the film was filmed
And he is playing a character but he has got to realize not everyone will appreciate his rants
Anyone see Neal Patrick Harrisrant