 And away But what is ready and what is go if we look at monopoly go is, you know, very specific thing Go is a form of salary No, go is a video. No, not a video game board game. It's like the original board game, right? Sure, there's a video game of the board game though. Actually, I played it. Yeah, I'll next what 360 Know that go is the shortest sentence in the English language. No, it's the shortest sentence not the shortest sentence Yeah, that's what I said the shortest sentence. Yeah, when Americans say sentence fast. They start saying sentence Yeah, when you speed everything up you're gonna have to make budget cuts God you guys The tea didn't make the it just couldn't make the grade People are already saying wolf. He's he will be here. He's not currently here. It'll it'll happen eventually Unlike the rest of us here and the e-fap family Wolf likes to prioritize other things There's like life and stuff. It's just thing Doesn't he know that e-fap comes above literally every single thing we've spoken to him about this at length But he seems pretty steadfast that There are things that are more important than all of you guys now the rest of us Disagree and we disavow his position But he's definitely a work in progress and that's why you should elect us as your 2020 candidate for the presidential electorate election isa Yeah, I think that we're gonna bring the country into a new golden age of e-fap will bring balance to force Look wolf is just out for some cigarettes. He'll be back soon Any day now or have you seen the podcast between alt shift X and just right? That's a thing X never heard of him It does a bunch of Game of Thrones episode recaps and analyses and such He does pretty good work Accidentally found it already What is this? Episode 15 game of Thrones featuring alt shift X and just right So it's like someone else's podcast with them to on it, I guess Okay, well, I like alt shift X's work. I'm not a fan of just rights But I don't know what alt shift X thinks about Being objective about the work or whatever cuz he I've seen a lot of his takes and he usually says that his channel isn't about having a Personal take on what happens. So for example with how bad game of Thrones was he was like, you know This happens this happens this happens and that doesn't really make a lot of sense because this and I'm not gonna get into it That's not all this channel is for his like Well That's the true rags that is the true I used to read books, but then I Gave up reading for lint one year and I forgot how did that go it turns out reading isn't like swimming or something You can't just forget how to do it. So that's what happened. So now I only read through pictures and Very generous interpretations Do you read a picture? How do you read a picture? Well, I say that in more colloquial sense It's like to scan it with your eyeballs. Yeah to Excess aesthetics See lesson South Pole said he's been watching Sicario. Have you guys seen Sicario? I have not seen Rags can we watch that maybe even today? I've heard good things about Sicario, then they made a sequel and I almost made a video like is he like an Italian guy Yep, he's an Italian he makes pizzas, but He gets it's some bad luck his pizza place is attacked by spider-man and he has to fight him The spider-man universe great It's the Sam Raimi spider-man most people didn't know that was actually in that universe. It's only recently been uncovered Yep, because you never actually see Toby McGuire. You can only hear his tears Raising different scenes. It's really really good They are everything storytelling. Yes So so how is everybody it's been like 10 years since the last if it has been a while I Couldn't read last time either. Oh I mean that's good because it means that you'll never necessarily reach, you know an end So it'll all be middle and I've heard Mixed things about the middle. I'm always like the middle namely being in the middle. Mm-hmm. I I've heard that everybody prefers it these days. Yeah, everything's all about the middle or something I was Established that I cannot read I Just wanted to let you know that all the all like all the messages that we exchange You know to set up these e-faps and everything. I don't actually know what the fuck you're saying. Mm-hmm. I just have to go by your expression Yeah, like sort of like the volume alone. Yeah, kind of and I just sort of just Clap the keyboard and what happens happens More or invite hope that you've been getting legible, you know messages back Invite be high cheeks at me hi to eat If you would like to be on e-fap we would we would love You would appreciate it catastrophe Yeah, there was someone posted on our discord a screenshot of somebody in chat I must have missed it who said something likely, you know The reason you rip at this video parts because you break it up to pieces keep pausing let the guy make an argument That's like I don't think it's I don't think I'm not certain that's why we ripped into it. I think that the video was how we ripped into it. Yeah You know some videos can stand up I mean this is the thing we've covered videos on e-fap that we've actually concluded on too bad even with our format So some videos can apparently survive it Videos I like that are why it's no longer fashionable to be like an academic or anything Because people you will just go on the internet with some Reference to some book of some kind and start spouting utter nonsense in a video essay With like tangential reference to some kind of theory by someone or something. What are you saying? That's probably not even remotely relevant. You think it was bad outside of the fact that it lacked more middle Yeah, I think that theory just nailed it I don't see how anything else could possibly explain anything. I was so beyond impressed with it I don't know. I have to feel like there's some other issues going on. Hmm. Maybe that's just me Once said that a sandwich without a middle is only bread Hell Theo we're mad at him. Why have you ditched D&D for today? Do you do Theo? Yeah Well, this is the thing this was the thing that Theo was supposed to be doing last time But then we got sidetracked with being Nazis, you know, it happens. That takes my that takes her attention away Can't blame us for it. But this is the this is the final time You'll ever be taken away from D&D unless he wants to come on You have to know where you're my last ever parents goodbye everyone Your friends or us I mean EFAP comes above all like we said other than maybe oxygen will let you have oxygen. Okay That's our gift Cuz I need I need oxygen in order to partake in the EFAP. So I guess I don't need D&D in order to partake in the EFAP It's either us or Mihai cheek sent me. Hi. I can't get over that name Like how before we checked it it was funny that after we checked we're like that's still funny The fact that it exists is still funny It sounds like such a meme name You that's not a real name. I like how we instantly pause the video when he said that And again, I want to clarify you can have a funny name no matter where you're from that one's just hilarious That one's just funny Me hi cheek sent me hi. It's just a funny name I'm glad Imrable too And Wonder if you like learned English You know after having that name and then sort of look back on his name like oh man. That sounds really dumb But in a good way, it'll be a good icebreaker be like hey, I'm each high cheek sent me high people like what? My name is Mihai cheek sent me hi, and you know, I'm sorry. I got the first word, but what? Me hi me. Hi. Okay. Hello. Hi. No, no, no me. Hi. He's like, oh, I got you dude plays it I feel like that was about me is like oh you like to take it up the ass is like no no no Mihai cheeks sent like oh you sent your high cheeks, and he like writes all of it down and shows you like no Still don't follow me. Hi cheek sent me Hi, hello See we've already written like a whole Sent me hi Hello, Mihai cheeks sent me I wonder if his parents hated him And shouldn't it be my high cheeks sent me like no no no no listen Mihai cheeks How long's this scene gonna keep going oh the whole episode Um, so yeah, we the plan today is to talk about Finally just right which a lot of people have wanted to talk about for ages just writes a video on Objectivity and then if we can we'll get through another video on top of that after that one But before that but since it's thematically relevant There's another video that I was sent and I want to cover it first only 10 minutes This one is is everybody in the watch together ready to start up this disaster No, let me let me click on the watch together link and we'll explore This one is called modern critique bingo and it is a criticism of I guess video essays using words That uh, they don't necessarily understand And so that's something we kind of do sometimes Um, or if we don't understand But we we criticize people for maybe that but also maybe just not being clear on say for example Use one word and it can mean several things. It's like maybe tell us what you're trying to say That'll just using it and assuming we know what your chosen definition is that's kind of Yeah, yeah, usually get confused with that. I feel that people misuse the word facetious often You're being facetious Yeah I feel like it's worth saying that asking for clarification is a good thing No, it's bad if you don't understand what people are saying immediately the first time they say it You're a fucking retard. Well, he sucks. We're in a society with that's actually the case If someone says you're being facetious someone else might be like Yeah, I know And then they quickly About like game of thrones and I was like, well, could you could you define a nitpick? And they're like, what do you mean? Everyone knows what a nitpick is Except everyone disagrees and then eventually when I got him to give his definition It was completely different than mine on a very fundamental level. So like this is why we do this It's almost as if definitions are a lot more Made out to be there was an argument on twitter ages ago. It was like, um He doesn't even know what nitpick means about me and then they were like, what does it mean? They were like it means an invalid criticism I was like, that's what it means at all Isn't like I've always known mitten nitpick to mean a valid but tiny criticism very small one that doesn't really matter But it's still there In the way that's like your perfectly white suit has a small black piece of like, I don't know fluff on it I'm gonna pick that right off and like, all right. Jesus didn't really matter. You're gonna even see it It's like, yep. Yeah, it was still there It carries the connotations of like overreaching To try and find problems. Yeah, and then and then you can have people say because of that black piece of fluff Your entire suit doesn't work and it's like, um No, that doesn't really follow like how do you I don't know about that Uh, and that's what people are typically complaining about people nitpicking for they're like, don't know He only does his nitpick to try and say the thing is bad And it's like, oh, well, I think that we should talk about nitpicks because the reason why they're there Why and how we can get rid of them, but yeah, I wouldn't say that uh Everyone has a different definition of what qualifies that's the problem I mean, wouldn't things be better without those things that we could nitpick? Yeah, that's a simple piece of logic It's like why why not not have those things and how do we do that? Well, we need to identify them so we can learn how to not have them there in the first place. That'll be good Why not have consistent writing? Why not have no nitpickable things in it? Yes, um Which leads us to this video who's gonna bring up a lot of topics And this man's perspective on all of them and we're gonna have some fun on the burn Um, you guys ready? Oh, who's fun ready when you are? But yeah, again, this is called modern critique bingo if you guys want to uh, check it out yourselves All right, do we need to do we need like a bingo board in order to he didn't supply one with the video? I was quite upset about that. I thought that he would in the description give me a link to a bingo board But nope apparently not Gonna he's gonna do the bingo in for us Dx Here's dx following video is in the 21 9 aspect ratio select 1440p for intended viewing Well, hold on All right, all of like all of my videos are 1440p 60 fps or at least they are now Thank you. That's bullshit for helping me do that. Um, but I don't think I ever have to Change I I think if you don't have it in 1440p if you have it like 480 or 360 or whatever. I don't think he The youtube screen, right? I mean, no, it doesn't really matter I've seen the first few minutes of this and his footage doesn't Really you go to his video click on the link to the video. It's like in this ultra wide. Yeah But like his footage doesn't necessarily um Matter in it says it's just a series of clips in the background that not necessarily connected to what he says I might be wrong. I only saw the first few minutes, but it doesn't seem that important. But yeah Yeah, I've never I don't think I can remember another video that had this aspect ratio on youtube Criticism is everywhere. It's inescapable nature like the This is like an intro God, I hate it. I agree criticism is everywhere, right? Criticism is everywhere It's inescapable nature made possible by the accessibility of the internet has made at the forefront of many discussions About entertainment and for good reason the discussions we have about works of fiction promote critical thinking Especially when there's a back-and-forth dialogue about things we disagree on We learn a lot from the things we don't like and as of late I've seen a lot of terms and terrible rhetoric thrown around that don't really describe the issues at hand with A work as much as they act as a doorstop to any real discussion or critique. All right I guess that's up Seems fine Or critique today We're gonna take a look at a collection of these terms and explain their true meaning while sharply contrasting that meaning with the way They're popularly used today Oh god I uh, it can all right. So here's what I haven't seen this yet um, my prediction Is that his complaint will be that philosophically Object he's gonna apply some ultra anal philosophical definition to objectively hear that nobody uses Um possibly Philosophers use it. Well, I mean people People hey come on man philosophers aren't people um Yeah, well when I saw this I was just like oh god here we go because uh, I don't know. I feel like it's a very To be objective about anything like make a statement or a claim and it can typically be put into Objective or subjective and then it could be valid Or invalid as an objective statement like if I said Uh, there are seven bricks in that wall and you look at it and you're like, but they're eight So what I said wasn't necessarily subjective. It could have just been objective with poor information Um, but if I was like there are eight bricks in that wall, I'm I'm curious how someone would argue that You're not being objective You you were clearly influenced by your bias if there was actually eight bricks, I should be like, oh Well, you were using your eyes to make that calculation And so you're just using the interpretation of the light bouncing off of the objects, right? The redness of your eyes and scan it by your brains, which means that truly you can't be passive, you know I hope it's not gonna be one of those videos I mean I don't typically bother with people if they go that route because I'm just like, okay So you think that nothing can be objective whatsoever. It's like, okay. That was a great conversation by Most people I know are happy to agree on like fat Like there's eight bricks in that wall. Well, typically people don't like to go against science being objective That's that's a boundary line. They don't want to cross. So if they if that can be objective And we start to work from there and how can we how can it be approached without? Objectively is the most egregiously misused term in modern criticism It's also the most obvious because it's popular use and the phrase is objectively good and I think that The most egregiously over you or misuse thing is like theme Yeah, I think I agree with you on that. I actually yeah, I think I agree with that um People abuse the shit out of the word theme and they don't tend to actually talk about what makes uh A theme let's say well planned out or at least Uh consistent with the actual narrative versus just going It's a great theme They don't like to go for themes with strong like textual reference, which is how you make a strong interpretation right They just tend to you know Bring something and I don't think people are prepared to the work. I'd say I don't think people are prepared for the whole like, you know Our tlj's theme was blah blah blah then you go But this thing that happens in the film is in direct opposition to that theme and then they'll be like No, it's not I disagree There was no we didn't need to go to the like, oh, it's my opinion that he's like, no, no, no, no, these are the did did Do you remember we had this with major lee or it was like The whole idea of po didn't make any mistakes and his his argument at one point was the post The lair slapped him and I remember being like so by virtue of lair slapping him He did something wrong. It's not that she could have been incorrect about the scenario at all And he was like, oh, no, no Like, you know, it was the kylo kylo and wren were clearly kylo and wren Oh Um, no, maybe second. I remember I'll remember her now. I will do it rey is her name Not kylo and wren kylo rey Who are the characters? Featured in the last jedi in that discussion that we had We he brought up how kylo and rey had some romantic thing going on between them. He's not the only one who thinks that I found well He that is sad, isn't it? Well, he's just like, okay, okay fine. What are your references they touched fingers? Okay I've touched fingers I've had my penis inside of people that I didn't feel roman romance for well So this whole touch and fingers thing ain't gonna fly son Guys, I always find it really awkward in that film because she goes from like absolutely despising him They're like sort of liking him in just one scene Yeah, that's really poorly developed. That's how charismatic adam driver is and how the script just enhanced his charisma Uh, but yeah, he's so he said is his problem is with objectively good and bad So I'm gonna let him go on a little bit before I guess kylo wren. I can add one thing to that First order really quickly from Like I guess the philosophical count is that that is one of the main digs with objectivity is the idea of objective value Yeah, and then on facts How do you the jumps that people have issues with is going from holdos an inconsistent character in tlj to Holdos inconsistency in tlj is objectively bad Yeah, which and then turning that into a general rule You still haven't you have to dig deeper into all the definitions. So again, I was gonna let him go first and then I'll In modern criticism It's also the most obvious because it's popular use in the phrases objectively good and objectively bad Is the most evident in its contradiction Good and bad are subjective terms So good and bad are subjective terms The issue Is that good and bad as I've said on this podcast a million times and people really don't want to grasp this is if I told you to define good Your answer to me should be um Well, that kind of depends on how you're using it in the sentence. Yeah, because two different uses of good If we go with google you got one two three four five six seven seven seven main definitions So like the idea that someone uses it to mean having the required qualities of a high standard, which is the second most used definition Um people ignore that they're like, no, that's not what good means I got 10 here. So to be definitions as a noun and an adverb Yeah, that's the thing it gets even worse when you start to look into all the definitions as well because they can all vary to a different degree so If good if I'm using good to mean of a high standard and I'm using objective to mean irrelevant of my feelings Then objectively good means of a high standard with no influence of how I feel Does it not Yep In that and you'd be like well not necessarily it could mean and I'm like, yeah, yeah, yeah, but that's how I'm using it That's what I'm using it to mean. That's why I always say Uh objectively good storytelling typically in my videos I'm trying to grow out of just saying good because I know people for some reason will be like Wow, he's saying that objectively everybody should like it and I'm like, that's obvious No, that's not what I'm saying at all, but okay So over high standard and then you you can go on to say but a standard is subjective That would be the next step But like we couldn't even get that far with this guy as far as he's concerned good and bad are subjective things Um just to create the subjective terms and you know, I'd like to see some backing for that Exactly why that's the case. Maybe I'll go into that Yeah, and I don't know That seems and there were people out there who'll be like wow use google definitions that I'm like, I mean We can you you can use whichever one you'd like let's Google if anything is the simple ones which means that if you want to keep going in We're just going to get more and more and more exact and that only helps us And this is the thing google's just trying to represent what people are typically using it for that's what a dictionary is for It's like hey, this is what this word is typically used for and so I appreciate the fact that the primary definition is To be desired something that people like or want. It's like, yeah But that's not what we're talking about the definitions that google gave us you'd disagree with And and yeah, that's the thing if you're very specific about it And then I was going to say and that's why we use sometimes words like solid or um strong We say like writing is strong. You're like, what do you mean by that? And it's like usually mean tight What do you mean by that? It's like well without inconsistencies heavy objects That's kind of that's the primary definition is strong right probably. I don't know. I just this is the thing it's like He's already assumed that everybody's using the definitions that he uses Because I told you I already understand People there's some people out there who think objective means everybody feels that way We do see that quite a bit and that's something a lot of people have said just right said it One person agrees it can't be objective And that's that thing isn't nothing objective at that point because there's no there's always going to be one guy There's a crazy person out there who thinks the earth is a red velvet cake Or that the world wasn't birthed by the cosmic chicken like there are people out there who don't believe in that It's a travesty, but they'll learn they'll learn in the end And when it comes to settling on whether or not good and bad can even be objective One way to bridge the gap of a non-believer Is to ask if one thing Can be objectively more good or more bad than another thing If there are degrees to good and bad Anyway kicking on Add our subjective terms Objectivity is the opposite of subjectivity. No, that's not true The opposite the the opposite of objectivity is not objectivity And the opposite of subjectivity is not subjectivity I mean, is he kind of argue that they like fill two hearts of a whole That's probably what he's trying to get at but that's not actually if he's going to be anal then Well, we've had I've had a lot. I've had a lot of practice. Okay, so But carry out the opposite of subjectivity to use the term objectively in relation to the word good or bad Shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what the word means So by saying what the word means Implies to me that he thinks that there's only one way to use any word Pretty much There's what the word means of this. There's no other way the word is used which Yeah, he's wrong. And if I was to Introduce someone to the idea that a word can be more than one thing the word I would use first is Good or bad. There would be the ones I'd choose. I'd be like, yeah, these ones There's some of the worst for this shit. They can mean a lot of things Like what were the other ones we went over two of them we got um Skilled at doing or dealing with it. No way possessing or displaying moral virtue Yeah, we haven't even gone over the fact that there's a moral element to it Um, I guess that comes into the whole deserved thing giving pleasure enjoyable or satisfying To you about the About the herpes question Okay, I was just I was making sure who had and hadn't because I just trying to keep my brain straight here. What was your answer to that Theo? Uh It's probably expected, but I don't know if they deserve it He said I don't know if they deserve it rags. He's in the middle The the blessed middle. He's in the middle. Nice to be the blessed middle. He's an enlightened dissentrist. I'm feeling me in the middle Oh Yeah, so another definition is valid which takes you into a whole other fucking And then seven is used in conjunction with the name of god or a Related expression as an exclamation of extreme surprise or anger such as good heavens. Yeah Good golly gosh batman And so someone said good heavens that he goes you've used that word wrong There is no so you can't have something that is a good heaven Or something you should be like, okay In my opinion heaven is good Yeah, I don't know. I feel like this is already just having a good time Also, yeah, just whoever made this video if you have a catch wind that we've covered it You're welcome to come on and talk about these points because I don't know. I feel like he would fold on this immediately. He'd be like, yeah, okay There are more than one ways to use it I wonder if he'd say like only and you can't use it more than one way in film criticism or something Yeah, you don't get to just say that X and Y terms are subjective or our objective are something because That's not that's not quite how language works Especially words like good and bad because of your word variety of uses they have meaning Yeah, I don't even do they just have shared understandings pretty much because words evolve completely look at look at Look a massive We are so large Word good or bad shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what the word means Further the use of this term kills any discussion about the subject because it simplifies the subject by making it an undebatable truth Thus killing any So we have so we've had so many discussions Prompted around just the idea of objectivity as a concept and criticism. I think this is like the a discussion I it's it's almost you could just discuss this for ages I don't know if anyone who's making an objective claim with regards to a film is saying this is Absolutely the case rather than saying as the facts are right before me are presented This appears to be the case um X film is bad because Uh because of x y and z that has appeared to me from the film If anything Objectivity as we see it in media allows us to formulate those discussions and leads us to believe that we can Come up with a what we believe to be the the correct Um answer on something Yeah, I mean there's object. We we use objectivity as essentially the basis of the scientific method as we understand it and Lord knows there will be never-ending discussion As that topic's explored But you think we're gonna figure science out what I was gonna say there is to this day discussion on whether or not the earth is flat I don't think it killed discussion. Unfortunately. So cosmic chickens don't play flags. So a lot of people That's true I've asked chat a few times everyone's keeps saying rewind and I was asking why I can't seem to find Apparently rags objectively misheard something What did I miss here? I don't know I don't know either Also, yeah, the as as justin's just highlighted the fact that I've been trying to use objectivity in videos has caused massive amounts of discussion Oh, yes Um, all right. Well, we'll go back. No, like a good half a minute to make sure we've not missed whatever people Have been about it's also the most obvious because it's popular use in the phrases objectively good and Objectively bad is the most evident in its contradiction. Good and bad are subjective terms Objectivity is the opposite of subjectivity to use the term objectively in relation to the word good or bad Shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what the word means further the use of this term kills any discussion Did he ever actually explain how it's a contradiction? because Uh, the words are inherently subjective and you're trying to it's like I guess he thinks it's like you're saying that is objectively subjective even though You could say that actually Let's just say it Yeah, he's because he said the the use of the phrase is objectively good and objectively bad Objectively bad are inherently contradictory. You know, right? Can you tell us how? Yeah Rags so he uh, yo apparently he said objectivity He didn't say objectivity is the opposite of objectivity. He said objectivity is the opposite of subjectivity I thought you knew that I thought rags that doesn't actually change the rags. His response was that um, the opposite of objectivity would be not objectivity, right? That's what you said Yeah, yeah, I mean if you even if you swapped them around it would be the exact same thing Yeah, so yeah rags wasn't rags didn't miss here that that was it would be the same response either way But hey, look, I do try and I do kind of try and keep track chat in case we do um Make a mistake of some kind. It's all good. Um, you know who can't track chat wolf We can't if he's not even here It was a fundamental misunderstanding of what the word means Further the use of this term kills any discussion about the subject because it simplifies the subject By making it an undebatable truth Thus killing any elaboration on what is actually meant with the use of this term So the implication being that once I tell you that holdo Uh was wrong not to tell po the plan it kills discussion on the idea that she may or may not have been wrong to tell po the plan Yeah, we we've never had any discussions Around the last Jedi especially also, I don't think that it's a bad thing to reach a conclusion. Um, yeah, so it was like It's a carp before the horse almost for example, is it contrived that star lord punches than us in Infinity war and it it's a discussion that goes on for a while and a thanks to end game I think we've concluded that it's a yes now because dr. Strange would have seen it coming And he chose not to do anything about it when if he had it may have stopped everything Like if he just ported star lord out and the fact that iron man saw it coming And he could have probably blasted him away and he did nothing the fact that the gauntlet doesn't come off for ages Even though Thanos is asleep. It's like what's Put some butter in there guys come on Get get it out butter him up And yeah, and you talk about it for a while and a lot of people who Uh Probably included myself who comes straight off the movie are like no no no no no It makes sense because then you support it with all of the star lord's history But it doesn't when you get to the wider context and you're able to separate yourself You can reach a conclusion and then it's not like there's an ongoing discussion about whether or not the room is a masterpiece of filmmaking But like writing and direction and audio editing and stuff. It's like no, it's pretty much been concluded However if you would like to make an argument and have a discussion that would be great And that's what happens on youtube super fun You get those videos that are like turns out spider-man 3 from the ramy films is actually good You'll find a video like that and you're like, okay Give it to me. What have we got? Yeah, let's hear it The discussion happens then the consensus is is Reached and that's what's considered quote unquote objective until I suppose a better argument comes along and changes the consensus A consensus doesn't necessarily start from one person just going. Hey, this is my this is what I saw from the film And I think this is a problem therefore it is and the conversation stops there No, it's hashed out until a conclusion is reached and if someone says uh, for example Batman homecoming is a terrible movie We don't have to accept that We could be like, all right, give us your arguments We'll we'll argue against it because and there's not a limit on how many discussions you can have about a particular topic Oh You can just keep having discussions until the cows come home Literally and the idea that someone uses Object like it, you know So we conclude that this is objectively poorly written and he's sitting there watching the video like what? Well, now I can't say anything back. It's like, no, you can't they might have fucked something up. You can be objectively wrong Uh, because you got a faulty piece of information. I don't know Objectively is basically the n word of criticism So who do we get the pass from? It shuts down all discussion. Who do we get the pass from? um me Oh, you have the objective pass. I am uh I mean if you depends how you want how far back you want to go but I am I'm some part in word. I'm sure That's hello all my inwards. That's us. Wolf gave us the pass a long time ago He gave us a lot of the passes massive pass was he made a pass at me. He did Yeah Let's let's let's keep going. I guess see what else he's gone Thus killing any elaboration on what is actually meant with the use of this term by saying something is Objectively anything it robs that subject of its true meaning Oh, tell me what? Sorry, but what does true mean? Holy shit true meaning not one of them. They're false meanings How is how is uh, how can I not just reflect the same criticism on him? I'd be like True meaning does anything have a true meaning? Yeah, what do you mean? You mean objectively the true meaning or just what you feel is I'm not even sure I agree that anything has true Beating. What does that mean? What does that sentence mean? Robbing it. It's a whole weird fakey. It's a whole lot of buzzwords. I can tell you that much I was gonna say this is kind of an ironic video, but uh What so what are you saying something is objectively anything robs it of its true meaning? Yeah That's that's something to just stare at for a while I'm trying to oh how what if you're right though Is what if you're right about your assessment of its meaning then it doesn't rob it of its true meaning It just means you've described its true meaning If he believes that because he he says things By saying that he robs by him saying that the true meaning has been robbed. It implies there is a true meaning to be robbed Hmm I love just for him to develop that because it sounds like he's just a hypocrite right now. I don't know Is objectively anything it robs that subject of its true meaning Water for example is not objectively good for us. Water is essential to what it depends. What standard you use it Yeah, it depends on what you mean by good if you mean it is good to survive then Yeah, it's it's got nutritional value I suppose or you know you could easily have a scientific But then you could be like a water is objectively bad for us in massive quantities where we're stuck In it if you don't I mean like you can drown us water is objectively good in moderation Yeah, if the if the end point like if our goal here Which is an inch which is generally a good thing to have in these discussions is what is what are you trying to accomplish? What's the end goal? Human beings objectively need water to survive like I don't even What do you mean generally they do yeah, some are sewers some are suicidal Right, right. Well, I was just gonna say like is there can you can't like Whatever the compound is at the base level like humanity humans need it to To go on right like we dive dehydration before starvation Because water is more important on dementia. Oh, yeah, we quicker. Yeah I don't I mean, it's it's an oddly formed thing here That he would say I mean that's You want to frame all right if the goal is x and water has these properties and we know this about humans Then you can say barring freaks of nature Right and and flukes of evolution and such then we can conclude this about water's effect On human bodies that helps us to reach that goal that we've determined I think he's trying to use a different definition of objectivity. He's just not elaborating it on really well robbing it was through meaning because objectivity as used in philosophy and other places Is essentially independent of human thought Ideas or perception of the matter like the thing as it is kind of essentially And there's a whole argument around objective value in that case like that kind of objective value That's where again one of the big problems arises in that How does a thing get value without people to ascribe that value to whereas the value locate it within that thing Kind of deal if that makes any sense Yeah, sort of I think I think I know what you're trying to get To I think I'm I think I'm picking up what you're laying down The idea that uh, like For something to be valuable it requires like A physical requires sort of like yeah things around it to communicate that value With one another almost point to me point to me where on the human body the value is yeah, exactly It's valuable because of it's valuable intersubjectively rather than Objectively or subjectively necessarily like with our input or not water will Uh subsist a human being like it's not That's not debatable that yeah water can be absolutely the case But then it can also drown a human to facilitate survival And a human being these things are all true So it's like so is it objectively good? It's like well it depends on what you mean by good And if you mean it satisfies a standard Then you have to tell us what standard and if that standard is to Prolong existence for human in moderation, then absolutely it is objectively good And if you want to just look at water itself and say is water good or what is good water is like well That's another thing. Yeah, you know hydrogen and oxygen molecules in this arrangement So if it is arranged like that that is good water And if it isn't like oil oil is bad water And yeah, so this is the point his statement could be correct. It depends on what the context is What is he actually saying and that's in these videos? It's part of why my videos are so long It's like it all reaches one statement at the end Like right at the end of like so this is a piss poor piece of writing. Thanks for watching this past two hours Why is piss objectively poor though? Piss poor it refers to um discussion about it. It refers to the objective true meaning of writing Okay, this objective. Yes. What is the true meaning of piss? Substance that Yeah, we're gonna go into this You know, there's some water in piss. So it's objectively good for humans The water in piss is good water. Mm-hmm. This keeps shitty company. Uh, I get it Our survival with water we tend to conflate our survival with the concept We understand is good and we further conflate that with a truth that is self-evident and therefore objective Similarly interesting sentence. Yeah, I need to hear that one again Full is not objectively good for us water is essential to our survival with water We tend to conflate our survival with the concept. We understand so we conflate our survival with an objective good It's like um, you can do that. It's the whole point of the word May once we once we all I mean once everybody in the discussion If you don't want to set up an objective standard to work towards then I mean that's on you man Like is existence inherently good or bad probably not it isn't I wouldn't say I think it's Completely outside of good or bad because existence is just a state of something I think I think he stuck all the way back an objective can only be a statement of what is it can't be a statement of What's good or bad or what's high or low or what's Nothing anything further than that would be relative relative to something else and so it's invalid I'm stuck right now because he seems to have shot himself in the foot because he said water is not objectively good for us Like again, I think you can quite happily say objectively. It is factual that if it water enables our survival Then that would follow that it's good for us question mark It's good and a utilitarian Survival equals good like yeah, I don't know. I guess that comes down to sure It depends on how inherent to the universe you want to define it. It's like I I'm Perfectly happy going along with the idea that existence is neither good or bad It's just a state of something's reality or not, right? If you'd said water is object water isn't objectively good. That's something I can get behind but you said water isn't objectively good for us I was like, well, but it is This is an implication of standard. I would just be like, so what do you mean when you say that and once he explains it I can be like, oh, right. Yeah. So what you were saying was true Which is this happens all the time like this is why you always develop statements and stuff By saying something is objectively anything it robs that subject of its true meaning Water, for example, is not objectively good for us. Water is essential to our survival with water We tend to conflate our survival with the concept we understand is good And we further conflate that with the truth that is self. So what is good to him? What is good? Yeah, I was about to say when you say good for survival, which of the 10 definitions of good are we going for here? Okay, I because at this point does he is he referring to the moral element? I mean existence I would say is amoral. It's just yeah, that's because that's the thing He would actually be right. It wouldn't be a moral good that we exist But is that what he's saying? I don't know This is the problem with good and bad. You have to be a little bit more specific sometimes I have no idea where he's going in these past 10 15 seconds. I don't I don't know what he's trying to say anymore I had like vague ideas, but it's gone now Just again buzzwords, I suppose That's his point Theo We further conflate that with the truth that is self-evident and therefore objective similarly some critics tend to conflate well-written examples of character development or foreshadowing as Good and turn it into a standard when it was them who decided these examples were well written to begin with And also them who decided to work a fiction by We do not decide the truth the truth exists and our acknowledgement of that truth is irrelevant to it being a truth By labeling a work of fiction as objectively good or bad You're saying that what you're describing as good or bad is a matter of fact Despite you basing this off your interpretation and your standards for what makes it work good. Yep We acknowledge we base this and this or is it we explore this Critique essentially in the same way that we do science Yeah, we cross-reference it with other people what he just said is we try independent verification That's how we do everything what he just he just criticized how literally humans have approached analysis of anything Yeah, we set parameters I guess by the definition of objective he seems to be going with then sure And media analysis at that point would be normative or intersubjective rather than objective necessarily I guess I mean if we go with that if we go with objectivity as he's using it in this context Yeah, well because this is the thing it's like why is it that um raise That weapon that was going to kill ray disappearing Is an objective bad and my argument would always stem from The idea of progression of story is completely interrupted. So by the standard of The very piece of work you're trying to create you've damaged it In the same way that a pile of fucking bricks is a bad house And if someone was like that's not necessarily a bad house like by the standard of what a fucking house is It is and it's like, ah, you know, that's the subjective. It's like, yeah, but that's what we're talking about That's specifically what we're talking about in this Instance and it's like what if someone wanted to Create a story that was bad. It's like that's fine they can Still what it is And you know, it's the word bad that gets uh stuck in everybody's teeth, I guess You get upset by it because I think it's just too closely associated with a an emotional reaction And so they immediately when you say that they immediately think like why are you telling me my emotional reaction? That's not what it was Like oh, that's not actually What what what I was doing, but you know, that's how people feel but Pile of bricks is what shabby lattice to live. Yeah Very true The fact despite you basing this off your interpretation and your standards for what makes work good My real issue with this is how people just leave something at objectively bad Never mind the misuse of objectively There's often no elaboration on what is objectively bad about the work which I can say that we're objectively misusing it That's what it gets super complicated everything subjective that what if it's my subjective take that I'm being objective It's like oh Jesus at what point do you say, you know what we're just being so loose with this word What's the fucking point? I'll throw him a bone here. I have seen this people just calling a thing Objectively bad and leaving it. Yeah, but then then it goes the other way too But that's the the interesting part is when you explore the actual because like for example Uh We on eFap and shadow versity agree that tlj is objectively poorly written But we'll actually reach different fundamentals for why We'll have different sort of like base standards of storytelling They usually are akin to storytelling or relevant storytelling, but They're slightly different and the idea of like logical consistency is absolutely something that shad takes seriously But he also has a couple of other Additional ideas about how characters are meant to be written or what makes strong characters that I don't necessarily agree with I think they're good guideline sort of thing. So that's the really interesting part but the idea that nobody ever like Explains themselves or whatever. This is some people out there. I mean, we will do it Yeah, I do want to raise something really quickly off the back of that Just a question to I guess pick your brain a little bit if you all have different fundamental standards Is that still objective? Um, I mean, I guess once you agree on the standards Then it's not really our opinion whether or not it holds to that standard And there's two different things being objective to a standard and then having an objective standard in the first place Like what is a standard that is objective and to me? I think progression is inherently tied to the definition of what a story is. So it's like Intrinsically tied to it. You can't it's not an a standard that was brought in from my personal preference Like our all characters should have long hair Like what's that got to do with storytelling? So it's not really connected. Yeah, you could set that as the standard Yeah, and you could be objective to it Like we are going to set the standard for this discussion that long hair is good and long hair is measured by it being This long, you know, give a measurement, you know, 10 inches 5 inches, whatever you want to set it at and then boom we could now talk about this in a purely objective way hmm I've talked about that before like Someone says a film is only good if there's more than 10 people in it and then they watch a film That has nine and they go well that film was bad and they're actually being objective in that case To a standard that they need to let people know about this the idea that you go Subjective take because you just didn't like it yourself. It's like no actually funnily enough you Explore what they're saying they've remained objective to a rule set But then you can talk about how valuable the rule set is and I think logical progression is a really description It's not necessarily a quality assessment Because something could be objectively Objective but kind of awful. I mean quality usually adheres to the The degree to which a standard is achieved, right? So the standard in which progression is most coherent Would actually have a limit like if everything in a storyline follows then it is as coherent as it can be Therefore the maximum standard of objective progression and if it was Half and half or if it was zero you've almost you've generated a scale there. That's a technically a quality scale Even though it's based entirely on What are essentially ones and zeros? right isn't that in Like referred to qualia versus something else in like basic philosophy. I remember glib talking to me about it Because this is This is not something that we've come up with by any stretch of the imagination. This has been around for a long time Uh, that's not one I've heard or read about I'm afraid it gets very interesting when you start to poke really really far But no, oh, yeah, not all people do some people just say blah blah blah blah objectively bad moving on. It's like hey wait, wait, wait Yeah And yeah, and the unfortunate thing is the author of all of those statements may not know they need to explain themselves Sometimes like we say a lot on e-fab. We're like, hey, what does that mean? But you know, you do have to give them a bit of room to assume themselves Like oh, shit. I guess people don't see it the way I do. Fuck. Uh, yeah, so what I mean by that And that's the thing my videos can always be longer every word I use I could be like oh I could explain that one like I'm not going to go on a nitpick rant ever again Hopefully it was in my tfa part one and I'm never going to do it again But maybe I will depending on more and more people talking about it We shall see to our second term Oh god Good and bad writing are terms less offensive than objectively as the people using them don't think they're Opinion is fact, but they have the same What would be the point saying good slash bad writing instead of saying I don't like this writing or I like this writing You by starting off with the examples that he did he's almost kind of poisoned the rest of the entire video Yeah, because he can't be objective about any of this I need to stop and I think how is this like Significantly different from yeah Because I've already assumed I've jumped the gun on this I assume he's going to be saying that when they say that they mean the primary definition of good meaning They were satisfied by it Therefore This is what bothers me about videos when they say this is good writing I'm like when you say that do you mean this is writing you enjoy and then they go Well, what else could I possibly mean and I'm like oh right? Yeah Because they think there's no other definition So I'm just saying like why didn't you say that and it's like because it doesn't sound as good If you just end every sentence with and I like this it's like meh, but if you say this is actually well written Oh But yeah, I think that's what he's going to be running with and that's why he doesn't find it egregious I guess writing our terms less offensive than objectively as the people using them don't also again. Have you noticed how this just clips? Yeah, they're just they're just Yeah, and he has that thing in the beginning like this needs to be viewed in this one I'm like, why do you even need to see what's on screen? He had one little neat editing thing was when he said the words good and bad When he said good Batman was on screen when he said bad Bane was on screen other than that That was like, what are they right? That's not even objectively true anyway. So what's the point? Right Maybe he's just referencing what people typically say Don't think their opinion is fact But they have the same effect on a discussion because they generalize and quantify matters that should be discussed Or at the very least examined before judgment is made If I argue for a certain plot point and someone just tells me to stop defending bad writing They haven't made an argument Counterpoints are an argument. Um, does anyone ever use the phrase stop defending bad Writing as the entire crux is going to say that sounds like the end of the argument Who is this video directed at? Yeah, who are these people? Modern critique is modern critics, I guess Because you'll say stop defending bad writing Yeah, that's at the end of a long four hour effort. Yeah, I was gonna say that's after the consensus has been reached I would end up saying it if I was pretty much at the point of being like giving up You know, I'd be like, oh my god, stop defending bad writing I wouldn't start with that because I agree with him. That's not an argument. It's just a Inclusion statement. Hopefully you have an argument supporting it They haven't made an argument Counterpoints are an argument. Condensing elements that you believe to be bad or good without being able to explain why Doesn't help prove your point. Unfortunately, if you put most people on the spot They wouldn't be able to tell you what good writing is or how you achieve it I don't think you just said that doesn't exist anyway. That doesn't mean anything though Yeah, first off, it doesn't matter whether on the spot people can tell you that that's actually Not an argument. Sorry bud So good, but why would he care because they'd be wrong either way according to his previous fucking section Yeah If good and bad are inherently subjective terms and that sentence is it falls into the same trappings as the previous section on objectivity Why is this a different section? For one what good writing is differs from person to person that's why we set a standard we can all agree on right that Is So is so is the point of this section that this is the subjective angle, but they don't explain themselves Is that his criticism the first one is you can't be objective This one is you can be subjective, but you have to explain yourself. You can't just say it Is that the simplified vision? I think so anyway, that'll be my Best faith analysis of this how you achieve it for one what good writing is differs from person to person But more importantly, it's far easier to point out the bad things in entertainment than it is to explain the good things Why? I would I would agree. That's true. Um I I think that I mean I I think I I imagine the three of us would probably agree I'm not sure I do because theoretically it shouldn't necessarily be that way with how we've broken things down Why why would it be easier to break things down in a negative way than a positive way? Well, no, I don't think that's necessarily like the I the the whole idea of what he's saying I think that people do Kind of even if they don't even if they're not conscious of it immediately or even if they can't put it into words people sort of know or at least feel negative things, um you know Is like, you know when something bad happens you pick it up the whole you might not have noticed it But your brain did thing About bad stuff. It just stands out more like we know something's wrong Or are we feel something's wrong? Even if we can't kind of explain it? I uh I don't want to put words in you But I think you guys would agree with me when I said you tend to judge like elements and aspects of media in a Sort of functional sense like in terms of the role that is playing within the work and how Adequately it performs that role. Yeah Functionally, it would be a good way to you Yeah, so past that point I'd probably say it's a lot easier to tell when something is broken or not Performing that function like it is non-functional then it is to tell when something is Three good functional or thought it's harder to quantify positively than negatively You've still haven't seen far from home yet, right rags I haven't no, um, but let's like let's use a fork as an example Like if you if you put a fork Do you show someone a fork right and you show someone just a fork that's just Into in dust, right and you show the two of them to say which which one of these is I don't I don't know I get it's it's hard. I'm trying to find a way to really phrase the concept in my head. Um I think people recognize things are bad more clearly than they recognize things being good I mean, I would tacitly agree. I just uh On a fundamental level if we identify what's bad by being To a degree inconsistent then surely good is just identified by being consistent Which is pretty simple to spot as well as the opposite um, but Yeah, I mean, I think I probably just agree that we typically see The people are much find it much simpler to point out floors than uh Praise worthy elements. I guess What's the what's the word you'd use in opposition to floor? What's the antonym of floor? What's uh floor? Um That's interesting. Um the opposite of the floor. Well in the colloquial sense opposite. Um, I would say See what chat says now. Hey, yeah, um Merit virtue Yeah I'm with merit. Yeah, I'm with merit more than virtue. Um Virtue has moral implications. Yeah like deserve Yeah big a pro low and pro Benefit a strength or something uh because Uh, we're defining good relative to a standard as the degree to which a standard is met, right? I said I guess my point would be Very good The degree the degree to which a standard is met. It's a lot harder to measure like I suppose excelling at that standard or exceeding the standard then it is to see something Non-functional or below the standard and how many degrees below the standard it is the severity of the like issue um someone in chat said as well that Sometimes it seems to be that the The good is almost the lack of bad and so when you're watching something that's coherent You'll be like on the prowl for any deviation of that Like we consider good the default Almost yeah, and that's maybe why we're not wired as much to then engage and why something is good Because you'll find with a lot of critics and again, this isn't This is something I've always been working on as well. But if you go say for example, I just came out of fucking Homecomings terrible all these reasons you name all these things then you watch far from home You're like, oh, that was amazing and you go why oh, I just I really liked it. Yeah, but why? I Don't know I had a lot of fun with it And you're like, yeah, but when you said the other one was bad you named all these like mechanical things What's what's good about this one mechanically and you're like, I don't know everything worked Like a lot of people do have trouble with it But you know, I uh, I actually do think that there is like an equal and opposite So every time we highlight any kind of flaw in writing they will be the reverse of it Like Luke being out of character. What is the good vision of that? It's like well him being in character But we don't necessarily praise that because it's supposed to be default He's not supposed to be deviating from him being in character because that's like what the fuck I guess yeah, that's my point because then I ideally in this case We would want something above that for uh for a scale. We have insufficient sufficient Is it praiseworthy not to fuck up? It's like, yeah And then how do we start quantifying those positive elements in a praiseworthy manner There you go. I think we've cracked and now agree with what he said pretty much And I'll have a I gotta I uh, for there's a friend of mine here. Uh, Renzi channel Steve McCray. He's really big into philosophy. That's his bread and butter essentially So we need to get him on one of these days to talk about the nature of objectivity. Is he free right now? Um, I don't know But with uh, I think we'll be good for now, but we should probably Like we should probably pick a video specific to him being a guest Sure I mean because this is probably the only video a week ever covered a video wisecrack did Technically what they call philosophy right in the last defab Philosophy of the middle, but we definitely do a philosophy with just right soon enough. It's gonna be great The thing is differs from person to person But more importantly, it's far easier to point out the bad things in entertainment than it is to explain the good things To help with this, I'd like to quickly I would say pointing out and explaining aren't dichotomous. So And I don't necessarily find it that way for myself But I guess it's probably because I've been trying to work on that I like to want to start figuring out If if there's a bad then what is the equal and opposite and how do we start talking about them as well I need to do more praise videos I understand that I've only done literally the one other than saying positive things in the long form videos, but I want to do more positive ones as well. I just I'm still pissed about Game of Thrones. So To help with this I'd like to quickly explain what good writing is to me as it's important for the next term We'll talk about right to me a story any story at its core is about us Our perception of fictional characters is based entirely from what we understand of our own species A well-city of humans within its constructed world and convinces us that the events the characters are going through No matter the story's concept are actually happening to them And that the decisions these characters make are consistent with our own rationalization patterns What do you mean they're consistent with our rationalization patterns? They're them not us You're referring to us in a like does he mean the yeah Does he mean the as long as they behave in a way that we can understand would be a human way You're only judging this from the perspective of how a human would act and behave like hell. Yeah, I am you can have stories that Create a whole new being like a Vulcan, you know Like they Well, we can still objectively analyze the thing that they're doing We just say all right. This is how they behave and this is what their goals are and motivations are I'm saying that we can't we don't empathize with Vulcans necessarily Uh because of what we know about us is Oftentimes it'll be we understand how they work who they are what they do and then When they make decisions, we'll be judging it entirely from what we know about them We'll be like Vulcans blah blah blah created the concept of Vulcans anyway. So Clearly they can be understood with a human mind in a way. So I don't this is a silly point I was gonna say if that's all it is that yeah, I don't necessarily disagree with the idea that we judge everything based on how we understand everything It's like yeah Fair enough are actually happening to them And that the decisions these characters make are consistent with our own rationalization patterns Bad stories are the ones where the characters stop resembling people And you begin to see the strings on their bodies as the author or writer Marry and let them through the world with no one maybe Depends on what we're analyzing here. Yeah, I was just saying what about a character that's built that way? Like a robot or puppet controlled can still behave in objective ways or have objectively analyzable Traits This is really limiting on what a story can be And I think that if you were here you'd be like no, of course I'm referring to characters that aren't robots that that in context Have robotic decisions that don't make sense toward their own values or something like that and I'd be like well, okay I doubt he would say the you know robotic character is bad because they're robotic, you know What about human characters like explicitly human characters are made To explore a concept rather than to be as Close to being a human or like as humanoid and normal as possible Like that may have made an exaggerated abstracted ways to try and explore an idea Like and surely this guy hasn't forgotten that characters aren't human anyway Well, sure But are you referring like have you got an example of that theo just so I know you're talking about Like are you saying like a character that represents more of an idea rather than a person? I suppose. Yeah Um, I'm trying to think of a good example. So like a character like in Well, the female the female in uh, Chernobyl Uh, Cole mute, uh, I forget the name. It's a weird Russian name But she was an amalgamation of people in the real world. She wasn't actually a character in that sense Sure She's still seeing she was still pretty consistent in in who she was right. She like I believe so. Yeah Um, I was I was thinking more like, you know, like full metal alchemists. You have like Uh, envy is a character, but it's more of a representation of an idea Yeah Um, but again, I So if he was to say envy Uh, is unrealistic because nobody's that envious. I'd be like, well, that's the idea It's that it's envy in the purest form. I don't know Yeah, but we just say envy just has to be that envious That's the only person who has to be that envious is that character Yeah, again, you know, what's funny us about this is this whole video is just too short for me I feel like I'd love to delve into every one of these topics with this guy assuming he's um No, not willing to shut it down after every statement or anything Author or writer marionette them through the world with no attempt to mirror reality There's a very jarring feeling when a story starts doing this and one of the complaints that manifests itself because of this is I guess You can have that manifest through a character. I don't know not necessarily the behavior It's usually how they an action either survival don't survive arbitrarily It's it's it's if anything it's a lack of an event happening the lack of an event being that character's demise I don't I'm being completely honest here. I don't know many people who misuse plot armor. Most people seem to know what it is Yeah, and plot armor is I mean just like real armor. It's not all the same So there are some things where someone could like Explosions are great because they generally have a randomness to them. Yeah, which means some people can seemingly miraculously survive explosions and other people can Tragically die when you wouldn't expect it So when an explosion happens on screen and a character doesn't die from it Oh, that's not quite as plot armor e as someone say being crushed by a Extremely large ridiculous object and surviving as a result Not all plot armor is the same essentially because of this is What no one tells you about plot armor is that every character has it fictional stories are not retail. Okay Does that need to be told to you? Okay, depending on what you mean by it though like Technically me and rags have plot armor in that we are human beings that have basic defenses and an immune system um We have armor against certain things from happening, but like plot armor usually refers to like armor that they shouldn't have Or Surviving because the plot wants them to survive Someone gets hit on the head and then the next scene is like they died from that You're like what they would just hit on the head with like a fucking shoe like why did they die? It's like a lack of plot armor almost or anti plot armor I guess you could try and overextend it and say say that like any given narrative has a requirement that Certain characters Make it to a certain point such that the narrative is able to proceed And thus like they have to survive to that point. Thus they have plot. Yeah, even if it never I would agree But even then it's I think people have like a tolerance for plot armor levels Like people don't complain about like Frodo and sam surviving often, but they'll really complain about Yeah, john snow surviving massive aero follies and cavalry charges and you're like What a lucky guy, you know Congrats you be cancel you must have great plot armor and excessive luck can sometimes probably be interchangeable as well I think I think it's a category. Yeah, I agree justness Yeah, yeah, exactly People can only tolerate so much because people ultimately understand they are watching a story So people have a tolerance for what they will Ultimately see and what eventually happens Yeah, and like in in stories like if a character gets shot in the gut, we all immediately understand right clock's ticking They have to get to a hospital now otherwise Give it like, uh, yeah Handful of hours will see them go pale handful of hours more and then they're just not moving not talking You're like, oh, they're probably dead But if they get like shot again and then again and then a week later they go to the hospital We're just like this fucking shit sucks And if someone's like, why does that suck? Why can't that just be the story? It is like well because the stakes How could I care about anything that's happening if there's no rules? Hey, what is a slightly tangentially related question? Sorry not on e-fap Would it be plot armor if a character survives something like incredulous and then they're just completely plot irrelevant Um, like they do nothing for the entire rest of the film But they they survive something they absolutely shouldn't have is that plot armor? Um, I guess the question then is is plot armor directly related to their effect on the plot? Yeah, is it contingent on their importance on the plot may um, I don't know. It's interesting I don't know if it's I don't know if I'd say that that's necessarily how I use it I usually just use it to mean that they help them survive something that should have killed them I use it with reference to like their importance in the plot like It was the plot itself that gave them their survival So whether they're important to the plot or not It was the plot that determined they survived and arguably their plot goes on whether or not it's relevant to this story Okay, so it's it's arguable, but I like the question. Yes Um, and again, both of those would still come down and under luck. You should be like a fucking Or you just say no, it's just inconsistent. They were shot in the head. They didn't die. Fuck off Tellings of real world events where luck and randomness are indiscriminate because stories are constructed narratives They can only simulate the factors of luck and randomness And it's the degree to which they do it that we can calculate their believability as a reflection of real world examples It's not just luck though. We're talking about like if you have a character that gets their head chopped off It's not lucky that they survive it. It would just be a direct contradiction. You really you can't survive that like but they did Like okay, okay You do not then say they're lucky. That's not a thing you say It's not lucky when a person survives something with About as close to a hundred percent fatality rate as you can get and then yeah fine in the next scene They literally separated by the atom ultimately plot armor does rely to some degree on Individuals ability to believe something that happens on screen But I think there's enough I think there's enough people out there when you talk about plot armor with people They're like, oh, yeah, absolutely was the example you gave an explosion Everybody react like a hundred people see a guy with an explosion of dynamite threw me as away from him And then he falls over and gets back up straight away half the audience is okay without the other half are like what He he's just straight up dead. Maybe all the audience are okay with that but some are like wow that was Okay, yeah We can talk about the concepts of plot armor without all necessarily having to agree that it is plot armor or not And then we the fact that we're discussing that whether or not it is plot armor means we all are trying to come to a conclusion Does it meet the requirements for this thing? This thing is a thing we have all agreed exists Even as a concept. Yeah, and we usually we talk about feasibility to Stop it from turning into a plot hole and turning into just a convenience slashing convenience when it comes to Plot armor like being disintegrated or being shot in the chest and get into the hospital in a couple of hours It's like I think that could work and then you google it You're like how long can someone survive a gut shot Then it says you know it says however long and you go, okay, I guess I can believe the character did that then that's fine Just my understanding of how gut shots work, but the literal chopping off someone's head and they survive was like Sorry, you have to have an in-universe rule for that like this character's Species their heart is located in their fucking head or something and you're like oh Hmm World events where luck and randomness are indiscriminate because stories are constructed narratives They can only simulate the factors of luck and randomness and it's the degree to which they do it that we can calculate their I wouldn't say they simulate it. I say they determine it um Simulate luck and randomness does he mean that it's all preconceived by a writer therefore none of it's actually luck or randomness It's just simulated. Yeah, I wouldn't I don't think simulate I don't think simulation is a good way to describe it really. Oh shit Someone's just a super chat no plot armor and cicario 2 I don't actually want to say it until you've seen the first of rags cicario 2 is a fucking disaster and I hate it It's insult so I've heard that cicario 2 is not nearly as good as the first one I hate it, but I've heard almost universal praise for cicario 1 But I can say without spoiling anything a character is literally shot in the head And then they're left for dead and then a day later they get back up and they continue living and It turns out They had this big cover on their head and they were shot through both of their cheeks Um, that's yeah, that's possible. It's possible. This is the thing. It's not an actual contradiction. It's Wow It's not unheard of I can believe someone getting shot through the cheeks. Absolutely. I've seen pictures of it but Oh, man, why would you aim for the cheeks? There's some bad odds. I mean you can have your jaw blown off and survive This is what I mean. It's like, oh my god, you're so lucky The bullet went through one cheek out the other and I don't even think it hit his teeth Oh that movie anyway This is where it's a complete it's a it's a middle finger to the audience So like that's what I would argue I'd be like, yeah, that's just a fuck you It's just like look the character you care about is now dead. It's like lol. No, he's not you're like, what? Why did it? Okay fine There's a fucking random guy just fucking hated his cheeks And it's the degree to which they do it that we can calculate their believability as a reflection of real world examples As long as an author has a story to tell Well a reflection of real world examples if you're gonna say reflection of real world examples It's to probably if you're trying to reflect something maybe a real world singular example Also, you tend to the real world is just a shit ton of general trends Yeah, and and funnily enough you would tend to go for the general ones if you want audiences to be convinced They need the ones that people people typically understand like I said about the gut shot one Does anyone know how long it takes for someone to die from a gut shot because I don't actually know It depends where they were shot what they were shot with It depends how quickly they get first aid. It depends how quickly they get to a hospital There's a gajillion billion million variables to something like that And then if you have but this is the other thing It's not even necessarily that though because if say they were shot by a You know a quantum phase ray. I'd be like, okay, so what is that you go? Oh, we'll go to episode three they explain that a quantum phase ray fires blah blah blah and it does blah blah And I'd be like, oh, okay, so I actually you need you need the additional shit Otherwise I can't follow the stakes. I need to know what this stuff does um Like a lot of shows and tv will have tranquilizers the instant action and work on humans and it's like It's not logically impossible, but that's not how they generally work in the real world, but we can buy it I'll just uh, okay. I guess they have that kind of thing in this world. Sure. Yeah Whatever, I mean, we do it with time travel all the time. We're like, I'll buy it Yeah As an author has a story to tell the characters in that story will always need some sort of protection from the story's choices to imitate real world hazards Stories are contrived in their very nature because you have to take characters from one point in time to another Depends on how you write your story Yeah, um, you couldn't literally because I'm pretty sure georgia. I'm on has talked about this. He does Have a couple of endpoints. He wants but Uh, it's the whole garden thing. I think someone said garden versus something else. Oh, that's architect Oh, there you go. Yeah, I would absolutely prefer an architect approach But I appreciate a gardener approach the idea that you're like you set your characters You set your will and then you let them go and you write as they would do what they would do and then Things will happen because that's what happens in real life All life is is a fucking bunch of motivated people with a world that has rules and then things happen And you can you can you know have a tsunami here and there like ultimately Roll the die every five chapters to see if a natural disaster hits and then if you're like, well How do you know that the story will be interesting? It's like well in a world where you've got Seven kingdoms fighting over a chair Some interesting things are bound to happen Problem with that approach is you get what georgia or martin has right now Which is uh, the work spiraling out of his control. Yes more and more elements get introduced The mirror needs not as well, right? That's the famous one. Yeah, that's the one One point in time to another both points of your own creation as a writer While we as people are affected by factors outside of our own control all the time Stories are a nullification of these factors because characters can only go through what the story wants them to Not necessarily It's kind of a weird way to put it. They go through what the story wants them to Is uh, you can have characters that essentially dictate their um their journeys Via what they want or where they want to go like I said that again the gardener approach kind of Count as that depends on what you I mean, it's a quote unquote rule that you generally want a fairly active protagonist Does it other seeks out and does things towards whatever goal it is they have And it's not the story writing and their goal for the story is not Everything I want to happen everything that I desire to happen in a story will happen in this story sometimes things happen in a story and the The uh, the artist of the story that the author that is yeah, I don't really want it to happen I don't like it, but it makes sense in the story and it makes it very believable. So therefore it will be in the story I am ignoring my own personal desires It's the kind of thing that happens when you write yourself into a corner You realize I need to I need to either let something really bad happen that could affect the narrative further down the line Or I need to you want a character to live But they're in a position where they just can't live and you're like, yeah I like this guy Because characters can only go through what the story wants them to these factors have to be reintroduced at the expectation of an audience Yet not at the random apparel of necessarily. Uh, you don't have to Whether or not people like it doesn't have anything to do with Any of that actually what what the story wants them to these factors have to be reintroduced at the expectation of an audience Yet not at the random peril of the characters So while it's easy to say that a character has plot armor It's far more beneficial to explain the situation the character is in has issues with its believability And examining and that's what it is Who doesn't think that's what plot armor is It's pretty yes pretty much intrinsically tied to believability and that's why if someone says This character's got plot armor and then you go, uh, no, they put the mithril vest on earlier in the film So that's why they survived that and you go what the fuck's a mithril vest? It's like the strongest I think I started off by saying it was about the audience's tolerance Determines whether or not they would call it plot arm or not, which is essentially believability is the tolerance whether or not they can believe it Is this video addressed to five word long youtube comments? Because that's the impression I'm getting Because like Who says these things who are these people and where can we punch them? Has issues with its believability and examining and critiquing why that character or characters Are in the situation they're in to begin with since we've started talking about characters Another 10 cent phrase I see getting to run around a lot these days is Should be fun. Yeah, I don't know. Where's he gonna go with this one? Oh, yeah I don't even know if I could answer to guess Character arcs are a story's way of simulating how people change through the course of their lives based on the experiences They have one of the problems with the term character arcs and their Whoa, whoa an objective standard for critique Uh, you guys slightly ahead of me. I think I need to rewind I'm at 622 621 I'm trying to go to six and that work Change through the course of their lives based on the experiences they have One of the problems with the term character arcs and their sudden bizarre inclusion as an objective standard for critique Is anything bizarre about it? Is he doing that in like quotations like objective standard or is he saying like that as an actual objective standard? I don't know What about I'm confused here because how is character arc a standard Well, but I was going to say I don't even agree because a character doesn't necessarily require an arc Static characters are fine. Yeah, the pens are fine It's contextual dependent on Well, for example, what is the arc of um, you can name a lot of villains villains don't typically go on arcs What's the emperor's arc? Is he a bad character because he lacks an arc? really So I guess I need more information on yeah, if he's gonna because it sounds like he's not gonna agree with this either Um, again, I need to know what the people he's arguing against are saying Yeah, I don't know. I don't know if I agree with Yeah, I don't know if these are real people or if he's just fucking up some dudes. He's thinking about in his head pretty much Is that they imply that characters must change and that if a character reverts I mean, there's probably some guy out there No, you know what you know what I have a reference People told us to respond to Jenny. Is it Jenny Nichols or Jenny Nicholson? I always fuck it up I don't even know it doesn't matter. Uh, she she says she's complaining about the characters in rogue one And she goes through them all and explains. They all don't have arcs And I remember Like listening to it and being like, why is this your standard right now? Like why can't you talk about what they do and who they are? Why are you talking about whether or not they have an arc? I was like, that's a strange If they have an arc talk about the arc and how well it was executed, but a character doesn't have to have an arc Yeah, um, so there are people who apparently use it as a sort of like Litmus test of how good a character is I suppose And you know typically again, this is not an objective good or bad as far as I'm concerned But typically people will like a protagonist in a long story to have an arc I like to see a character change over time, especially in relation to events that they experience It means it means everything was, you know, it's all remembered. It was all impactful. It was all worthwhile. It wasn't just Watched it and now it's gone. Yeah, it's just how people generally are their collections of memories that respond to events and Is that they imply that characters must change and that if a character reverts to a previously plotted point in their arc That their arc is then ruined character. Well, that's possible. That's possible Some people can naturally regress Again, it's all contextual I feel like this is a very loaded kind of thing to say because you know Oh a character reverting to a previous stage in their arc or having their arc undone. Where have I heard that before? I guess tlj, but game of thrones Game of thrones Jamie Lannister is upset many people But um, yeah, the that's definitely um, something you can say. I'm curious if he just does he just flat out disagree with that Characters like people Change if they want to and it's the nuance in that choice and how they interpret the experiences that change their lives That is interesting Not the mere fact that they change by implying that the only good characters are the ones who have changed Through the course of a story. We ignore the fact that there are people in life who don't I feel like are we trying to defend? Who says this what's gonna say whoever said this is wrong? Yeah, whoever said that's clearly wrong. I don't even know if I don't think anyone in our audience would say You have to have a character arc for the story to be good Or for the character to be a good one and then to the idea of is it Strictly better for a character have an arc than not I'd be like not necessarily There's it's really dependent. It's complicated Depends on their role within the work What is what is jack sparrow's arc throughout all of his films doesn't pretty much just stay the same Not like his whole thing And yet people absolutely adore that character So I mean as long as people if people don't change but behave consistently. I'm totally fine with that Kind of raise Heath Ledger's Joker Yeah, I mean a lot of people they don't change very quickly The dude are consistent with themselves And this is the thing if it doesn't make a character bad to lack an arc and therefore character with an arc could still be really poorly written um Because the arc can be broken. Yeah, but the arc cannot work. I guess he's implied that That isn't necessarily true. Oh, someone said patrick said it and that gave me a bit of a flashback I think patrick says about batma versus superman But the character's like a flat slash don't learn anything Which there's like there could be an implication there of patrick saying that they have to grow and change in order for it to be good Or at least engaging for him because he obviously doesn't believe in objective stuff I don't think anyway What was Ned Stark's character arc? Um, there is something there. He at the end of his rope. He does give up on his idea of always Being honorable and honest in order to try and save his daughter's life and it ends up technically killing him I would argue that He breaches but the thing is that's not necessarily against his character because he's already breached his quote unquote honor to protect john snow so Extremely often. I like no character is perfectly consistent with their morals or at least no human is I don't think I don't think so No, the real world is a the real world is a very messy place that doesn't care about your perfect streaks. So I think it's just natural for I think it's just inevitable that at one point you're gonna have to make hard choices Ned's character arc is big alive and that big dead It's definitely a change From one place to another also shagley boy said post of it. It's coming. It's gonna be really long I've already tested more than half of it on fringy and he liked it even without seeing game of thrones. So It's coming. This is a common People are gonna keep asking me but it's coming Change in that they can be equally as interesting as those who do for example General Zod is the same character at the beginning of man of steel as he is at the end of it But that doesn't make his interactions with the world around him any less interesting because it's his conviction that defines his See so he's just I actually have a criticism for him now because he's he said people saying character bad if no arc and then he responds with It doesn't make his interest is in interaction with the environment around him any less interesting It's like oh was that was what they were saying by good or bad Were they saying that if you lack an arc as a character you are therefore less Interesting when you would interact with the environment. Is that their standard? Be nice. We knew what they're standing because I was gonna say like I did maybe that's true I don't know. I don't think I'd agree with that I kind of yeah, I broadly agree with what he's saying, but It's it's quite easy to agree with um Yeah, I guess we'll just I don't care, you know I guess he's just making standard arguments for why a character isn't terrible Even though they don't grow which I would agree with him on so because it's his conviction that defines his character As he is quite clear about his unwillingness to change Stories have the incredibly difficult task of trying to mimic human behavior Characters that don't change are hard to write but characters who look like they're changing and then don't are probably the hardest What do you mean? Why did you reference jamey lannister when he said characters that Look like they're changing and then don't he does change He literally abandoned cersei lannister to fight for the living That's an action. You can't just say like no, he was just lying Like he nearly dies like three times in that episode. He did it, but he was lying. Yeah, he didn't mean it Fuck off You can't reference any scenarios of him like quote unquote relapsing throughout like after he leaves Other than the part where he just up and decides and I'm going yeah, it all seems to be a collective Uh decision. It's like he doesn't ditch. He's still team cersei Um when he gets back and he sees what she's done He's still team cersei then he sees that she blows up the sevens like still team cersei I want to go back to it, but as soon as cersei basically says I would rather everybody die than lose the throne He's like, yeah, no Like I like you and everything, but no, this is too much. I'll stick my dick in crazy And then yeah, so and and the whole brand that's the point going into it here But like if if that's not a character dark break. I don't know if there is one Don't are probably the hardest We're not very forgiving of irrationality in our characters because of how out of place it can seem in our own day to day Well, that's why you have to set that up. You have to show us The elements of the character that inform that you don't just have it happen ie star lord Like the idea with jamie is that supposedly cersei's supposed to be something like an addiction to him and uh Addictions are supposed to be a constant temptation. So he relapses We need to see that. Yeah, we don't see that We see that he's he's kicked it Yeah We've we've seen that uh jamie. He's kicked his Cersei addiction. I suppose otherwise then nothing is anything anymore We're just like, oh so anything can happen because anybody can really make any action ultimately Like rags could just randomly jump out a fucking skyscraper window. It's yeah humans can do it Like what why why it's the sub it's the subtext of rags realizing the futility of life The futility of being objective yes Are probably the hardest we're not very forgiving of irrationality Sorry, I mean dying is not objectively a bad thing for me. So In our characters because of how out of place it can seem in our own day to day lives But a character we think makes an irrational choice that sets their progression as a person back to square one Isn't instantly a bad character nor you just implied then that there is such a thing as a bad character Is there or is there not and does he just mean they're not this thing Oh, so you think this thing is a thing that exists He's fucked because he just said that and it's like, okay So you don't mean objective, right because you're just talking about uh subjective stuff because there is no objective bad And he'd be like, yeah, and I'd be like so why are you saying that whether or not Someone can dislike a character has to be based on them do an x y and z when when it's all subjective anyway You can dislike a character for being consistent I could be like I fucking hate this person because they always do x But he's just yeah, it's no fun. He's just running himself around in circles You can't say like oh, it's not that doesn't make a bad character. It's like you can't decide that if it's entirely subjective screwed himself by saying that good and bad Uh, uh inherently subjective terms that early because then he had to write the rest of his script without saying good or bad ever again As a person back to square one isn't instantly a bad character nor that choice automatically illogical Irrationality exists and it's important. I think we should I think we could fairly well Measure whether or not someone's doing something logical or a rational, right? Yeah, or a rational. Yeah I mean unless that comes into the whole you can be irrational while being logically written as I'll just keep using star lord as the example The problem with him hitting thanos isn't him hitting thanos that makes complete sense It's like we understand why he's doing that. He's a very emotional character. He loves gamora. He's already done this previously Like that's fine. It's the other surrounding elements and what the character the other characters are doing. Um So like the the idea that someone does something absolutely out of character and insane and his answer is well You know people are irrational. It's like that It's just like patrick williams people aren't logical Are we really that irrational apparently we will see that there's such a thing as crazy people do things that they believe to be rational Yeah, there are crazy people in the world my conclusion on this one Even crazy people will behave in a way that they believe is rational Well, I would want to write a crazy if I had a crazy person I would prefer that I have some level of like There's a consistency to their insanity if you if you know what I mean just for the writing sake of it thanos is a fucking psycho, but he's following rationality That he thinks he's being rational Even on a more fundamental level in a sense a character is a collection of attributes assigned by like the creator To explore something or for whatever purpose that character might have all of those attributes Rather than and like that has to account for that has to account for something so You can't just deviate from that at any point because then is it really the same character I just spits in the idea of progression then as well because any character can do anything at any time So there's no point in even having fucking characters Why even have names everyone is everybody Why why do I bother assorting these characters and attributes just call them a1 a2 a3 a4 And then you're like, why did you say a4 did something? It's like it may as well just all be a Don't call them characters. Just call them events A4 jumped out a window then a3 called him and threw him out another window To analyze whether or not that choice the character makes along their arc is one that is true to the character By defining everything as a character arc. We're saying that progression What the fuck are you talking about? Define everything by character when you define whether or not a character is committed to an action That's true to them. You have to figure out what their values are what their motivations are and then see if it's in line. So um I hate the x's and chap all the way Sorry Apparently the x's and chap the creator of this video. Oh my Well travel fast on the planes. Hello there. We're nearly done with your videos, uh If he is in chat I scrolled up and I saw someone um dx. Do you think that your video is good? I think he thinks it's good I just want to hear him say that his video is good because if he I know you're going with that right Uh, we shall crack Oh, yeah, there he is. Hello We are responding to your video, so By defining everything as a character arc We're saying that progression must be linear when sometimes it's circular Just because an n is linear the results can be circular I was about to say it wouldn't a circular progression still be linear It would have gone in a complete circle. It wouldn't have jumped around the circle Yeah, results can can come you can have repeating results. So we call that circular However, the progression is going to be linear Um, because like jamey lannister people are calling that circular while I would call it a 180 and then jumps right back Like he gets halfway around the circle and he just fucking teleports back to the beginning point I think because there's no there's no progression there from further on It's an arc from a to b I suppose and then no arc back just You know you flickers out of existence at b and reappears it That's not an arc and that's not circular either. But yeah, but the idea that I don't know Like I don't know anybody who really defines everything about a character through their arc as opposed to What they value like I said, that's that's where I typically would start and their values may change across their arc like, um A lot of the times like a character's arc They'll they'll have a fundamental value that stays the same, but maybe they will Change the way that it's expressed or at least Will they incorporate a new value? Yeah, like it's learning something about I mean Or an experience makes them appreciate something like oh, I appreciate my family now. I appreciate, you know It's a reference to all homecoming but Going from I must get into every battle possible and help every person possible to I must pick My battles and do like responsibly act responsibly and use my power correctly not just jump in Um, it's the same value the goal of helping people, but it's like expressed in a different way. Thanks to the arc When sometimes it's circular Just because you end up at the same place that you started doesn't mean you haven't grown as a person That one dimensionally. Yeah, you can go back on one thing, but you can develop in other ways Um, yeah, so I guess dx if you want to Uh Come on you welcome to do you have discord? Well, um, we typically since we're close to the end. We'll try and finish a video and then we'll talk about it That's what we did with the doom sausage man I think that's what we've done with everybody pretty much Stand on its own a car did we do that with snowman gaming? I think we got through most of it I don't know if we finished. Yeah, I think we pretty much finished it I don't think we've ever had someone in while we were watching their video As a whole the video should stand on its own Yeah, so in the description for this video, there is a link to my discord get in there and then at me Um And then I'll I'll add you into this conversation. Be wonderful. But uh, we'll sort it out. Like I said, we'll just try and finish this video Change who you were to begin with the final term. I'd like to talk about is a strange one Subverting This movie Uh Wolf unironically believes that rye johnson's destroyed the concept with the tlj because some food expectations are such a like Neutrally understood. It is. Well, we we use it as a meme, right? Don't forget. Don't forget benny often. Why is this contribution to that? destruction of subversion Well, they've also destroyed foreshadowing like the concept That everyone's had to talk about foreshadowing versus development. Thanks to them In theory, a story that subverts expectations is an amazing one It does two things we've already talked about It creates a cast of characters so closely resembling actual people that their behavior is consistent and therefore their actions predictable Yet it also forces these characters into situations that make us question whether or not their choices that have subverted our expectation of the choices They would have made were choices that were true to their characters. Yes In a way In theory, it could be very good. So like a character who's I just think that you need Uh, not a strict one-dimensional source of information need a bunch of things like um There are characters throughout buffy and angel who some of them have a rule of never kill humans Some of them have a rule of never kill good people And so they will come conflict is the same with superhero like stories where the punisher versus daredevil for example um and so Could you enter into a scenario where the person who said they would never kill a person Would and you'd need a bunch of additional information and context to be able to set up this moment But maybe maybe that's something you would expect because you understand the I guess the ultimate What's like a great subversion of expectation? I was going to reference the depart. I already did that in my video. So um, you argue net fate as a subversion who's Game of Thrones net starks. Oh um Yes, actually probably one of the best because it's the reason we don't expect him to die is because of meta subversion Yeah, we understand that you don't kill not only a top billing star, but you're protagonist. You don't kill them That's not something you do But everything points to him dying in that episode There's no reason why he shouldn't and then the closer and closer you get to it. You're like no no No, the other characters react when you're like, no And yeah, he doesn't come back so There's a couple ways it depends on what you're subverting. I suppose which expectations complicated feet I tend to be of the opinion that a subversion is like it's still a kind of payoff in terms of setup payoff kind of Uh the way films are made like it still comes from something within the work yeah um, and then again It's like a our expectation of what the character will do or what will happen to the character Where the story will go. There's lots of different things. There's lots of different, uh, I guess Ways we can gain our expectations like, you know, you can have a scenario where something happens Then two people one of them is like, yep, that makes sense to the ones like what that that came out of nowhere and it's like, uh, so They got information differently The problem with this line of thinking and why this phrase needs to see the pits of hell soon Is because you don't actually need well written characters or difficult personal choices to make the Of expectations a component doesn't have to be think of Yeah, you don't have to submit. Yeah, you don't have to have subverted expectations to have a good story Not at all a lot of the times they can't help if they're done right But as we learned from the last Jedi if they're done really crappily Then it really hurts the final product. They expect everything to be meaningful. Let's make nothing meaningful Okay You got me You showed us you've successfully paid off nothing Of expectations a component of your story think of subverting expectations as a box Now i'm going to put everything that has ever fooled me into thinking something about a character or a situation Inside of that box without any context as to how I was fooled by the story That is the problem with this term I said that a character's behavior has to be consistent so their actions are predictable But that doesn't mean you have a great character on your hands because I don't think I mean by any of these Tim's though if none of them are objective Is just great just mean character you like in which case Are these are the is there a standard by which we can objectively like measure Um, I wasn't measuring what makes a great character is a consistency because he was almost saying like he doesn't You don't require x y and z to make A character great and I'm like, but what is a great character by your own definition because I thought that wasn't a thing Beyond you saying the character you enjoy I don't know this is true either for every general zod. There's a uran gray joy Both characters never changed, but only one was actually interesting Wait, is he saying that uran is interesting? I some I hope no reference got earlier. I think in a mo in a some I don't know. I think that was a positive reference for zod Yeah, all right. I yeah because I haven't seen man of steel in long enough to not remember if sod was like I don't know A great character. I hesitate to ask chat because I'm pretty sure everyone hates man of steel You know, we could uh, we could explore that one one day. We will I also said that irrationality exists and while the choice a character makes that subverts expectations Could fall under legitimate irrationality It also could have been pulled out of the rear end of a horse. Right. So how we define that is the important part how we figured that out Was it them being irrational but within character or was it them being uh, out of character? If we label anything under subversion of expectations, we're not actually specifying the quality of that subversion Yeah, no, I agree with him You need to be more specific than saying it subvert my expectations. Therefore good Yeah We're just what if your expectations were good? What if your expectations were excellent and they made sense and they were rational And then therefore the traits of what's what made it subversive was the fact that it was terrible What if the subversion doesn't Doesn't pay anything off doesn't do anything with any of the material present and kind of I guess squanders in that sense Like say tlj. I guess Think that they did really well. I don't know what you're talking about I didn't see that shit coming That it's a subversion and many people think that subversion is objectively good I don't know who says that which brings us back to objective I'm sure there are people in there The problem with modern criticism is that some critics both professional and amateur would rather encapsulate their criticism into descriptors Than actually mostly a games critic these days But my ability to resonate with an audience still comes entirely from being able to explain in great detail How something fails or succeeds If I said a gameplay mechanic was objectively bad and left it at that the viewer Oh, yeah, I did saying something's bad on its own isn't boring. So you gotta say why You don't get to say something's objectively bad without then qualifying Yeah, before or after because otherwise. Yeah, what's the point? It's just a thumbs up or down for every video. It's like, okay Doesn't learn anything if I explained why I thought this mechanic was objectively bad The viewer learns something But is in a poor spot to debate because I've determined that it is bad No matter what if I explained not bad no matter what no matter what you haven't explained it It's a different sense of objectivity Yeah Because yeah, I completely agree dude like if I said to to rags the Fucking end game is objectively badly written 100% and that's it and he's like wait and I go. No, that's it I'd just be an asshole It wouldn't be the we're having that that word doesn't stop discussion I guess because that's something that he's echoed from earlier in the video Um, but what it tells rags is that I've got information that goes beyond my feelings and so he can be like so What are you referencing? Well, I really all I know is that you believe it. Well, no, even all I really know is that you've said it Well, I'm going on the going on the fact that you know me rather than I'm a random person Like you know that if I say it that I'm probably gonna have references, but Yeah It doesn't end the conversation is my point Why the no objectively doesn't Conversations if you say something objective at in stations. There's no discussion that can be for me. It's a great I'm like How dare you Rag is we haven't like you haven't like built a channel around that as your main contentious point. No I wonder if he's heard of me. He probably has Add no matter what if I explained why the mechanic works against the player's goals And how it also works against the intended design of the developers The viewer not only understands my position on the topic. I would understand your argument I'm not sure I'd agree with it if uh you said a mechanic was bad because it wasn't necessarily intended Oh, yeah, you can fuck up into a good mechanic. Yeah We can offer their own insight on the matter which could influence my previous judgment We all benefit from having a discussion on these issues But only if we actually talk about the issues and not summarize our opinions In terms that sound cool without any reasoning as to how we arrived at this opinion Or what to do about it. Oh, this sounds like this guy might be on team efap to a degree We're all about people explaining everything they say I completely agree with him. I just don't know who he's talking to necessarily and don't agree that when you say something Objective that there's no counter-argument that can happen Some of my criticisms do amount to like nobody's explaining what they like we do that on efap regularly, right? All the video essays we cover when they just Say a thing is a thing and we're like, what do you mean by that? I mean we kind of done it with this video too I mean it happened Which we're all free to do Obviously, but the more people who do it the less nuanced a topic becomes Until the only thing you have left to talk about is how much you hate what you're talking about All right Uh So he is he's joined the discord. Just I'll get him I'll add him as a friend If you accept my friend request, I'll jump you into this call mr. Dx What did you think of the video guys? Um It's far from the worst bag. Yeah, it's definitely not even the contention for the worst video we've seen So you take that as whatever victory you want to Just uh There's certain misconceptions about how objectivity or objectively rather tends to be used by people Did he actually ever define objective? No, that was part of the problem is that he's assumed there's one Definition I suppose the the two the two uses of objective I tend to Be familiar with uh the more journalistic sense of let's try and be as unbiased as possible To be as you know fair to the subject as we can and then the more formal sense of Irrespective of human thought and ideas on the matter The thing as it is I guess Hello sir Hola, what's up guys? Hello, let me just do a nap on a podcast So your video was sent to me a couple times because it's the That first word you tackle is something of um I'm I'm I'm something of a proponent of it in youtube criticism of you have you heard of me before I'm like a demon when it comes to this sort of thing Yeah, I've heard of you, but I haven't seen your content. Um To be here to be fair though. I don't watch a lot of youtube content these days. It's just a time So you uh this video you made it after I'm assuming seeing these ways being used in a couple of videos Sure, I saw them in a couple of videos. Uh, I saw them on reddit as well read it to a very strange place for criticism Can I ask if are there any like youtube critics that you don't like that? You really think don't do a good job at what they do? Are the people who like you just don't think are good critics? Uh, sure, you know, I was watching a skill up video recently about uh, Wolfenstein young blood and regardless of my feelings on that game I feel like it was a pretty shit critique. Um, yeah, I don't think You went into the right mindset I mean if you have somebody that doesn't play first person shooters review first person shooter It's it's topical, you know, so if you don't play what you're reviewing. You're probably not gonna get a Uh grasp on the on the matter, but I mean Um, I'm a little curious. What have you played young blood? Oh, yeah, I'm playing through it right now What do you what do you think? I think it's okay. I don't think it's I don't think it's the best Wolfenstein game Obviously, I think it's okay as well and we seem to be in the mind. I've got a review. It's not up yet So but I that's that's what I say is I think that's it it's okay guys It's not terrible, but even that that seems to put us into the minority I I do think there's right. I think people sense blood in the water and they do want to hop on it Well, I think I think the knives were out for that game Even before it came out. So Yeah, Bethesda's been making a lot of friends lately Yeah, they're they're uh happy tree friends up there Everyone loves them right? Sounds like what you're highlighting as well would be like how episode nine will be hated Even if it was a great film at this point now, I think uh potentially um I For a long time had no interest in watching episode nine. Um, I left the theater After the last Jedi and I finally felt how the people who walked out of the prequels must have felt and my interest in star wars Was totally destroyed and I'm gonna go, you know, I'm gonna watch episode nine and And watch it, but you know, um, I'm sure that I'm sure there's gonna be a lot of people who go in with the preconception that You know, this is gonna be dog shit no matter what Yeah, I think there's a lot of channels out there who uh kind of have a vested interest in it being bad I hope it's good. I think all of us we all hope it's good Are just our expectation for it to be good Is not high if I was given one year to write a good end to the trilogy of the sequels in in in disney I would be like no, I can't do it Yeah, it's so fucking hard to do Well, I mean, I I've never talked about this and I haven't done a video on it But I think a lot of the problems with the last Jedi originated from the force awakens So even though that's not an I I like the force awakens Smaller But I think a lot of the problems That present themselves in the last Jedi come from that come from that film and just the entire, you know Concept of of universe shrinking. I don't know. I don't know if really if I was tasked to have written TLJ I'd be like so first things first JJ Fuck you like for putting me in this position because I've got to build our world all over again because you just ignored it Like and it's tiny now So I'm gonna spend like half of my movie establishing where everything is and who everyone is But yeah, TLJ as much as It's it's got some horribly bad elements on its own It didn't have a lot of great things to work with thanks to tfa But it also had some stuff it could have worked with a little better than it did People who are fans of tfa felt Uh, the TLJ was a terrible sequel to it and all I'm referring to is just paying off some of the mysterious elements I suppose I mean, yeah, what they did with snow I've been Because I had to rewatch the movie to make this video and um, I think the production, you know, it's just Top of the fucking line. It's an incredibly Orchestrated film visually, but I mean the writing still the writing didn't really hit me I mean, you know, sometimes I like I rewatched Batman versus Superman after I saw it in theaters And I thought to myself, you know, maybe I was a little too hard on this film I haven't changed my rating on it, but I see some of the merit there The last Jedi. No, it just No, no It is the doodoo But you wouldn't go as far as saying it's objectively bad, would you? No, yeah, that's the thing that's the point of my video or at least one of the points I make in the video Is that I hate the movie. I just straight up hate the movie. Um, but do I think it's objectively bad? No, and I guess, you know, the definition of whatever we describe as objectively is important here So what we can start there if you want what do you consider the definition of objective to be? Sure, um, I'm gonna go off what it says in the dictionary. So Let me pull that up. Give me a sec Okay In a way that is not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in a way that is not dependent on the mind for existence Actually, that's what I think objectively in the context of critique should mean or I guess in overall context And so what does good mean in this context? Good is whatever you think it means good is, you know, a subjective word Yeah, sure if you like lobster lobsters good, right? No, no, no lobster can be good But lobster isn't inherently good No, I don't mean anything can be inherently good or bad I think good and bad we're good as lobster because good can be anything Well, yeah, that's the point good can be anything to us, but that doesn't mean Um, I I guess but they're different So, uh With what my question I meant, um Which which definition of good are you running with and I know that may sound As a strange question, but I'm almost being literal here Like how would you define the word good in that sentence? Uh, something is objectively good I don't think objectively good can't exist. I know. I know. So like if I said, um, a wheelless car With wheels you'd be like that's not possible a wheelless car with wheels is You and they'd be like why it's like well wheelless means without wheels More basic than that is like If if a shape has four Equilateral sides, is it not a good square? Well, it is a square. Um, the definition of square is Pretty defined. So whether or not it's a good square is irrelevant. It's a square Definition perfectly of something Yeah, but what is a good square? Yeah, I mean a good square is what not a triangle because a triangle is In your line of thinking objectively not a square. So Well, yeah, it's a triangle is objectively not a square Yeah, sure, but that's a tautology. Uh, you're saying the same thing twice a triangle is not a square A triangle is objectively not a square. They're you're saying the same thing You're just trying to find out what you think like to define good Oh, okay. So like in the context of a story or in the context of you know, overall things As a as a quality of something The thing is you seemed you said the good and bad are object are like inherently subjective terms So that implies a singular usage To give you a a rope. Are you are you suggesting good means likable? No, what I mean by good and bad is And I I guess I should have clarified this in the video is that I yeah, I I could think I have a good phone, you know um, my definition or What I think is good about that phone Is not going to be what I think is good about anything else if that makes any sense So like whatever I say something is good I'm judging it off the merits of whatever it is in relation to how to what I think about it It's effectiveness and then we get into categorization from there So what makes a phone good? Sure, uh, to me a phone that's good has, you know, a huge screen. It's a responsive phone has a lot of features Um His picture-in-picture, uh, I have the galaxy note 9. So I have the pen that's a useful feature as well But see that's all subjective So if we can agree upon criteria and it doesn't matter what our opinion is But you would agree that if we agreed upon those criteria Then we would be able to behave objectively to it as in We pick up another phone that lacks a pen is small and then we go with that by the standard We've just employed is now a poorly A poor phone objectively Sure, but if we created that standard and I guess that's the point I'm trying to make in my video is that If we if we create that standard then it is not objectively because objectively is something that actually just Is the earth would you consider? Just to clarify would you consider there is there such a thing as an objective standard in any Any walks of life in any conversation about anything ever? No, I wouldn't I wouldn't say so everything There's no objective standard for a square No, because a square is a square has a definition so Well, I'm with you on this right so the idea that Scientists bite over whether or not a Pluto is a planet or a dwarf planet, right? Is um, I mean I say they fight I'm pretty sure there's always an answer. They just change the parameters or whatever So dependent on what are the standards been generated? It would be objective of me to say it is a planet or a dwarf planet depending on what the current understanding of science Is and if you said to me all those standards therefore are subject to change by whatever standards have been generated by the Science as it exists on this planet by human beings. I'd be like well, yeah But that's the best we can so like is any is nothing objective at that point Well, I feel like In the example you mentioned you Assume that the discussion is about planets if you told me Pluto is a rock then I would agree Pluto is objectively a rock But that's but a rock is a standard that we've generated ourselves I I don't think so uh a rock is Rocks exist in our universe, you know, uh rocks in space. So what I mean to say is that a rock is formed of certain Materials regardless of whether or not we want them to be a planet on the other hand is what we define it to be If that makes any sense. I wasn't a rock what we define it to be because rocks existed before us but it's so Our definition of what a planet is Did not exist before us neither did the rock definition Well, are you saying that the categorization is made by us? Yes, that's exactly. Yeah, that's what I'm saying I'm saying the categorization is made by us. So Yeah, Pluto can be a planet regardless of whether or not it's a planet But at the end of the day, it's it's a rock. We're arguing about whether or not it's a planet because we haven't really Decided, you know, or I guess we didn't I couldn't I go further than that and say no, it's not a rock is a collection of atoms Yeah, sure and you'd be right But so that's kind of what I'm getting at is that everything we we make any kind of conclusion about is run on standards That we've generated ourselves in the first place I I wouldn't agree because um, okay, so in your example about, uh collection of atoms, um The collection of atoms exists whether or not We want it to it existed before us Our definition of a planet did not exist. Yeah, and that's what I'm saying. It's objectively a rock But so does the planet so does Pluto It's just the name we gave it Right. I I I don't think we just I'm not sure we disagree on this because I don't know what we're saying It's the difference in what you understand to be objective. I think Yeah, I think that's I think that's a discussion we're having because I don't disagree That Pluto is a collection of atoms. I don't disagree that it's a rock What a discussion can and has been had on whether or not it's a planet because Well, we haven't decided on that but you know, whether or not it's a rock is indisputable Well, as someone just said in chat, it's not actually a rock. It's ice Then it's ice my bad. I thought well, but you get right that all of this change is based on how we define We look at all of these things that exist that what they are and then we just use language to To explain to other people what they're defined as which is how everything runs There isn't anything that doesn't run with that because that's what language is and so when Uh, we're talking like what I'm saying is that whatever you agree we can be objective about With a planet a rock or atoms, whatever we can extrapolate that into basically everything Because it's all based on how we define and what parameters we generate and the only problem is to just explain to the other party What the framing is but when you say like it can't be objectively good I'd like to know what you mean by objective what you mean by good and then I can explain to you what I mean when I say objective and good and uh You can understand what I'm saying that you may give different names Like if I said Pluto was a planet and then another scientist goes no No, no, no, it's a dwarf planet and they go well, we we're saying the same thing We've just given it different names because we didn't understand Each other's standard and which is the correct standard Well, typically we just run with whatever's most commonly understood at this point Or wherever science tells us is the correct answer at this point because we have to run to uh Authority figures with that because we're not scientists, but typically we run with with Uh definitions of ways we just go to the dictionary common understandings For example, someone saying a shoe is a car We'll just be like well, we're not going to be taking them very seriously because that's just useless Well, yeah, there's a there's a difference between I mean, I believe in facts obviously But I don't think facts are determined by people if you tell me that The solar system is going to collapse in a billion years That's that's a fact. It's just going to happen regardless of whether or not we're around Not necessarily, but sure I mean, isn't that what happens with stars? Again, this is all based off predictive models is the thing so I can't say that for sure Um Because to try and bring it around again, right? So the way I look at good if I conclude at the end of a video essay that uh, let's say Game of Thrones season eight was poorly written And I say it's objectively poorly written Then you say okay, you can't say that or I would have said sorry It's objectively bad and then you go what do you mean by bad and I go by the standard of poorly written It fails By the standard of writing it fails to reach A high standard and that's a definition of bad. Likewise with good. It reaches a high standard There's someone you can use that word for it's it's typically looked at as the second definition as opposed to the subjective side Which is just like it. I like the thing. It's good because it makes me feel good. Um, so when you say something's objectively good That's why people say like that's an oxymoron. You can't be objectively a subjectively good thing Because everyone's gonna have a different reaction. So when someone says objectively good I would assume or bad that they're referring to a standard and I agree with you In the portion of your video where you you're explaining that someone Saying something is x or y without having any kind of explanation is pretty much useless because you're just like, okay by your mysterious standards you've just defined it but um With my videos and I hope with with many others they would do some legwork and explaining it Mine typically runs with like a sense of logical consistency an establishment of rules that do not get broken A progression that does not get broken um Which I would argue is intrinsic to the idea of what a story is you can't have a story unless there's progression in the first place So it's a standard that's tied to it objectively um, so whether or not I like let's say Season eight of game of thrones it is poorly written and I would have to separate myself from it if I really enjoyed it A great example is endgame. I rewatched it recently and me and my friends Me and my friends like non spoilers or anything, but me and my friends are going through and it's like damn Like I love this film, but good god. None of this makes any sense. Like loads of decisions. They make is so stupid um, and a lot of the events take place of very contrives unfortunate, but uh That would be the objective part where I pull myself and how I feel away from it and judge it based on these standards That I think are intrinsically tied to storytelling as a whole and then someone comes at me saying hey By saying that you've invalidated this guy's feelings over here, and I'm like, oh well if that were true I've technically invalidated my own feelings, but I don't feel that way at all I'm just like yeah, I accept all of that, but I still enjoy the shit out of it and vice versa. I can Really dislike something that I accept is actually very well Well made like a lot of people feel that Blade Runner is very boring or lame Even though they'll say it is pretty well constructed though um, sure, um So I don't think we disagree on much beyond the concept that Like the example with Game of Thrones that If you say it's poorly written based on The standards or based on standards. My problem is that those standards were just I mean like It's hard to get my point across here Standards were created by people. Yep. So I mean, yeah, we can all agree to them, but there's always going to be dissonance Within that standard there's going to be who don't disagree. So I guess and correct me if I'm wrong. What you're arguing is that Because of the arguments we've made we have determined that it is objectively bad and we're running with that and The only reason we're running with that is because no one has presented an argument Proving the opposite So if somebody presented an argument, I don't know. Maybe it's the greatest argument ever that season eight of game of thrones is good Oh, uh Things like that can change over time. I'm trying to think of um if you remember a lot of people consider Ben Kenobi is an it made inconsistent by the prequels because he looks at Anakin as this Person that he's like, uh, he thought was an amazing Jedi and a great friend and stuff And it's like you look at the prequels like oh clearly he wasn't but you know I don't know if you've seen the video where someone made a mashup where He's talking about Anakin with Luke and then they intercut scenes from the prequels And it actually makes a really emotionally impactful scene because it's the idea is that ben is deliberately Talking about it in a flowery way when he knows that it was all painful And it's like oh and once you look at that as an interpretation It's hard to make the conclusion that he is now inconsistent in the same way that when he goes um from a certain point of view People like wow, that's a ret card. It's like well It's in line with his character because Ben makes a lot of decisions that are kind of manipulative I actually see the fact that he let himself die to vader as quite manipulative in in retrospect Because he was like this will make it so luke will definitely hate this guy Like he'll definitely want to kill him And if you look at that from the perspective that he's vader's his dad and ben knows that like wow ben Like you really wanted to and and not without reason vader's a piece of shit And if luke goes to the dark side that's going to make everything even worse. So Hiding the fact that he's his dad is probably for the best to a degree It's a it's a relatively you could call it an immoral choice to lead to um a moral The ends justify the means is kind of what i'm getting at there I guess I guess you could you could also argue that You know vader eventually does get what he wants which is killing obi one But it doesn't result in anything and he's completely It's a completely pointless victory So the discussion isn't necessarily uh over in certain topics But for example, I'm assuming you've seen the clip people reference where someone's about to kill ray with a knife and it disappears Yeah, that yeah, there's no That conversation's over we've we've had different guests try and defend it like uh, we had major lee say Yeah, that's only a mistake if you judge it as a mistake and it's just like You can try you can try all you want to walk around it to find any kind of standard that makes I was like the only way you can make says if they radically have a movie later on But they go yeah, it sucks that the imperial guard that were under snow sometimes their weapons would disappear That's just a thing that they do it sucks. See not yeah, just I mean knives dematerialize all the time Then you know, well, it's the thing it completely changes. Uh the stakes you'd be like what then then they're fucking their weapons can disappear What well see I I think I get what you're getting at here and yeah, so so that's a production mistake. I mean obviously My interpretation is that that was or what I think happened is The knife must have been erased in post Because somebody realized why is any killing her right so so It has to be a production to sake of production error um My point and the point of my video is Whether or not we think that's a good or bad thing Is ultimately up to us. So yeah, it's a production error. We can look at it that way or I mean I guess you can quantify it however else you'd like, but whether or not It's a good or bad thing is it is to us. I think it's a bad scene But does that actually make it a bad scene? I I feel like I don't have really the authority to say that even when you know When you say good or bad, I assume you're referring to whether or not it's a it's a Ultimately like either moral or desired or approved of thing. That's the primary definition, right? Well, I'd be like well by the standard of Maintaining a progression of events maintaining stakes having your story Match without it's it's a complete faltering. It's a complete contradiction of events. So it's just like Absolutely a bad on the binary scale if we wanted to put it that way It's certainly if if we were to say characters walking from a to b It's just like all good. Everything's in line. It's all making sense. Nothing's wrong. Well, then they just disappear It's like, well, we got a blip but someone's fucked up What when I used is and this was years ago. I guess at this point Um, I used to review like really really bad anime and a point that I'd always like to make is that yeah It's like here. I'm presenting this argument as to why this is bad and I think this is fucking terrible But I think it's terrible. Um, I'm not really interested in arguing with other people who think it's good because ultimately That's their interpretation and I'm not I'm not interested in arguing with that person The merits of the content because at the end of the day Both of our both of our arguments are going to be motivated by personal feelings as to how things are work or they don't work Do you not think you would you not want to change their mind on it? No, absolutely not. Um That that's just how I am. It's like if you enjoy something I know what it feels like to enjoy things So I'm not going to try to rob that from another person Um, and this is in the context of power to rob that from people Well, sure I do if I know and and I've gotten these comments before it's I've seen you I love this anime and I saw this video and wow, I I Saw all the flaws in it and now I dislike it or I like it less I I think you can absolutely rob somebody of their enjoyment if you Can convince people but it's not like you're forcing them into doing anything Yeah, I I would take issue with the word rob It's it's like would they not would it need not be consensual for them to engage in your video Especially if the title is like critique of or review of or something something is bad I think the question is if they notice they're seeing themselves How is it any different to if you showed them it is that still them robbing themselves? Is there and I suppose Is it really robbing rather than enlightening? I mean, I think that's um, I think that's an interesting Take on it enlightening, but I don't feel like I have really the right to do that I mean I state my opinion And whether or not you agree or disagree is you know, ultimately up to you So it's like I don't the the focus I take with my videos and my critique videos Like I did of rainbow six eages. I have these problems with the game. You might not have these problems with the game But for me, here's why they are a detriment to the game. You don't have to agree with me Um, I guess we can even argue the merits of my complaints But at the end of the day, these are just my thoughts and that's the that's the that's the approach to critique I take that everything is just what if that makes people enjoy rainbow six less Well, then it makes them enjoy it less just like it makes me enjoy it less But there I mean there are in the previous examples There are plenty of people who Would never I mean I mean, there are plenty of people who agree with my complaints about siege and there are people who If you go on the rainbow six subwriter right now would never agree with a thing a single thing I said and all the unbalanced garbage in the game makes the game more fun for them. Um, I recently did a video on call of duty where There's a lot of people who like black ops 4 For the reasons that I hate the game. So So why why would that not apply to the previous example of the anime? um Can you remind me of You don't want to you said you didn't want to rob people of the way they feel about it Sure, but he's like a double standard and in really obvious kind of way How how would how would you say I'm genuinely trying to understand my bad. You don't want to put out your You you said you don't want to rob people of their enjoyment of the anime Why would you know? Oh, okay, so yeah, no Okay, I get what you're saying when I post well when I feel like when I post a video on youtube Yeah, I can get shared by algorithm. Yeah, I can get shared by that but My videos specifically the ones I've done I've done on anime have had this very strange effect where people start taking them as Gospel and bible and people just start Repeating the talking points and repeating the talking points at a certain point It just went well beyond me to where I was seeing these talking points Spewed everywhere on the internet Points and people I mean I I guess but agree with them then sure, but I don't means you make good points Sure, but I don't think that makes them objective points I mean they they can be argued and I've I've even seen some replies to my video where I've seen Well, yeah, maybe I was wrong about this but does that change anything because even if I think it's wrong about it the The consensus has gone way beyond me at that point I can't rectify whatever I said in that video at that point Well, shouldn't you do you think it's better for us to be able to justify the things that we believe? I mean in the context of critique. Yes, because I help I feel like it helped gets your point across, but at the same time It's not um It's not law, you know Well, it never was law Well, I mean if you're saying it's better that people should watch a video And through that video be able to justify the way that they feel Instead of just in an ambiguous impossible to express way like something for reasons that they could never explain I mean I would consider that almost infantile to a way I think I definitely think it's growth if we can Be able to express the way Or why we think the things that we do Would you would you prefer that? Everybody liked everything No, I mean people can like right so if someone liked the holocaust for instance Would you not want to rob them of their enjoyment of that? I mean I don't think people can enjoy Uh the holocaust considering that they weren't there I mean how how would you enjoy the holocaust if you weren't there to enjoy it? It's subjective So of course it's I mean we can substitute the holocaust for the concept of the holocaust. What are we? Okay, so you like killing jews. Is that is that the we already know that the the people who exist is Yeah, I mean, we know people enjoyed that. Is it not do you think it's good to rob them of their enjoyment of that? Well, how would you go about robbing them of their enjoyment of that by killing them? Humanizing the Jewish people the same way that you rob people of their enjoyment of an animal The exact oh, I I don't think those are nearly the same thing I think a genocide is is far different from enjoying a fucking No, no, no, they're not the exact same thing to like But the same way that you would rob someone's enjoyment of that's not that's not the same concept. What? You would have how the difference would be a significant moral judgment, right? You consider it far more important to consider people humane than it is to enjoy an anime Yeah, I think we're certainly more weighty than the other. Yeah, rags concept is a fundamental like So just right argue to us the well to me and wolf that uh We shouldn't necessarily Break a piece of media down that people are enjoying because you can rob enjoyment from the world. That's that's the words he actually used Uh, so the idea that it's a it's almost a bad It's just strictly a bad to explain to someone why season 8 of game of thrones is poorly written because they might have enjoyed it I don't I don't know that it follows that because they're having a positive experience It means that to prevent to explain something to them that stops them from enjoying it is always a bad thing And rags has chosen an extreme example on purpose to prove that that is not definitively true So now we need to draw a better line I I just don't I just don't understand the Equivocation of no, no, I get I get what your point is. I get what your point is that there methods are being equivocated There there are people obviously who want to see jews removed from the face of the earth. That's you know Yeah, there's seven billion people out there. Yeah Yeah, and there were nazis, you know that committed atrocious crimes in in germany and across all of europe, but I just Yeah, we have muslims. I mean, hey, it's a very real example that we can pull from I feel like Who are you to rob them of their enjoyment of the concept of the holocaust? Is that you're right? No, because we have for each speech laws in this in this country So for me to I mean, what how do we are we killing them? Like how are we are we arguing against their points because that's that's just illegal. So I mean, this is the exact same way that you use with anime How how is that possible? How how is it possible? Sure, I would have a I would have okay. So in in your example, I'd have a debate with somebody It is what you're saying That the holocaust the holocaust isn't probably something that Uh, you say that's bad essentially the holocaust is bad, right? And if you're also trying to explain this is why this anime is bad Well, you would use the same methodology for yeah, but the same yeah, and in the same light and in the same Using the same logic if somebody liked that anime. Well, what if somebody's a nazi? They also like that too. Are you arguing that? What you're arguing it is that it's bad to kill jews essentially. Is that what you're arguing? No, no, I'm arguing here I'm saying that because I this whole this whole thing stemmed from the idea That there was a there seemed to be a very obvious contradiction in why it's okay to do the rainbow six thing And not for the anime thing, right? And so yeah, we're getting into the methodology for you know This stems after that it stems from should you take people's enjoyment away because you frame that as a bad thing to take away people's enjoyment Sure, but you can't extrapolate that to me taking people's away Me taking someone me taking uh, someone's enjoyment from a thing does not Void their rights as a as a citizen of this country or of their Lives, um, I don't I don't like see how that even I mean because I I feel like Okay, answer this. How do we rid nazi's enjoyment of the holocaust? Oh, I would say we should we could make arguments with them and show that this is bad for the world that it's not fair That we should have foundational principles and we could show the results of these principles in society And we could use you know apathy as a way to get them to understand how cruelty works and other people And how they would feel if it was done to them they use all sorts of things And much the same way that you would convince somebody right, but I don't now we're doing it with a holocaust I don't think that's the same thing. You can consume a work of fiction. How do you consume the holocaust? I mean you watch you read about the holocaust just like uh, just like with anime you look at the source You go to the source material and we have a lot of it for the holocaust Look at this. I feel like this is a very disingenuous No, it's not just about it. I don't I don't understand this argument No, that doesn't mean it's just ingenious just because you don't understand it I mean whichever part you don't understand I could elaborate on I don't I don't know man. I I don't think you can and especially in the gameplay example I mentioned even the gameplay is different from the anime because You play a game. So your experience is going to be fundamentally different than experiencing an anime We can disagree to a different extent examples from it in order to Explain to people why it is of a certain quality or whether it meets certain criteria Right, how would that be different from the holocaust? Uh, well for one, um Rainbow six each is a game. So okay We're not debating the merits of a game. We're debating the merits of A genocide. Oh, yeah, we're comparing the merits of a game with the merits of a genocide One is not they're not equal in terms of their scope and their scale and their impact on civilization This is about the methodology that is used Right, I understand the methodology. Um, yeah, I could repress the holocaust quality or anything like that I I I feel I feel like you you can't I feel like a more accurate analogy would be to say um, I'm going to take away the enjoyment of I don't know committing homicide Because there are people who enjoy killing other people. I think the example you've mentioned with the holocaust is So it's okay to take away people's enjoyment for certain things Yeah Sure, of course. I mean that was If that if that was all you wanted from the if that was all you wanted if that admission was all you wanted I mean, I could have given you that before because you could have but this was fun. Interesting I I mean, who? My my my problem with the holocaust analogy is not that you know, of course killing jews or killing anyone is a bad thing It's just that I don't know how you derive enjoyment from a fictional event. Um, I mean I guess you could but I think the holocaust actually has just for just for chat. Oh, fuck. Oh, shit Yeah, no, no, I'm not no the holocaust actually I got I got I'm sorry. Did you say you don't know how you would derive? Oh, no, this clip is going up somewhere I'll I'll tell you why because if if you really really hate jews and think they're subhuman Then you will derive enjoyment from no, no You said you don't know how they would derive enjoyment from a fictional event. Why not Well, I what I meant to say is I can see you deriving enjoyment from Hunting down jews right now and killing them but driving enjoyment I think I think the I think we're arguing semantics in here. Anyways, I think you can't derive enjoyment Is an enjoyment a present? So I mean like how could you a present derive enjoyment from What I mean is I don't know even the idea even the idea of doing it even the daydream of it can bring you joy I mean I guess for a moment this entire thing is an Started from a semantic distinction on how we use the word objective. Yeah, what it can be. Yeah, the whole thing is Anyway, I Honestly, I agree with you on uh objective not being suitable here. I might use normative instead, but Honestly, well, I think you can do is common standard as well It's about the nature of people's enjoyment is really The the closer basis than objectivity or not That depends on how far back you go. I suppose that's when but that's where the conversation's gone to. Yeah Yeah, well, yeah, I mean somewhere that declaring something objectively good or bad is a Conversation ender which is weird, but I've seen it use as a conversation ender It's certain it certainly can be an An argument and or I mean like I'll give you an example here. Um I agree with it sure but in rainbow six each is a character called lion. He's a broken piece of shit and Based on what he does in the game. None of us really deny That he is a broken piece of shit If I start my argument out with that stance, then all I'm arguing is whether or not He's a piece of shit. I'm not arguing the merit of having a character like that in the game But I'm not arguing we agree with you here Yeah, we don't like it when people just assert things and don't provide evidence If well, I mean like my argument is even if you provide evidence as to why he's broken and I believe me I could provide you fucking pages of fucking college thesis on why lines are broken piece of shit That doesn't I mean that makes it that makes it true for me, but that doesn't make it true for other people There are other people. I mean, there's only one truth The idea here is that whether it is objectively true Is there obviously it it exists whether or not we think it however This is our attempt to identify whether or not it is objective or not If you said he is broken. I said how and you say by The standard of imbalance. He is more powerful than other characters. This is not something that is an opinion It's provable damage values or His abilities have far more pragmatic use than literally any other character Or I'm assuming you've got standards or values. I haven't played the game So I don't know but to give you an example that I gave Before I think this was I don't know if this was major like I don't remember who I said this to but um hitboxes like To match a model I don't know if you've played ds2 or any of the games that are terrible But when you have one that completely unmatches the box when the entire Like circumstance is understanding your opponent in battle Like there is is essentially a binary conversation. Did it match? Did it not know objectively bad hitbox? Because that's the whole that's what a hitbox is I try to run with what is intrinsic to the the thing itself bring a bring an argument down to its core um I get what I get what you're saying, uh, but wouldn't it be more accurate to say the hitbox is inconsistent with the rest of the hitbox is in the game? uh Well at that point I'd be like It wouldn't so much be about its inconsistency with other hitboxes in the game It's the inconsistency with the model that if they yeah if they were all one meter to the left of the model Yeah, like I suppose you I don't even I don't think that would ever work Like I don't think anybody would be able to uh account for that in a consistent manner But at least you could actually say all the hitboxes are consistent in the game's design And maybe there is an in-universe reason for that as in there is the what you see is not actually real And that there's a ghost to the left of everything that's the actual hitbox It would be a really bizarre justification But you could probably do it that way in the same way that a character getting the head blown off Isn't inconsistency for them to live But if you had context in source That identifies that as being a possibility because of the species they are or the circumstances then that would be the direction Yeah, uh, so But but at the base level a hitbox matching the model that's entirely It's supposed to represent because the hitbox isn't even necessarily supposed to be a thing we recognize That's something it can be measured. Um, also I was going to say southpaw Would like to ask a question as well. So I was just going to bring him in and um, unfortunately Wolf has said he's not going to be able to make it at all now. So typical man So, uh, I figure southpaw will be our southpaw will be our our fourth, uh, but he said he wanted to ask a question I'll let him jump in While he does jump in I need to refill my beverage. Anyway, so I'll be back in just a minute. Very well D time Hello everyone. Hi. Hey, dude So, um dex, I have a question for you Cheers you brother So do you believe that there are differences in talents for writers? There's a kind of a second follow up question I'm going to ask you but like we'll just start with this Yeah, sure I think that there are You said differences in talents and rinders. Yes. Yeah, sure Okay, so how do you quantify that? I quantify it by whatever I feel like is good writing and bad writing. So if you tell me rakikau hara Or let's take rakikau hara as example. I feel like he's a pretty terrible writer Um, based on whatever I feel makes a story good. Um, he was another example Um I'm blanking on his name right now, but let's say let's compare him to the guy who writes one piece Um, I think he's a better writer. Yeah, oh, yeah So it's like I I feel like Yeah, of course But I mean whatever I quantify a good writer or a bad writer as in the differences in their quality is based entirely from what I What I um Determine makes a good story to me, uh, which is not what Would maybe determine what's a good story to somebody else or somebody else? Okay, so um, let's say that I I'll tell you I'll tell you about a a bad movie that I enjoy right what kind of is a guilty pleasure Sure So the amazing spider-man 2 is a universally reviled film for several good reasons Yeah, I I don't know where you're going with this, but I I feel like that movie also is not a movie that I detest either despite the writing Wait, I'm sorry. What he said he doesn't detest it despite the writing either. Yeah despite the writing Yeah Yeah, so there are there are elements of it that I enjoy but I Admit that the writing fails to meet a standard that I would qualify as good writing Like I think that's kind of all over the place you've got Characters that are being set up to be significant and then the payoffs aren't even in the film There's too many villains. There's not really like Development they like they're focusing on making a cinematic universe that doesn't even Happen after the film so it's kind of a kind of a pointless film There are still elements that you can enjoy in it regardless, but you can acknowledge that there are flaws Right. Um, yeah, I'll use your example. Uh, there's a game called rogue warrior, which is absolutely atrocious it's just make you rock sing fuck for like two hours And by any standard that I would have for different games End of the standard that I have for games. It's a 1 out of 10 game. It's a terrible piece of shit But it provides Uh Fun and laughs in other ways. So yeah, I I understand what you're saying and I separate that aspect when I'm critiquing something However, that doesn't mean that I feel like that is just The truth of the matter if that makes any sense. So yeah, rogue warrior is a terrible terrible game, right? Yeah, but It's a terrible game to me. It is it could be I don't know. Maybe it maybe it's a game of the year to somebody else I don't I have no fucking idea and it's also What their standard is for rating the game if they rate a game entirely on laughter and how much fun they had with the game Then it would probably actually be a 10 out of 10 game to them. So whatever we grade things by is different and that's that's sort of my point Do you think there is no common ground in that regard? Uh, potentially, um, I'm sure there there are groups of people who agree with certain things and and I think Objective standards the way that we may understand them or the way that they're popularly used are derived from large groups of people liking something But there's always going to be outliers or outliers and people who have You know different I hate everything of all people when he called me childish condescending and stubborn About this whole topic. Why did he do that? Because he had never seen my videos and he believed the right opinion and quintin reviews about what I say And then I got him into a call and he like reversed all of it once I didn't be able to explain myself I hate everything. You remember the whole fucking debacle. Oh, yeah Who knows? I know it's funny. I just I just played hunt down the freemen for my channel after years of fans pestering me to play it And uh, I was quite an experience. He was uh, he was actually one of the better parts of the game Um, amazing. So he was he was of the opinion that there is no such thing He said it previously in his videos that something is objectively bad So I was very confused that he said there's no such thing as something being objectively bad and the one that Cracked him. I'm curious what you'll think about this. Um, so have you seen suicide squad? Yes, sir. I own the movie So, you know when they introduce to uh, I guess I can't remember if it's alchem or whatever place They go into they they have black text on a background that is very dark The point where most people can't even read it. Yeah, of course. Yeah I would be like that's objectively terrible. You have writing that can't be read. You fucking idiots Well, see that's where I agree with you. It is writing that cannot be read whether or not that's objectively bad That's intrinsic I don't think I would I I mean it sounds it sounds dumb and this example in particular sounds dumb because I think it's a Terribly edited film. I I agree with you that it is a that I think it is a terribly edited film But it's entirely possible that somebody places no importance on that aspect of the film Take it take it out of the film and we just now I've used as an example of it existing and now we talk about Writing that cannot be read is intrinsically bad because it's of the standard of the writing It's of what it is It is not what it is and you'd be like so isn't that binary and it's like well Take um a label for something and then blur it by a little bit Everyone can still read it blur it again blur it again gets the point where most people can't read it So now you're in territory of like five out of ten it gets to the point where it's literally just a blotch No one can read it. It's a zero That would be how we'd scale this sort of thing and and you know like plot holes or inconsistencies can all be done In this way like how much they affect progressional cause progression arbitrarily So I have I have let's go with a hypothetical uh murder mystery, right? um, let's say that you have a a murder mystery where It seems like there's no viable suspect for who killed this person And then at the end of the book you find out or movie or whatever whatever medium this That's uh doing this the story Let's say that you find Out that the killer was an astronaut who was on the moon at the time of the murder now There are a few different ways in which this is possible. Uh, let's say the let's say that the astronaut has a death note Okay, and the Is is real in this universe. Okay So that's that's one thing But then let's say that the author says no no no the astronaut didn't have a death note So go okay. Well, maybe the astronaut can teleport across the galaxy and thus Teleported to earth real quickly to kill this person then teleported back to the moon But the writer then says no that's not what happened either and then you go Okay, what if it was a shapeshifter that shapeshifted to look like the astronaut and then The writer says no that didn't happen either that like the astronaut was the one who did it But the astronaut was on the moon There is like basically no way that this is possible And the entire story hinges on this massive plot hole. Is that not objectively bad? Okay, so Run it through me again. He could not have been At the place because he was on the moon, of course, right? So right And all methods of him killing that person have been exhausted or the author just doesn't offer an explanation at all um Wait, I'm sorry. Can you repeat that does the author? No, there's no explanation given you're just told that the right that the astronauts did it But you're not actually told how to clarify though. Even if the author gave an explanation that wasn't present in the source Wouldn't really matter I mean, I feel like if he gives an explanation and then of course has Has the element of how he killed the person explained beforehand Then is it like let's say he has a 50 fucking foot laser sniper rifle It's a dumb thing, right? But if it's in the story beforehand, is it really a plot hole? What if it contradicted previously established information? That's the point of the of the question Well, yeah, I wouldn't call it objectively bad. What I would describe that is is what you guys are describing it as it's it's It's inconsistent with the rest of the story Which is objectively bad, right? Yeah Yeah, it's just to connect that way to connect the dots objectively bad translates into without my feelings being present It is of a low writing standard by which i'm referencing progression See, but you're putting the standard in there my definition of objective ends at whatever Um, right, but that's what language is So like words mean multiple things once we've clarified what we mean Our perspective would I mean, yes, if that's your definition of objective, absolutely, and yes, it would be That's a means progress. I think I mean, well, here's the thing guys. I've never I've okay. Here's here's my problem I've I've never like if you guys want to consider something objectively bad. I'm not going to argue against Because I mean she would If you want to call something objectively bad, you're free to do so It's my opinion on why you shouldn't call something objectively bad and why it's It's detrimental to the standard of critique that are not to the standard to the state of critique as we have it today I mean, I don't think there can be multiple definitions of a word um, but okay That's baffling claim. I'm afraid. What do you mean? That's an interesting thing to say Okay Well, how how are you okay? How are we describing objectively here like right now? Okay here. So so dx. Um, so in the Murderer astronaut example here. You have a story establishing that a person is dead if you have a story establishing that There's an astronaut who is on the moon at the time of the Person dying and this astronaut is somehow connected to this person in some way And then you have the story telling you that somehow the astronaut Is the one that did it and wasn't framed and didn't have a death note And didn't have any superpowers or even a laser cannon that allowed him to snipe that person from the moon So objectively you are given two contradicting Statements and there is no explanation for how exactly the astronaut was able to do it Not in the text and not On twitter by the author. So that is a plot hole that is going to really Significantly damage your story because like especially with a murder mystery It relies on the conclusion making sense Because if you don't have your conclusion makes sense and if your story doesn't abide by like the rules of logic Then you're cheating basically and it's kind of a waste of time I feel like this example could be well here The point is that you this is more about the concept No, I I understand I understand. Yeah, it's the concept of it's an exaggerated example. I don't give you that No, I agree. Yeah, we I feel like the example. I mean you could just use the best example Yeah, no, I I understand. Um So, yeah, but here's the thing the way that I would describe that in my own critique is yeah, it's a fucking plot hole Yeah, it's you know Bullshit contradiction. It doesn't make any sense But I don't feel like that's the end. I'll be all to to the inner pit to to my opinion. I feel like that's my opinion That's that's not it's the it's the solution to the mystery It's the words that we use to describe them and we've gotten you to Well, not that we've gotten you but we've you agree with the concept that we use the word objective for and that's Basically the big thing. Yeah, that's uh, because I was just gonna say to draw you back to saying a word Only has like the one definition. Are you aware that a lot of people think objective means that everyone agrees on it? Sure, but then they would be wrong. Yes, we we but is that is that in a dictionary anywhere because that's how I would define it That's not I don't actually I'm not actually sure if it is but that's what just right Just right said to us then then they aren't wrong then then then they aren't obviously wrong about the definition Well, but so you do agree then that words can have multiple definitions To try and steal man your point a bit dx Are you trying to say that there is a difference between saying that x is inconsistent saying x in x is inconsistency is bad? Absolutely, that's been the entire we already know that part because we've moved on to fact value distinction That's a that's a very big distinction. Make make sure that yeah Well, that was what I feel like I've been saying that this entire time that I even if I feel something is x that doesn't mean it Is objectively x I was gonna say that's rewound because we we I made it to the writing thing right to find that It would be considered binary But you can stretch it out to a zero to ten with with the writing one You can do it with a hitbox the degree to which it's tied to the model and then plot progression You can do that again You could have this character's wearing blue shoes or he's wearing pink shoes a second ago and that's it Who the fuck is has no effect on anything unless the main villain Looking at pink kills him at that point you'd be like what the fuck would you get the pink shoes from? You know, I mean like the the progression It's all very relatable as much as You could be like how can you draw a value judgment? And it's like well, it would be based on a wider context of How it's all framed how how in a scale it would be judged like a broken brick in a house doesn't destroy the house How many bricks were broken? And then it does destroy the house if it's if there's enough. Um, and none of this stuff relies on how I feel Uh, you might you might say like well is 10 bricks enough to break it? It's like well it did The most important payoffs of the film being That's usually what a story is for everything we see is all in it tied together to create the for example We don't skip from we meet luke and then it then it goes 10 years later Or whatever the fuck and then it cuts to him and vader fighting because we'd have no investment We'd be like who even are these people? Why are they fighting each other? What happens if one of them wins? Um, so everything other films And this is the whole concept of plots versus subplots, right? So like uh the biggest everything's in favor of something So like a subplot will technically only be in favor of its own subending But it would still be all the stuff we saw was all for the purpose of uh that one payoff. So Uh again with the pink shoes thing. It's like we can draw conclusions irrelevant of our feelings from the standard of progression and that's That's what we're using the word to mean irrelevant of how you feel Essentially and that's as far as I'm aware the primary definition essentially and then you'd be like We've added good onto it and I get that the The surefire way to judge what good is is just how how much you liked it But we're using what I assume is understood as the second definition Beaching a high standard or being a high within a standard Yeah, because I I I don't think that lazy and inconsistent writing should be Like held equivalent to consistent writing where tons of effort was obviously put into making everything makes sense logically you can have a writer who Like they make a movie based off of the first drafts of the script or you can have a writer who redrafts several times and takes years to master Like to masterfully craft a Story that is logically consistent that has a sure It's like we're we're glad we live in a world where people think the lord of the rings is amazing and the room is so bad It's good Sure, but again in that example where the people You know some guy makes some bullshit in 10 minutes versus some guy who makes some bullshit in 10 years, um That that's an also and i'm not saying that you're saying this but that's also not a designator quality. Yeah, yeah, exactly Well, for example, it's when someone's if you say like this actor disappears halfway through the film with the fucks like he died It's like, oh that sucks But it's still are we talking about the room when the actor disappears I'm just talking about a general sense But you know it sucks the people will be like you can't and I think that if I was making a critique or something I would actually mention it because I think it would be fair to say like there is a reason for it But it does damage the story regardless unfortunately. That's just the reality. We're in with that happens Well, yeah, I mean I I which is why I mentioned about episode nine It's like JJ's got a year to write a sequel to the fucking last Jedi It's like I don't know that you can even make a good, but yeah, he's gonna try. Good luck Good luck to him because I think it'll be pretty well because what I'm expecting is he's gonna rush out a story that he had a basic idea for with With payoff cc's in his head and I'm gonna just say random shit here But like, you know Ray defeats the emperor Kylo sacrifices himself for ray He just has these ideas and he's like, how do we get then he does a bunch of things and then we watch it And we go wait That ship doing that thing in that moment that wasn't possible back in episode and he just be looking you're like, you're a fucking dude Well, I mean, I don't know how far we want to go into this discussion, but I feel like fundamentally um Starting the story off With the first order being the uh oppressive power in the in the galaxy was already the wrong way to start the story Um, I think you kind of just walk yourself when you do the same story over again Even after the universe is already shrunk with the emperor's death and Vader's death So I I feel like that was just instantly the wrong thing to do And yeah, I was gonna say we've we've got a we've got another two videos to watch today And I've got to make sure we watch them before we hit time where I'm not able to stupid youtube's actual eight hour cap Might fuck Anyway, thank you for having me on guys. Thank you. This is this has been a tree Yeah, um, I will pop your channel in the description. So from what people saw if you'd like to check them out or hid Uh, do you want to do you want to I mean, I I figures fader just what do you do on your channel? And uh, why should people check it out? I guess Sure, I do uh critique of games I've recently did a critique of black ops 4 where I spent 200 hours playing the game and I laid out all my thoughts It had to be done uh recently or last year I I spent 600 hours playing siege and I tried to extrapolate all I could from that game I do long form game critique basically And uh, you haven't fun with it Oh, yeah, it's really fun. Especially when you play games you actually don't like from that game I agree playing games, you don't like his shit. What kind of games mostly shooters or sure Um, I've done about three big videos on shooters before um I'd like to do some videos on, you know, third person shooters, but um, I feel like I am pretty pretty versed in First person shooters If you can do first person shooters, you could do third person shooters. Just oh, absolutely. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you Thank you for having me on guys I'll I'll send you a request so we can talk more. I enjoy this conversation. Definitely man. Thank you. Peace guys See you later on Ifap is mean and terrible We are the hate mongers of the toxic Surprise how many times we've covered a video and then the author will be in the chat And I say a lot of times as if it happens more than it doesn't it it happens less than it doesn't but I just didn't expect it at all. I guess I don't Well, yeah, you know that youtube is such a big fish Sorry, youtube is such a big pond and there's so many fish in it That you wonder how these one guys talking about my one video is something that you come to learn about, you know Yeah, somebody tells someone else who tells you who Is interesting it definitely is interesting either. So how long have you got rags? I got about 30 minutes. Well There's the invite so the southpaw and and yourself can jump back in if you want to We're finally covering just rights video odd objectivity and the The funny thing will be. Yeah, the wolf isn't able to make it and rags will be leaving soon Yeah You got the B team for tonight. I'm gonna say enjoy what with the B team. Nah, you'll Theo and Theo too I think you guys are more than capable of handling just right I mean, Theo is our actual guide for this. So It'll be great. Theo all of the pressure is on you every single piece of meaningful content in this stream has to come from you now I have to keep my mouth shut in that discussion. Is there any bogging us down too long? Is there any primer you'd like to give about any of this? Uh, right. So do you guys know who a manual count is? He was a real percent barely really stable Isn't it hunt? Uh, technically it's cunt. Uh, you know, I have news Right, what what is fairly wolf is available? Yes I always knew he was untrustworthy. Yeah, I should just not let him on due to the fact that he is a blatant liar olive No Yeah, I guess this is a thing, isn't it? Oh god, we should be in singapore. I'm so There you go in singapore south first off The server location in us south that the us south is a fine place. Nope. Um, simple better So I I just have a simple question because I wasn't able to listen to most of this um I don't know who the dude with the animatic profile picture was But why were people in the chat calling him? I don't know who that is either. Why were people in the chat calling him new j New j. Oh I didn't see that. I guess because j was covered and then j came on and the guy was your friendly We covered his video. I thought I thought it was supposed to be like an insult or something It was like it might be you never know with You made it just in time wolf. You can probably see the link still in in this group chat to the watch together We're about to start covering just right Oh, fuck with three three hours into the delayed stream Oh, son of a bitch We should leave now. I don't know if I want to do this. Yeah, sorry for interrupting you. Theo. What did you go ahead and carry on? Uh, I didn't I don't honestly have a huge amount to say in prime other than uh Yeah, can uh, essentially get ready for the reading of a wikipedia page of a book Exciting and yeah for context this came out soon after um All of the conversations started to rile up about objectivity and writing because holy shit. Hold on. Hold on. I'm sorry This is more important than just rain is in the video Is this true j's actually seen the lord of the rings finally I didn't know that twitter. I don't have I don't have a twitter. What's this twitter handle? I'll google it I should have been at it if that's true by now Okay, hey, don't you lie to me? I'm checking. Don't worry That's j xc Oh that brought it up. I was about to type in at j the faggot and hope that would brought something up, but I should have one fan account I'm not seeing this this sounds like fake news Um, so all I know is he recently uploaded a photo and I was going to tell you about this But you didn't want to hurt your feelings. Yeah, he was playing a lord of the rings like pinball game And he said this is about the same as watching the movies, right? Oh, no, I'm sorry. I'm sorry Uh No pinball is not the movies christina. You are correct Unfortunately j might not might not he might just not watch them at this point Simply despite wolf and us Until we see him in person and you know clockwork orange him watching them He may never do it or my theory was that he's actually seen them and he's just fucking with us No, he would know he would be so proud of himself He would want to let us know and he would want to talk about the movie with all of us He's like, yeah, fucking aragorn hitting that knife. And yeah, yemley was funny and he's seen the first one And he didn't even say any of that. He was just like, yeah He wasn't he wasn't blown away by it and it's part of what upset literally every person on this plane So, uh, wolf, are you actually there or are you dead now? I think that he's killing himself F press press the capital F button, I suppose. I mean I actually played this video. I don't know if Well, I guess, you know, we almost got you were on the cusp of being able to play this video I was So I can add one more thing. It's like a preface. I guess I mentioned this before we start the stream, but again, uh, at this point the critique of judgment, which is the book, uh, by Emanuel Kant that uh, just right is gonna reference here is about 200 years old So who here thinks that it has gone unchallenged in the field of aesthetics for 200 years Well, if there's anything that I know about philosophers is that they love to agree with each other all the time Yep. Oh, it's their favorite past. Yeah, it's what's what they love It's just a circle jerk in the philosopher community They definitely don't make their entire living and reputation on disagreeing with each other for the dumbest or greatest reasons Well, I'm I'm ready and willing to see just right just tear through all of the fat and get straight to the point And uh, well What wolf put f in chat it will just we'll check out the beginning at the very least. I'm sure you'll pop back I'm ready. So there's a particularly flawed idea about media criticism that has gained a lot of popularity recently It's the idea that we can judge art quote-unquote objectively It's a great start. It's flawed I mean Don't I don't know. I find that pretty agreeable that you can judge it objectively If if we go solely from the idea of uh What is You know this this I don't think many people disagree with the idea of being able to say what what is objectively Like if someone said you may have seen Luke attack Kylo while he was sleeping, but when I watched the film he didn't be like, okay You won't find You won't find many philosophers or people for that matter interested in debating the fact that facts exist Yeah, but uh, I guess he said criticism. So I like that he put objectively in the the really Cliche font that every single movie in the world uses whenever it Is going to a new location Like just imagine new york in this font at the bottom left corner of the screen It's the transformer is establishing shot font Do they do the whole like it comes up military style or time began there's the gate the cube The cube Autobots Roll It's just like hey, come on. They poke it with a stick. It's like we needed a seven ball movie It's the idea that we can judge art quote-unquote objectively a kind of criticism that focuses Exclusively on things like plot holes and whether the events of a story make strict logical sense The goal of this criticism is to establish that a piece of art is objectively good or bad I find this position pretty damaging. I would say Um, it's probably more accurate to identify if elements of the film are objectively good or bad Whether or not you think that how how that affects the whole for you is much more debatable But once you can establish that an element of the film is objectively good or bad We've got you in his whole stupid premise here We don't do it to say to like point the finger at ryan johnson. I mean we do but you know We don't We don't do it just to point the finger at ryan johnson and say ha you're a faggot No, we do it because we want people to improve Yeah, that's the whole point and besides to help people avoid these mistakes in the future Yeah, we want to enjoy star wars movie and in a world where the last Jedi is touted as an amazing star wars film We'll probably make star wars films in the future be really shitty And this is where it gets complicated because poor filmmaking can't simply be defined by poor writing because there's a lot of elements and we've even conceded that tlj has some nice shots or acting or um Set design characters like there's a there's a shit ton of elements that come into filmmaking We agree and if everything is good except for writing Can you truly say it's poor filmmaking as a whole so not necessarily however? All of those additional elements are usually I I say usually because i'm trying to think of examples where it's not the case They're all attempts to facilitate the story So they're tied to something that originates in the writing Uh and anything meaningful about a film's um Is something you can draw out of it in terms of a lesson or um an idea It's probably from the writing rather than a visual like a series of colors because at that point ow at that point you um Yeah, you're advocating for the idea that you would have just happily watched a fucking an oil spill on the floor You'd have been like yeah, that was amazing and I drew lots of me It's like we usually have references Whatever you reference is typically going to be something that was drawn from the writing as opposed to I just love how big godzilla is it's like, okay that's fine also, isn't he kind of um overlooking the analysis of like contrivances and very convenient coincidences used to solve problems In in art. I think you would just say that I think he's lumping that into plot holes Plot holes are typically worse than contrivances. So you'd probably put it in the same umbrella. Yeah I do want to bring up his framing of the objective analysis there at the beginning saying it focuses exclusively on things like plot holes and whether the events of the story makes sense that's uh Perhaps too reductive generally as far as I can tell you could be objective about pretty much everything You're focusing on things that are tangible Like what I like to draw out of the work. What is the scorpion king in the mummy returns is objectively bad CGI Yeah, I guess you could say that I would want to see in the film I'd love to listen to the qualifiers because for example bad CGI on or airbrushing for Superman's lip is because it makes his lip look like jelly, which is by the standard of It's inconsistent with the rest of his fucking face Hard in the uncanny valley Sure. Yeah, I would like qualifiers, but I would totally be ready to agree with something like that Or bad, I find this position pretty damaging to film discussions as a whole So today I'm going to you know, I like that he doesn't take the idea of like Invalid strictly there his conclusion is almost damaging to film discussion. If there's anything we do on e-fap Fucking discuss And the idea that it according to him it should damage our discussion significantly And maybe he would argue that that's what just took place like an hour ago Maybe it damages his position like the last time we had a discussion where they don't know what you mean Wolfie came out of that debate really strong You know, what's funny is I actually recently listened to that debate a while ago and Mauler when you were describing to him the process of two people Actually arguing about something Like from objectivity like one person saying it's objectively bad one person saying it's objectively good and they Have a discussion and a back and forth and then they like They both come away a little more enlightened about the material that they were discussed. They were discussing it kind of actually Maybe think oh you kind of predicted that mission impossible fallout debate like a year before it happened Because that's basically what we did. Yeah, and we had to show references We I could tell when we said that they didn't show The facial prosthesis thing. I was like, we're gonna have to show it because you won't believe it if we just say it's true Yeah And like I was actually talking about something far more substantive Which was debunking the plot hole thing and then he interrupted me And even though it's like I could I could just drop this and keep on Talking about why he was wrong about the plot hole. It's like no, you're wrong You're objectively like you were factually wrong about this And so it didn't do great for his credibility when he died on that hill when it was like on the screen And he moved the goalposts like three times like it wasn't there. No, it wasn't there long enough No, it wasn't big enough. It's like dude The efap mask debate But yeah, no, that's that's the thing. Uh, you can have an objective Objective discussion for him that was objective. It wasn't in the film because his information was faulty. You can believe it's objective, but that doesn't Like he wasn't doing it based on his feelings. He lacked information that he required Yeah, it was it was an objective argument. Sure, but it's it's definitely like it was one that could be debunked Absolutely. And that's that's why I find the conversation very interesting I I think I'm gonna reference once I finally get to making more of the tfa thing the the fin one people like been saying that Uh, the discussion on whether or not fin should have known that light speed was possible It is the conclusion these days is okay. So he forgot for a second. What's wrong with that? And it's like that's when you pretty much have given up of it When we have to delve into the realm of absurdity Yeah, just stop just stop You'd think you would have told someone about it because it's like a when they find out it's possible They like blowed away. It's like yeah, it's a pretty yeah, because even if you forgot for a moment It's like he was with them for how long? Yeah, and like majorly being like, you know, he was about to betray the resistance and leave him It's like when the fuck did he join him? I don't remember him signing up. He just helped them defeat the the death star, but for his own reasons I don't remember him being like i'm a resistance fighter now as opposed to a defected stormtrooper Well, you see no no no the the definition of betray is subjective you see because you can just redefine it to mean Uh, you're going up against people that you were never with in the first place He I don't think he tried that because he could have been like well, they thought he was on there very well could have That dude said that there can't be multiple definitions for word. Isn't that fucking insane? I think I don't think he would have I don't think he stood by that I think he gave up on that once we uh, I don't know that was a weird thing for him to say Paging to film discussions as a whole so today I'm going to explain all the many reasons there is no such thing as objective criticism In 20 minutes. Yeah, man. I'm already regretting coming on this 20 minutes 20 minutes, okay, we can do this We can do this 24 hour show part one Get there. So I just want you to hold on to this one idea before we begin the dark night What's with the shitty paint dot net like drawings he keeps doing substitutes. It's a theme My god, just use fucking video game footage, please You know, I was I I almost actually said that with the last video Instead of just random one second clips of actor close-ups. I'm like just play a game Yeah, at least we could see a little I'd rather see someone wrecking mordhow or something than just actor faces from I know It's weird because I know that just right has shown his face before so he usually has film clips, but he's not doing that this time Just hey, Malar. Don't do this Malar can I quickly respond to a Go ahead I can't quickly respond to a super chat. Um, so a guy named the love doctor 69 all day said Hey there southpaw is it true that you and veto DM'd each other on discord And you shared what you said in private to laugh at him on a stream without asking a veto If so, that's pretty crappy response So no veto did not DM me He DM'd a guy named Stefan and then he was basically Talking to Stefan about something which he got into an argument with about like with with wolf on wolf's stream Basically contradicting what he said Like privately so Stefan messaged me and I told wolf about it And then we decided to cover it and respond to it I don't think that that's crappy at all And I I think it's just it's not really even worth talking about much by once you just quickly The only thing that's crappy is veto's stream numbers Wow 16 minutes to get one guy to type in the chat takes me three seconds before I'm even Clicking the go live button for like also to show up Also, veto and I actually like made up our differences like months ago You know, there was there was a funny uh back and forth that we had on mawler's discord server Someone tried calling him a cuck it autocorrected to duck and then I Objectively And well that that turned into a meme I basically continued calling him a duck and then he even embraced the meme Laughs Laughs were had and then we uh, we made up. So it's not really an issue anymore. This is just old old ass drama Well, and uh, I'm sure veto and wolf will be best of friends eventually right wolf I mean when he like develops a functioning brain sure So anyway, it's thing as objective Anyway, I have to go. All right It's been fun rag is I'll catch you again for the next one. I doubt I will be back But this is e-fap. So maybe I'm not sure I feel like we'll be pushing this one to the eight hour limit probably Yeah, I got you but I will be gone for uh quite a decent amount so Maybe I'll be back. Maybe not. I guess we shall see very well, sir. Thank you for coming in and Yeah, I'll catch you later What a massive It's going to take me quite a while to get there So I just want you to hold on to this one idea before we begin the dark night The movie every film bro keeps on a shrine at his bedside has more plot holes than virtually any other movie you can name He is apparently never heard of the dark night rises. I was about to say what about the dark night rises Is that even true? What about the last jedi which you deny having plot holes every time you talk about it? And who cares Jurassic world falling kingdom And who cares Jurassic world one but we can just name films all day. He's wrong But I was just gonna say like what about people who were like, yeah it does. I still love it like You cut who are we talking about here because I I'd have to watch the film again and listen to the arguments But off the top of my head I'm not 100% sure of what like all of the plot holes are for the dark night. Any of you guys know of any just off the top of your head He rattles off a few a while down the line But I would rather not spoil it for the for the chat just for the sake of redundancy What's a film bro That's his way of disparaging people who think they're critics while they're not Well, so I'm assuming I'm assuming it's the the strawman that the uh movies circle jerk subred it likes to uh respond to Man, I used to like this dude channel Like a lot I used to like your channel I used to like my channel too, but now I realize I've never made a good video in my life and don't worry I'll be deleting my channel soon Episode 50 last time I'm here That's a very massive thing to say you're gonna scare everybody Also, hi. Hey Hi j Hi j Yeah, hi to j wolf He's too angry Just hold on to that real tight because we'll come back to it. So first let's get the semantics straight You can make objective statements about art star wars was written by george lucas There are spaceships in it. The main character is luke skywalker I'm glad he's got that far at least and give him a gold star for that These are all facts The no those are so those are like observations about like what's actually in the film, but there is no Statement on whether they contradict any prior information I mean, you could still even do that. You could be like, uh, you'd be objective. No, I'm just saying that Well, I'm saying that you can't do that. I'm just saying that like none of what he has said is doing that Yeah, well, that's why we we were almost sighed because it's like, yeah, of course these things are things you can do it's like Again, it's non-controversial to agree on objective facts being present in media Facts you enter subjectivity the moment you make a qualitative statement about those facts George Lucas is a brilliant writer these spaceships are cool luke skywalker. I don't think anyone's gonna argue that I mean It's like the funny thing is if someone said spaceships are cool. I'd be like, hmm And you'd be like more is that an objective or subjective statement? I'd be like depends what you mean by cool And they go low temperature and then they find out from the fucking information in the law books that the the ships run on a Temperature that is low in comparison to any other ship. They are they are a cool ship. I'd be like I guess okay. Yeah, I guess that's true. But if they were like, oh, they look so George Lucas being a brilliant writer. Oh, well also Also the thing with luke skywalker being well written if that's just an opinion then why in the world do people Teach writing about like how you need to give your character goals and motivations And they need to be proactive and they need to have flaws and be relatable and weaknesses The answer to that is that teachers only ever teach what they believe to be good writing always subjective I do want to I do want to keep the laboring this because again, he's what he's just out Outlined here is the fact value distinction There is a big gulf between what is factual and what is valuable Yeah, no, and I I get it right on that distinction Well, like I said though that there are scenarios where we can actually create scales that'll have values When we're simply talking about what is Yeah, this is a Like I said, there are words for it. I wish I remembered what I was talking about with glib like a year ago, but The um the degree to which a standard is achieved isn't always binary No, yeah, and the standard can you know and uh, if we're talking about how much someone likes something Yeah, of course, that's like the fucking peak of subjectivity, but oh Value is being used in like an art sense here as in a film like a story ought to be internally consistent Um You understand what I mean. Yeah, but um, I don't know that you have in the same vein as that Writing that can't be read Like I don't know that you have a story if it's inconsistent to begin with because your story is now not a story Because the story relies on in the same way the let's just take it to the extreme I just have the first five minutes of one film second five minutes of toy story third five minutes of the dark night fourth five minutes of You know fucking Schindler's lists you'll just be like, what is this garbage? I can't follow anything that's happening You know, yeah, because this isn't a story. This is just a series of like I can't even call them It's a clip show pretty much. Yeah, I think you'd actually have to call it a clip show And you know, I'm sorry Someone the chat asked if uh, the guy the guy on the left being Theo if he was Sean Oh god, that's the third time This has happened before Yeah, we should we should get you a vc fap. I've been on what an unfortunate thing to be We should get him to really work on a shone impression and then have him use the icon and say that we've got a special guest shone I don't know who shone is You can like oh bless your heart. Well Maybe you can like pretend to be shone and then you can say something like I'm a dumb faggot. I Like hey black people, you know, I'll just say just say things of me on the internet Hey, it's not gonna be you. It's gonna be shone. I'm just glad that I'm compared to chris stuckman instead of shone I'll just yeah And they they compared me to this mola guy and uh, and the other dude in this this coal He's often referred to as like he's like wolf. She's like the fuck We have our own docent. Okay Blessed south pie. I watched a chris stuckman video like a couple days ago And it was like the dumbest worst shit i've ever seen. How dare you which video Okay, that's hyperbolic, but it like it was a worthless video. He didn't say anything At all. Oh, so the whole thing. Oh wait, were you talking about the his 80 minute long shazam review? Yeah, that thing was garbage Oh It's like it's like south pole took it in a different joke way, but wolf's like no, I'm trying to say this stuckman is shit I'm trying to say that you're the better stuckman Oh You see this is the thing. Well, I'm not a mind reader. Okay I can't even do that. I can't even be nice. Right. It's okay episode 50 grand finale I'm saying that Brilliant writer these spaceships are cool. Luke Skywalker is well written. These are what's called Opinions, I know this is some simple stuff so far, but I know if you have evidence to back them up you dunce Yeah, so having one thing happen that is directly Contradicting another thing No longer is something that is like dependent on the person if that's how he defines how an opinion works I like that. He says though that if so for anyone who disagrees with this is essentially not understanding something a child should It's like thanks. Just right I love how we had that little pause where he was shifting through his papers Just to say opinions in that condescending way that'd be me saying or doing this This is what you call Pepsi I thought you were gonna call him a retard or something Oh, what no, did did you hear the the I did but I thought that I just I you've subverted my expectations That means you're all no if I was going to call him a retard. I'd be like, this is what you call A retard You can't do that on live television As the idea I'm reacting against is the all too common phrase. This movie is objectively bad Which presents an opinion as a fact Hmm, I mean we kind of been over this in the first few hours Yeah a little bit. It really depends on what he thinks objectively and bad mean We're not gonna find out I don't think The proponents of this idea will assert that the objective critic is only speaking I want to remind people that he failed miserably to defend this perspective in a debate Like and then he goes on to say it's obvious. I'm like that's interesting. Mr Right that was like actually that produced our very first meme It was before efap will potato made the uh curb your subjectivity video or curb your objectivity I don't remember which one it was. That was good. Yeah Yeah That was the first meme So the whole thing with him with him saying that this film is objectively bad is an opinion It can be backed up by facts So to say that this film is objectively bad would mean that this film Curb your right. That's what it was No, no, that's okay. It has a a sum of issues with it that are You could argue are substantive and the The number of issues that it would have and the size of them Because like stuff like again the four guys walking away in the bathroom and fall out That's not much of an issue, but the disappearing knife is So not not all you know what cinema sins would call sins are are equal, but To say that a film has a giant number of issues with its writing and You know, maybe special effects failures or whatnot or maybe the Sound balancing is bad. Maybe the dialogue is really bad You know the like take attack of the clones for instance and the I don't like sand line that's just like one example of Really bad dialogue and attack of the clones and it's littered throughout the movie So if you have a large sum of problems with writing in your film And you come to the conclusion that Therefore it is objectively bad. It can be backed up by an opinion And if your conclusion is wrong because you're not informed it can be disproven so it's just He's he's saying that these are that these statements are opinions, but they are backed up by facts Um, he might he might consider that well founded as an opinion, but still not an objective issue That that is uh, I would say it's like yeah, you can make an extremely strong argument for why something is an issue But then that does not make it objectively an issue. That does not wait make the thing that is not present objectively valuable Remember he's evolved as a critic as for have not that is true. That is true. He has evolved That's the best line. He's ever said That's the thing that got me to unsubscribe from him like what a condescending thing to say I used to think like you until I evolved as a critic Thank you. You know what? You know what though? Maybe dickhead. Maybe it's because he's older than you guys It's got some it would be funny to find out if he was like 20 or something. We were like, oh not actually Then we could be like, oh just right. I used to think like you but then I evolved We were like, no, sorry. I was never that retarded. He's like, what? The proponents of this idea will assert that the objective Is speaking about the tangible facts of the matter while so-called subjective critics only talk about their feelings But this is a false binary. It's totally possible to no, I would say the subjective critics. That's an interesting label um, I stand by what I said in the tfa stuff so that you often use it as a escape hatch or a Shield just like when you can't figure out why you didn't like a thing With any basis in reference you just go and it's just bad in my opinion You sit in there like mention that that's that's already like a strawman We don't say that you that subjective if you're going by this terminology Quote on quote subjective critics only talk about their feelings. I mean you can be okay with that only by subjectivity And you can still talk about other things other than how you feel about something It'll be covering stuff like themes and whatnot that like that's their their main Well, I'm not I'm not saying that's their main themes character arcs. I mean you you can talk about a majority majority A plethora of different things while still being subjective about it A great example is high top. So he opens his saying this is all his opinions or subjective leave him the fuck alone Okay, I don't like this film. Okay. Um, I'm a big fan of spider-man comics. I'm not a huge fan of how they've adapted him I personally feel that it's blah blah blah. Okay Uh, peter never has any consequence for things that happens in the film. You're like, oh, you just crossed a line Because what you were saying before was all things that nobody can You know, I do games because I can't argue to somebody. They don't feel a feeling. That's ridiculous But if you tell me that Luke Skywalker isn't in the original trilogy, I'll be like he demonstrably is you go Okay, no, okay. He's there but he never uses a lightsaber. I'm like he demonstrably does Okay Does this sound familiar by the way with a certain mission impossible fallout discussion Some things don't actually come down to your opinion if you simply talk about your feelings. That's absolutely fine with me I have no issue with it whatsoever It doesn't typically make for a fantastic video beyond a few minutes though Because there's not a lot you can actually say once you've explained how you feel And that's usually how videos start They'll tell you how they felt and then they'll go into references for what made them feel that way And then they can typically get things wrong or right for example I didn't make mission possible fall out because it's the first mission impossible that doesn't show us how they made the masks Like, okay, you did feel what you felt but it's based on invalid information like you fucked up Or we're saying that it has a plot hole that he totally makes up Yeah, the only the only way that you can actually disprove that someone actually Liked or didn't like a movie is mauler. Let's say that i'm messaging you saying I I really hated shazam Okay, but then at the same time i'm messaging wolf and i'm saying by the way I'm just fucking with mauler right now shazam is actually like really good And so then wolf could send you the screenshots where i'm admitting that i'm not telling you the truth about my opinion But the thing is there's no way to do that with these people And we all acknowledge that we're not trying to invalidate their opinions We're not trying to disprove that they actually liked or disliked a film We're trying to go over You know again, whether it's actually well written or not and again It's like when I when I made a review on shazam. I wasn't trying to Say you were wrong for liking it You were uh, you don't actually like it or you shouldn't like it or anything like that I was going, uh, there's a ton of really bad writing errors in shazam and so I don't know it's just Yeah, and I and I would actually pause it. This is a bit controversial, but I don't think people watch Uh reviews strictly for how people feel about the content as in You go, oh, let's watch chris stuckman cover tlj and he goes. I liked it and you go. Okay. Now jeremy johns I liked it. No now mauler. I didn't like it. Oh, that was a good day. Anyway, I'll go to sleep now Like no The interesting part is usually how they construct the arguments what references they're using and the information provided like I don't think I mean, I'm probably wrong on this But I don't typically tell you if I like or dislike something in my videos It doesn't happen very often because I don't it's just not necessary. I tell you something is inconsistent Um, then and then I move on or I might say something like this can frustrate the shit out of audiences because I'm actually trying to sort of Not only be a little bit more engaging by flipping what I'm talking about but actually trying to tie myself to the audience To be like, oh, he's not a robot. He's not just explaining what happens He actually does feel things too But I can use language that doesn't necessarily give away how exactly I feel about a thing like we had that with uh I think it was just right. I can't wish debate I was in Where I was explaining an issue and then they were like just because you don't like it. I was like that I didn't tell you if I like it or not Telling you that it exists. That's what is Do you guys want to know why I don't like chris stuckman? So because he doesn't make good content Well, so let me give you a tangible example mauler In the beginning of the stream I mentioned that I was watching sicario And I was enjoying it so far implying that I haven't seen it before because I haven't seen it before But I had seen sicario 2. Why did I see sicario 2? well because I didn't realize that it was uh actually the second movie and I watched chris stuckman's video on it And he had given it an a-minus and so I went and saw the film and it Like I didn't have to I didn't necessarily have to see the first one to understand what was going on But I didn't understand what was going on anyways because it was a bullshit story And so to see him give uh sicario an a-minus whereas I know that if I had Watched someone that cares a lot more about the exact types of things that I care about when watching a movie I'm uh I'm more likely to you know Talk to to agree with them. I'm and I don't trust chris stuckman anymore because the standard of quality is shit He oh, he's he's the quintessential bland reviewer. He reviewed hillhouse in four minutes Joe frustrated that is Like and you might be like the baller. He could have said is like no no Four minutes short bad bad I'll fucking review hillhouse in a meaningful way in four fucking minutes And he gets even worse because he watched the video and he spends loads of time talking about the person who made it He's like the person who made it made this I like this the person who made it made this and this is good It's like fucking tool. Oh, what the fuck are you doing? It was it was it was really bad and you look at him covering other things And you'll spend like three times that amount of time on like a random movie Like oh And you might be like well, hey, it's his prerogative. He can review whatever he wants I'm like, yeah, it just makes for a shitty review. You think reviews don't have standards You think that a review should just be anything and it's all up in the air This is the part that they really don't like and you could say this about me I don't agree that I can't take criticism But whatever it's people say it anyway the um the idea that they rip movies to shreds And then you're like your video was very bad at explaining to go. Hey Hey, this is my video And then, you know, it just slips out. It's just my opinion No, no, no, no, no, no, no stop it Um, we're all conduits, right? But everything is as it is and we're all here to be able to point things out Support things that like all of us could technically make the same video It's technically possible. I suppose other than we don't have access to the same voices But I could feasibly create Wolves if wolf releases a video I could recreate it It's just the voiceover would be different Like I could get all the same footage to a decent degree and I could just copy a script over um Again, we're all conduits. We're all particularly good or particularly bad at different things We all have our limitations and we all have our biases and getting rid of the Things that get in the way of being um, you know Really strong with clarity is is part of what I think makes um a review stronger Because when you give people false information There's a lot of negative results that can that can come from that I don't think we need to reference them, but I think you already did one It's it's not it's not that his uh Like he's he's never able to spot a good movie like he praised mission impossible fallout So obviously he can recognize a good movie when he sees one But man, I mean, he's a little too inclusive with what he considers to be a good movie And I mean if like you need to be able to So just doesn't explain I was about to say like I've never really experienced a stuckman video where he's explained him So he uh, I watched his blade rotor review with friggy. It's so funny. He basically explains that he kept watching the film until he liked it Because he didn't get it. He was like, why can't I like this film? Everyone says it's amazing And he just says it's really embarrassing to watch. He's just like I just kept watching it And you know what I'm starting to like it What the fuck I the other day I watched his review on uh, your name because I heard about it and I was like Oh, this looks interesting and his whole review can be summarized as it is an anime It was made by a guy who made these other anime It was good And I was like, wow So insightful. I learned so much from you And yeah, it's you need to watch him all the months. I don't actually think you have to watch I could probably get a better response from the chat chat Tell me if your name is good so I can like make a judgment if I should waste my time with it I trust the chat more than I trust fucking Chris stuckman I don't think he requires multiple viewings to understand I think it would benefit to watch him all the months, but he watched it way more than twice He was explaining like he kept watching it until he finally saw what other people saw or something like that And I was we found it amusing because doesn't it break his entire reviewing scale? If he concedes that he only saw the value of Blade Runner after many viewings and then chooses to judge other films after one Like wouldn't you say well well Chris that seems like you've kind of skewed everything But just because the reputation of Blade Runner, that doesn't seem fair But another accidentally fuck up the actual name. Hold on. I think it might have been your name and I've said my name Your name. Yeah, no, I'm sorry. I mean your name If I if I'm talking about my name Well, I gotta I gotta know the chat has better opinions than Chris Stockman Yeah, I think it's like sometimes Looks like a few people are actually able to get it though. So it's fine I don't know. I mean some some movies you can tell from a first glance that they're shit like transformers 2 or suicide squad But others like it for me at least it took me it took me a while to fully understand How bad Shazam actually was because the first time I watched it I was just enjoying the the jokes and the in the comedy because that part of the movie is Genuinely pretty good and then once you see it multiple times and the novelty of the jokes wears off You just have the story left and the story and the writing is shit so um And if I had if I had reviewed mission impossible fall out after only my first time seeing it I wouldn't have been able to give like an in-depth perspective of it because there's a lot of stuff that You would have to catch on repeat viewings or you know like little little details or Um, you have to spend some time thinking about the story and analyzing the plot and trying to find holes in it And then realizing oh shit. There's like there's no inconsistencies here. It's it's just an a plus story um So it's weird for chris stuckman to yeah to With one movie he sees it a couple of times It has his opinion on that change but then for every other film he reviews it after only seeing it once That's a little bullshit And yeah, it's a necessity for me when i'm like reviewing the thing and i'm like oh this thing didn't make sense because Say for example fucking finn says that he's aware of it and then i'm like wait Did he say that? I think he said that i'm gonna have to rewatch it because I can't go on a lot of the time I can't make a judgment based solely on the fact that I remember it being that way Feels like it's just poor research on my part at that point Yeah, you know and it's enough for a lot of people to be like hey man, it's just my perspective And it's like okay. Well you got something wrong you agree And you get to that awkward place where they're like Motionlessly about the themes of a particular work For instance, I could say that the original star wars film is about why nature is superior to technology And I could point to the climax where I can't I can't help but think of the show the am directors Uh like at the end of the um of his video where he goes. Yeah. Yeah Yeah There is such a thing as a stronger and a weaker interpretation If you're gonna think about and this is your reference then you're gonna need more than that Yeah, my interpretation of e-fap is that this is an obscure right wing podcast Try to talk about a lot of references for that the dog whistling through star wars analysis stop them Think of the children. Uh, yeah, so the idea that you can interpret anything anyway At all and then when I say in my video that If you want to say that the themes are like fantastically consistent because they all match the way that you see everything in the film When it completely flies in the face of all the objective references like yeah at that point you just It's entirely subjective what you consider that theme and people took that as you see if you don't agree with him You're being subjective. I was like it's not what I said, but okay The fact that you consumed a piece of media has to count for something Like The interpretation comes from the piece of media. Otherwise, why do we need the media itself? Well, he's about to argue right do the interpretation and who needs the media He's about to argue that all of his references are gonna be from the media, isn't he? Yeah weak references to the technology and I could point to the climax where luke puts away the targeting system And embraces the force and that doing so helps him defeat the technologically superior empire Except he uses technology to defeat in the shape of a fucking missile you Yeah, and yeah, then we bring out that reference and say, okay That interpretation probably doesn't hold much weight a missile coming from an x-wing no less Yeah, it's it's not it's pretty flimsy with that reference embraces the force and that doing so helps him defeat the technologically superior empire Nowhere in that analysis have my emotions factored in but I haven't described an objective quality of the film either I've used evidence from the text to support a position and use extremely flimsy evidence I was gonna say yeah, you got one reference You got one reference and it's faulty. So you gotta do better than that Process I've revealed something about my subjective perspective, but someone else could say this Why did you need to subjective the said perspective but No, my objective perspective scene isn't really about nature versus technology. It's about atheism versus religion the rebels one What? No, what? What the fuck? No, it's not If we cut him some slack, right if we have a charitable here, how do those two things conflict with each other? Is it not possible to draw both meanings out mutually without either like I mean, I'm I'm kind of on his page in that you can Ignore elements and pick out elements to reach conclusions you want to but that's part of my issue With analysis when you're not being honest with yourself I I don't think that I think he's trying to claim the like Through interpretation you're describing you are talking Impassionately, uh, but you are but you're also not describing objective qualities of the thing which I don't know maybe is the case but interpretation like Preceed proceeds the assessment You can't assess something until you've interpreted it some way I'm sorry Is the implication here that the empire or atheists that religion defeated the evil atheists even though the empire uses the force Which is part of the whole well, I was gonna wait for to qualify it because I think it's I don't think it'll hold Yeah, it's not like this is you know God's not dead where there is overtly a religious versus atheist Well, the thing I wish he would pick ones that are actually, you know supported so I could be like, oh, yeah, yeah, no, that's fair Hmm, but someone else could say the scene isn't really about nature versus technology It's about atheism versus religion the rebels won because luke had faith while the empire lost Darth Vader did too though you idiot But I think at his point because they the like scorned Darth Vader Yeah, but that's one person in the collective. That's not all of them That's the point He realized Darth Vader and his master were the ones that made the empire in the first place This is so dumb It's yeah, it can't really be Compared to religion because religion is not falsifiable or provable, but you've got Darth Vader like Vader's a bad guy He's force choking a dude in front of like a bunch of witnesses like 15 guys It's not like they think this isn't a real thing that's happening Look at this guy played along with vader just trying to spook us references aren't doing in many phases. This is what I mean. It's all falling apart immediately Could you imagine if like the clouds split and you see mount ellipus and then zeus fucking Chucks a lightning bolt down And wipes out captain marvel and then you have you kind of have to go. Okay, apparently greek mythology exists in the mcu now I mean Norse does so Why not? Could you could you imagine like someone walking away from that though and still not believing in any of that? All right. Well, that's the thing. I get this isn't making sense. You can't draw this line when he's like see these guys Don't believe it. It's like they're talking to vader. He's on their team, too How do you and they're watching him force choke this dude if anything this seed Has destroyed their assessment that it's a fucking hokey piece of shit It's about atheism versus religion the rebels won because luke had faith while the empire lost because they belittled religion You're sad devotion vader's on their team into that ancient religion Apparently greek mythology does exist in the marvel comics Oh neat. Okay. That's beside the point. But not not just not just on their team. He's like one of their leaders He's like what number three you got vader than grand moff tarkin and then the emperor When grand moff tarkin come before vader though, no, well, I think grandma talking has Yeah, if you take it all as it is grand moff tarkin has control over the death star So i'm guessing that vader is under his control while there, but he's still extremely high ranking Because I'd have to actually i'm pretty sure grand moff is an actual thing, right? Yeah, they despise me as some kind of paramilitary thing Well, tarkin tells vader to let the man go in this very scene. So he has some It's either authority or vader just has enough respect for him to yeah I would I would say it's probably both. He probably has jurisdiction here talking so Okay, so he's fine vader is number two Let's say that he's number two not number three big big fucking difference. But it's like Yeah, not just on on their team. He's one of their leaders. The empire does not be little religion Well, I can't believe the guy above vader is the emperor It's like this is the evidence and it's like of the team where the two top ranking Fuckers are using the religion fully like I don't understand how this makes any sense stolen data tapes Are giving you clairvoyance enough to find the rebels hidden for We've come to two slightly different readings of the same film and neither of them is objective They're This is all besides the point I was about to say i'm not sure he's using those words correctly because okay, so I all all we've got here so far is that yes interpretation precedes assessment. Isn't interpretation inherently non objective? As in because you can only support an interpretation as best as you can Well interpretation is a part of viewing Because as to go through your eyes through your brain and then you process Meaning from it. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, that's kind of what i'm getting interpretation in your head And so and then put things back Like the idea that tlj was the whole failure can be the greatest teacher I can say that they failed to achieve that and you could be like, what do you how do you know? That's what they were trying to achieve. It's like because they were fucking overt about it Like it's it's in the text itself. There's no interpretation required for the overall lesson that's trying to be delivered Beam they said it but there are multiple interpretations you can have that don't have any kind of overt messages that ryan johnson could then in turn be like Yeah But again This goes both ways You can actually have a very valid lesson that's supported by a shit ton in the film that the director was completely unaware of It wouldn't necessarily make it invalid. It's just that Interpretation will have supporting references and when you're just right you just make them up And you know like oh fuck they would like directly contradicting the single reference. I even had Anyway, go on Uh, I've lost my train of thought. I had nothing I wanted to say uh about interpretation Uh No, it's gone. It's all good. I guess move on it'll come back maybe We've come to two slightly different readings of the same film and neither of them is Objective they are steeped in the perspectives of whoever believes them to be true And both of our hypothetical critics here could use their analysis as a reason to claim that the movie is well made And they would be speaking just as subjectively as someone claiming it is well I will at that point They wouldn't necessarily be subjective in that conclusion if they had claimed a standard And then they adhered to it one to one with whatever's in the context of the film They would be operating objectively with a subjective standard displayed so But like then you'd be like well the standard would still be subjective and that's that's a whole different conversation. It's like two different levels to the discussion and I actually find it very interesting to talk about but the idea that They couldn't be objective when judging from this format is wrong because he presented the idea to us the panel And we just determined that he's inaccurate. We didn't have to have Like an emotional connection to it. We didn't have to care about the idea of religion versus Atheism to be like well whether or not this is valid can be supported by references, but we could be objective about it We concluded that he was wrong like immediately Yeah, because his interpretations are weak Yes, well made because that's what makes logical sense They are opinions based on evidence that are held up to a personal standard very fucking weak evidence And I also point out that this is uh, this is different from an assessment This is a reading for the sake of an interpretation to determine. What meaning is being communicated? Yeah Actually attempting to assess whether or not anything's malfunctioning within the world Like off topic almost He probably thought he was so smart coming up with these and he was like man People never thought of any of this thinking. Yeah, no one in their right mind thought of this I But this leads us in a bit of a pickle that is a sticking point for a lot of people if all value judgments are subjective He he would we know what's true He he used the pickle rick animation there because he has a very high IQ Which you need to understand this reference right here I just I just like the how do we know what's true? It's like, oh, no we're getting super philosophical Very existential. How do we know what's true? Doesn't that make everyone's opinion equally valid? I mean, why can't we just agree on a standard of quality and then judge everything against that wouldn't that be objective because well You make it really difficult to do anything. Don't you? You have to argue about shit from a really stupid perspective So we have to have a stupid argument These are questions that plagued two 18th century thinkers most respond You know, it's funny about his two ideas of people searching for themes and star wars is they almost sound like strawmen that uh a Like a worse version of us would make up to bash the subject of us and argue against anything except for us pretty much This is the fun part because now you can't they're gonna get involved. You should see. Oh, yeah Questions that's lagged to Most responsible for how we think about this today. David Hume and Emmanuel can't Oh god, he's starting up the beat music. This is where it gets serious Historically speaking thinking that you can judge art objectively is not entirely unheard of too many ancient and medieval thinkers The idea of beauty being located in an object was a very popular position It was as objectively true to say that a rose is red as to say that it is beautiful, but It depends on what you mean by beautiful. Uh, a lot of people I was about to say that uh a standard of beauty that a lot of people either reference or Consider valid is Symmetricality like in a face And you'd be like that doesn't determine whether or not they're beautiful and it's like well No, but they're saying that the face is symmetrical and you know that that's that's something provable. We can actually measure it You don't like that that would be into subjective based on people Yeah, your left eye is not horribly out of proportion with your right eye, which you know allows you to not look That much like Quasimodo It's just I don't know. Yeah, and whether or not that is this is what I mean by like The standard can be judged objectively we can actually get there, but whether or not that is a standard that Everybody should employ is another conversation or whatever, but Again, that's when you start to You'd be like, oh, so then everything subjective and it's like not necessarily depending on how We created labeling in the first place like what is But like I found it interesting that our guest earlier was like you can't say something is objectively a planet But you can say it's objectively a rock Interesting I mean, yeah, I guess that someone could have a beauty standard that would allow the Lady from Madagascar, which I assume is what wolf's profile picture I did a thumbnail today, you know, I was like if I can make it to the show I have to use this You see I was I was first thinking of asking if that was a photoshop version of ross from Monsters Inc And uh, I'm gonna go no, no, it's the lady from from the Madagascar movies I'd choose to interpret it as like the older version of eric taxon Speaking of which, I don't think we talked about it on the show moller Have you ever mentioned that time that eric was like sobbing and Quentin was just standing there. I was only uh, I was only told about it I've got no reference for what actually happened. Um It was what I do know is that cj covered it on his podcast and Uh, he pissed off eric Significantly and eric has called him a liar about all of it Um, and I think it's due to the due to the context that he shared it in as in cj said that he had heard x from person And then shared it and then eric was like that's not how it went down Um, so they've got their own beef going on But yeah, all I know is that apparently eric was crying and quinton wasn't doing anything about it But eric says said something like quinton wasn't supposed to be doing anything about it So are you guys saying I would absolutely kill to have a picture of eric crying Like that would actually make my entire life better So are you are you telling me that eric taxon might actually be spider-man? I don't think I think he's older than 15 Oh, right. Thank you. It's too fast 19 He's yeah, um sides. No, he could be spider-man from into the spider-verse. Oh But I was gonna say black Wouldn't it wouldn't either be Parker wouldn't not be spider-man though if he was he cried Wouldn't that definitively make him not spider-man? Wolf wouldn't make him a good spider-man Guys that that's not ammo. I would have I don't even want to use it as ammo myself I just want to like hang it on my wall and like chuckle every time I see it Also, yeah, I read a couple things. I have no idea why he was crying. I didn't see anything for why but But apparently friendship over for him and cj if they had one most like rip I just love it. I love like the idea of cj just walking just Mining his own business and then he like glances out of the corner of his eye Eric like sitting on the ground cross-legged and crying and then Quentin's just like standing around with his hands in his pockets looking like he doesn't know what to do He like that he like kicks Eric and he's like stop it Oh, that image in my head is like the most beautiful thing. I think I've ever seen Yeah, I tried to see there's a what I understand cj was told about it. He didn't see it himself The image the image in your head wolf. Does it include running mascara? Yeah But anyway, no, but I could interpret that Published of the standard of taste which relocated beauty to the eye of the beholder beauty is no one's gonna draw it now Oh my god, beowyn beowyn make my dream come true I swear to god I will print it off and I will hang it on my wall above my computer And I will take a picture of it and I'll show it on the next defab Oh, so wait make your specifications clear You have to make it so that Eric is cross-legged on the ground crying And Quentin is standing right next to him with his hands in his pockets staring a little off into space like looking kind of nervous Doesn't know what to do So cj in the back row of the telescope Kind of like the people in that collider clip where they're just like trying to To not acknowledge what's happening and they're just sort of staring off and you know Ignoring the the tism that's taking place Collider clip Collider life. Oh I don't know what that is. Well, for you there for that. I can't remember it was the meltdown thing Yeah Over over the the one where the dude was like, yes The guy who was like, I don't get to go to this thing. So therefore And you've got like three other people there who are just like very awkwardly just I remember the two at the at the head of the table that were like looking at their phones and we're like That that one lady trying to go. Oh, yeah, I like that you did that cash me outside How about that reference trying to save it and then it just goes back to To the meltdown. Oh fantastic Um, and also I don't care if Eric said like uses that as a means to say look at how Mean wolf is it's like, okay, Eric. Let's talk about that video you made where you lied about me for like 20 minutes He still says the he keeps saying nobody has shown me a way. I have taken him out of context We know it's because he's a fucking idiot. He doesn't do it definitively on the e-fap when Was it the e-fap where I was fucking ripping into jack's like lies for hours? I think we did be covered to you as well briefly on How how we took you out of context. I think we clarify I hope you cry for the rest of your life Also, uh, I mean, there wasn't there a whole video of his that you guys covered like when wolf returned from his hiatus Yeah, well, yeah, yeah, so there's that too There's like Eric the the amount of care I have for your feelings is equivalent to the amount of brain cells in your empty head Oh I might have but Fleshed of the standard of taste which relocated beauty to the eye of the beholder Relocated beauty to the eye of the beholder What does that mean? So I guess that he means that there is no such thing as objective beauty That all comes down to the the idea being that beauty is no like It is not a quality of the thing in itself. It has to be formed in perception Beauty is no quality in things of themselves It exists merely in the mind which contemplates them and each mind perceives a different beauty One person may perceive deformity where another is sensible of beauty Uh, I think deformity could definitely be defined by relation to what standard human genome presents as a Standard human body. There would be a Isn't a deformity by definition in abnormality As in whatever is not normal I'm almost defined by what's most common. So this is this is something that can be objectively measured Deformity is being used like an opposite beauty here. It's seeing used. So let's say let's say it says ugly Yeah, yeah I mean does this guy does this guy not actually think that a rose can be objectively beautiful because Like if you're trying to compare two different flowers to each other Like there are okay, let's take a rose that's dead versus a rose. That's not dead one is Objectively beautiful and one is not Are we really going to argue this? I can't Admittedly, I can't really qualify that myself. I would typically avoid using the word beautiful Because as far as what is the standard definition for beautiful. I'm pretty sure it's actually tied to Feeling right? How is it to find? pleasing the senses like what can you That's yeah, I can't so we're stuck there Regardless of any particular definition. It carries connotations of like aesthetic satisfaction That's true. Sure. The interesting thing to it is that the second usage is of a very high standard So fair enough if someone well, this is almost supporting your point If someone was to say it is beautiful objectively and then I go no, it's not and then he says well By beautiful. I mean that it is 100 percent Symmetrical like I said as a standard I could be like, oh, okay, but that's not how I use beautiful and then he's like, okay Fine That's how I use it. I feel like okay. I mean the only time I try to vaguely invalidate someone's saying like I said earlier about the You know, this shoe is a car. I'd be like, that's just not at all how anyone's ever used that way You just fucking making that shit up yeah Well, I also it's like if you try to compare a rose to a different kind of flower Like a lily or a tulip And you try to say that a rose is objectively more beautiful than Than a tulip. I think that's where you go into like subjective territory I don't know. There's a way to really objectively prove that a rose Like at the peak of its beauty is At the or or life rather Is objectively more beautiful than a tulip at the peak of its life I think that's a that's a matter of personal preference Whereas there is a standard for what a rose should look like again, like, you know Like one that's not dead versus one that is dead, right? So that's that there's a standard for what you could call beautiful there But when it comes to what's more beautiful, it's kind of difficult. It's also kind of like trying to compare Michelangelo's David sculpture to The um the cysteine chapel I just this is the whole point of discussion So I just have to find out what the person's actually saying and if I told you The uh x is beautiful and then you go what do you mean? I go it's pleasing to my eyes Well, then yeah, that's entirely subjective because I don't know pleasing to your eyes What am I going to do about that? Like I can't there's no way for me to know what's pleasing to your eyes unless you explain some kind of Like a consistent set of things and that's that's how people look at all film criticism It's like all of it's just pleasing to you. It's got nothing else beyond that and I'm like, well, not true I think at this point it's important to make clear that we're in the realm of philosophy So we're using the philosophy the philosophical usage of objectivity being irrelevant of human Thought on the matter the thing as it is which is a lame way to use that word because it's like Oh, it's a very important way to use that word. No, I know but It's irrelevant of the human it's like but everything we do is from We're filters for everything right everything we say do and conclude is all filtered through us anyway Well, also I would just like to drop any pretenses of me being that deep of a thinker when it comes to philosophy because I I don't do much thinking on philosophy. So I'm going to let Theo carry it from here I want to also say that I'm not a deep thinker at all. I'm actually an idiot. So it's okay. You're not Well, you know So don't expect intelligent thoughts coming from my head thinking is subjective anyway. So I don't really know why I say And every individual ought to acquiesce in his own sentiment without pretending to regulate those of others Oh, you sweet summer child if you had only lived to see youtube for hum You need a perceiver to exist for beauty to exist But of course this creates the problem we're running into if everything is subjective Then how can we make any truth claim about a piece of art? Hume's answer is in the title taste Basically people can improve their taste over time and make well-founded judgments that we can trust Strong sense united to delicate sentiment improved by practice perfected by comparison And cleared of all prejudice can alone entitle critics to this valuable character Creating a standard that's defined and improved over time. I'd be curious what improved would mean at that point though Shrug uh, just right. It's not going to tell us because he doesn't spend much time with Hume He just gives us this brief account of his wikipedia page and then moves um, is this is this uh Kind of implying that beauty can only exist Uh, or quality maybe could even could only exist if uh, there is someone there to observe it Uh Essentially, yes beauty exists as something within the eye. Yeah beauty's in the eye of the holder again So I I really hate to uh, send us on this tangent, but um, so let's say that there is an event that causes the entire world to go deaf um and What does that? What? I'm sorry. There there was just a thing me and molly have seen recently that Yeah, it's not deaf. It's not deaf. It's okay. Everyone goes everyone goes muted. Yes. Okay. So then um, Sorry, uh, so what does that do to Beethoven's music? Does that mean that Beethoven's music is no longer beautiful just because there's no one there to listen to it anymore or Uh, does the music that Beethoven composed have a timeless quality to it where it will always be beautiful Whether there are people there to listen to do it or not At that point I challenge you to show me the inherent beauty slash value In it I mean, I would have to think a little longer on that but sure we could if we could try to go over that one day I just don't I have sorry. I know I keep coming back to this but that it's one of the big ones is A objective value is the value isn't value is not necessarily actually come back to saying if a If a tree falls in the woods, does it make a sound if no one's around to hear it? Uh, kind of basically dealing as a factor other than as a value, right? Because beauty is opposed to because beauty implies a thing is desirable So we need to find we need a way for this thing to be objectively innately desirable Maybe instead of beauty I should say rather it's well composed Right as opposed to Chopsticks, okay take take moonlight sonata versus chopsticks. You've heard chopsticks. I'm sure right You know the the piano Song chopsticks is like super super simple Oh I thought you meant like actual chopsticks. It's no it's the musical equivalent to drawing stick figures It's like the easiest thing to do on a piano Oh, so I can do it Yeah, basically so like I'm just going over like that. I don't see though Like maybe the word beauty is is the wrong word to use here But I think that uh Beethoven's music is always going to be well composed even if there's no one around to listen to it How do we how do we arrive at that? I think that it's just because you know Well while it was being observed Um, we agreed that it was well composed like you're unanimously I would need someone to argue that it's not well composed So it's based on the agreement of people Not necessarily you'd have to have people arguing uh two different points and having to Uh qualify their statements I'm just like I'm just going you're noticing how this is dependent on the people. Yeah The I'm I'm just interested in all of this statement because all of it needs uh Strong sense united. It's like stop. What is strong sense? Yeah, united to the delicate senate What do you mean united to do you mean presented by sentiment and then what kind of delicate sentiment? What does that mean improved by practice? What is improvement? And I was just like just rising going to go to any of this so We may as well kick on because Yeah There's not a lot we have to do here other than speculate on Things that aren't even just right points. So we're gonna have to wait for hey We're actually five minutes in that's that's more than I expected I can give you small amounts of background on Hume like he was a hardcore empiricist and skepticist So like is the idea that sense data is The thing for knowledge for the most part So the idea that uh beauty is in the eye. Oh, there is probably typical of him But you know, we're not going to get any more from of the standard of taste in this video So you'd have to wonder of spending exactly a minute on a book Is not a great idea. Well, Theo the here in his defense long critique is not deep critique Just right I see This is the thing a lot of people Greatly approve of this video and I already knew it was just like this. He's not gonna fucking Qualify anything. He's just gonna it's just gonna be a reaffirmation of what people already thought it's all subjective. Well In the words of wilbo shakes gins Brevity is the soul of wit and by the way if you look up the full quote of that in context You'll notice that it's part of a much longer line of dialogue, but let's not let's not address that I was in my I put it on screen, but the in my tfa part one I said h bomb a guy has gotten that criticism and I put his defense on screen And his defense involves the fact that in context It's like a self-aware statement As in he's very much taking his time to make a point So like it's it's just Whatever it's such a fucking catchphrase for people though And the joint verdict of such wherever they are to be found is the true standard of taste and beauty So hume's answer is we can't know what's good for sure But we can get pretty close by listening to an expert and that anyone can become an expert with practice It's also better if we listen to critics as a whole instead of just one person because by joint verdict He means that critics tend to come to a consensus on great art over time Basically since great pieces of writing tend to withstand the test of time The fact that they have been well regarded by so many critics in so many times and places functions like an objective Standard making it uncontroversial to say that hamlet is an excellent play for instance It's sort of like polling data a few decades later and I see and that's where I would I would be disagreeing just just because a lot of people say it it's it's good Wouldn't line it up, but um Yeah, I wasn't I wasn't trying to to argue Argumentum ad populum earlier when it came to beto, but I'm just saying like I think that You'd have to have two people that were trying to quantify their Arguments for why beto of them would be good or bad Well, you know Like like like like mauler once said in the the mission of possible fallout debate He would be stalwart in defending a certain scene making sense Even if um everyone else in the call were outnumbering him and saying that it didn't make sense. Yeah I completely get what you're coming from. It's just that again the fact value distinction is the first big What is one of the big bumps in the road for an objective assessment? So when we're trying to reach our objective assessment, we need to bridge that that's that's one of the first things we need to Of course Emmanuel Kant was a little disappointed by Hume's essay thinking that he hadn't gone far enough to solve our problem In 1790 he published the critique of judgment a landmark and enormously influential book that tried to get as close as possible To figuring out how we perceive the world around us And I mean how we perceive the entire world around us Kant isn't just talking about art here and is actually trying to find a way to describe Why art is different from just about every other kind of object we encounter So i'm i'm not going to read all this out because kent doesn't write because that would be work Like i'm not i'm not gonna actually go through the text Is this such a like limp video, you know, it's horrible Like a regular human but instead like a computer describing math equations But what he says here is that taste is inherently subject Okay friend. I'll just take your word on that. Yeah, I was gonna say that's a really great video It just what he says is sort of this um kent said taste subjective So it is also depending on what you define as taste. I might agree with that statement I think most people would depending on what you mean by taste. Yeah I don't I think it's relatively uncontroversial to say taste is person to person. It's a subjective thing Objective when we feel pleasure or pain when looking at something it has nothing to do with that object It is taking place within our own minds the essence of subjectivity Now as kent often does he splits things into categories when you experience pain or pleasure The object responsible for that belongs in one of Can safely ignore the sublime for the purposes of this discussion since it alone would be its own hour long video Okay, so three categories. There's the agreeable the beautiful and the good The main difference between them is based on which we desire Let's say you're starving and a man offers you food because you need the food You're in no position to judge how it tastes. You can only say that it is agreeable like what? So the agreeable is that which like satisfies a function. Yeah The good is more about functionality. The the agreeable is that which satisfies The food would be functional rather than uh gourmet or exquisite Wouldn't it? That's sorry. How do you mean so to be functional to satisfy a function being the food satisfies hunger Like any any said you wouldn't quarrel about taste. It's like, yeah, it would be functional. So wouldn't that be the functional? I suppose so but that's that's not quite what he's he's getting at the idea is that Like you file something under the agreeable when it's not When it's not specifically serving a function like a hammer. It's not serving a specific Almost sort of I don't know like you put a book behind your head to weigh yourself uh prop yourself up as opposed to a pillow Yeah Like the book is agreeable full and the good the main difference between them is based on which we desire Let's say you're starving and a man offers you food because you need the food You're in no position to judge how it tastes. You can only say that it is agreeable Likewise our judge you could still judge how it tastes Confused with this analogy. Yeah, I'm calling bullshit on that one of the worst things about this video is it's a horrible account of camp Okay, so um Compare uh, let's say Have you guys ever had five guys or um in and out? Is there anyone here that knows what what a burger like, okay Right, um Shit fast food is always thing Yeah, it like basically well, okay. Those would actually be considered very high quality as far as like fast food goes And comparing that to something like mcdonald's I'm trying to compare like a like a low quality food to a similar but high quality Food like the one that actually does taste better and it's it costs more money because There's higher quality ingredients that are being used You know, for instance mcdonald's freezes their meat and five guys does not and so um That does affect the taste of the burger right and Makes the five guys burger tastes better And so you are if you have the money to like if you if you're a millionaire You're not going to go to mcdonald's you're going to go to five guys if that is an option yeah I'm just like all I was saying was this analogy is really strange And I think i'm going to be able to understand what he's trying to say He's just doing it really poorly if I try and put it really simply the agreeable is like a purely It's purely a sensory judgment That's all it is. It's it's a sensory judgment of the satisfaction of a desire There's nothing more to a particular this particular category of judgment But he's not going to spend much time with the desire Let's say you're starving and a man offers you food because you need the food You're in no position to judge how it tastes you can only say that it is agreeable Likewise our judgments of what is good are also prejudiced by our desires We want things that fulfill their function So we say that they are good if they do but when we look at something like a flower We can call it beautiful because we don't need it for a specific purpose. It's an unbiased judgment There's another important distinction between the agreeable and the beautiful and it helps us solve part of the problem of total Subjectivity things that are tied up in the idiosyncrasies of our senses can never be anything more than simply agreeable You may find the color purple agreeable I prefer blue and there is no conversation that we can really have there our senses just like different. It probably is actually It's just we're not capable of it yet Like there probably is Hold on. He is comparing the um so he's comparing different colors to um comparing an egg to a rose Isn't that a little strange like this kind of whole thing is strange because You can't you can't compare a you cannot say that a rose is objectively more beautiful than a tulip Um when they're like at equivalent health, right? um But you can say that a rose would look better if it is Alive and not dead and I just think that this is you're comparing um two colors to each other purple and blue And I I don't think that that's an equivalent to comparing an egg to a rose Well that current light the the purple versus blue thing is purely within the the realms of the agreeable And straight into the beautiful if I told you I preferred black to white and you said why and I said because white is too striking It like hurts my eyes. It's like, oh, you've actually referenced something that's tangible there Like I can't actually but if I just told you blue versus purple because it makes me feel better You'd be like, yeah, okay. There's nothing we can do with that. It's still still a sensory phenomenon though Uh true, but it's still provable that white is absolutely brighter than black true um, so it depends and like Sensory phenomenon that determines whether or not it is agreeable Yeah, and bright is technically relative, but it would be relative to the black is kind of what I was getting out there Yeah But the beautiful is different when we see something beautiful We actually feel that we have a good reason to believe that everyone should see it the same way as us And see I feel like he's slipping almost getting to the point where he's gonna slip me in soon because like The whole you you created objective analysis specifically to make your Uh subjective one Understood and appreciated by others or some shit like to validate it further Um, which which is a it actually explains the motivation like it would explain people like me, but it's not what I do And um, I can't get away with it Anyway, because I've already established standards that I would never be able to now get away from if you know what I mean Like my fan base would absolutely hold me to them now This this entire video is so far a missed shot. I would say anyway, like if you try not to deal with the beautiful like Uh as was outlined very very very briefly earlier What you guys try and do in terms of an objective and assess of in terms of an objective assessment Is categorize art under The good or whatever elements you can you try and categorize under the good because that concerns functional and like purposiveness and such like like Hence the image of a hammer a hammer is a good hammer if you know you hammer nails really well. That's how you're trying to see art So all this all the stuff about beauty is like Okay Yes, can't said all of these things by the way also no information on why can't says all of these things Nothing on the the huge level of metaphysics and understanding that backs it Or he'll he'll explain that within the remaining Raining possibility. I'm sure he's gonna explain the entirety of transcendental idealism Yes, leave it to be a true quality of the object even though it isn't this phenomenon There are things that are true qualities of the object We can reference that are of of Value to stand as we've generated even if they were by us or whatever. I don't know just also who's moving around the thing Hold me South Pole Also I'm a wolf a dude does nothing. All right. Hey, can you guys hear me? Yeah, sorry that yeah, that was me. I I was trying to ask if we could rewind 15 seconds and I guess that my mic muted out. Sorry. Okay very sorry about that No problem All right, we have there our senses just like different stuff But the beautiful is different when we see something beautiful We actually feel that we have a good reason to believe that everyone should see it the same way as us We are is that actually what we think though when we say that something is beautiful That's that's what comes to saying the nature of a judgment of the beautiful is Okay, okay, when you when you are witnessing something when you're witnessing something beautiful you have Okay You have a reason to believe or or reason to demand I suppose That everyone else who should witness the same phenomenon would have the same Like would draw the same conclusion that it is beautiful Okay, if if I was to read count very conveniently, I could say he's arguing for objectivity And I would cite that You see how a convenient reading can change how you can present someone's work and perhaps this is what's going on here Mm-hmm Believe it to be a true quality of the object even though it isn't this phenomenon is what can't calls and bear with me through All of these terms subjective Universality Yeah, that is that is a big weird phrase. So I know what you're thinking this sounds like an oxymoron How can something be universal if it is subjective and I hear you but can't is using this phrase to talk about the fact that While we can't irrefutably prove that we are right about something being beautiful What matters here is the fact that we feel like we have a good reason to believe that other people should agree with us We have a justifiable opinion. It's in this Sorry to pause again really quick. Uh, I don't know how deep you want me to go into The philosophy behind this but all I'll say is that is a horrible account of what's actually going on with the beautiful I was going to pause and all I was going to say is is that what cad thinks is that what cad says All right, yeah fairly honest god Uh, right. So let's start what you're here for dental idealism. So in the shortest terms I can think of can't believes there is a Very first off can't has things like causality space time are not actual things out there in the world They're human concepts that we use to process experience into what we understand We never actually interact with things in themselves like the things as they are or what I suppose you could call objective reality That's not that we don't perceive objective reality That's part of what makes lovecraft scary, right? Is this this whole universe beyond the one where you understand and perceive? Yeah, we perceive reality through the categories in our brain like space time Causality so on and so forth and that processes it into What we understand and what we see and then a judgment of the beautiful we've got this uh, Subjective universality going on, uh, which is one thing. I don't know if can't ever use that phrase by the way I don't I don't remember actually. I'm gonna assume that that's a convenient way of putting it from it, but yeah, who knows Uh, essentially what's going on with a beautiful is Uh, what what count refers to as the free play of the imagination and the senses the idea that uh Because we have these concepts that I've referred to previously like for example If the concept of a dog would be what we understand to be a dog and then we've also got the categories in our head like uh, space time so on so the idea the way a normal cognitive rational judgment goes is Some uh the uh The object we perceive is subsumed under a concept to try and like As we process the experience. Mm-hmm, but with uh But with an aesthetic judgment a judgment of the beautiful, uh, there's sort of uh, it's really hard to sorry uh an like An excess of cognition. I suppose is how you put it like it can't be fully subsumed under one concept And that results in the free play of the senses which then results in a judgment of the beautiful And that's that's as close to a brief account as I can give of it Uh, and I want to point out that's got Very little to do with what just right said was going on in a judgment of the beautiful because he didn't have time in his 20 minute video To give us background into all the reasons why can't believes what he does and says what he does what if there was a story about a guy who was trying to Defend a movie he really liked through a standard that was nonsensical and went on a stream where he was unable to defend it and then he Went as far as Being frustrated by that event and so looked into philosophers that may or may not have discussed this particular subject Read a brief summary of their work on wikipedia And then constructed a video with a couple of jabs and snarkiness while also referencing them Just make it seem like he's actually got a lot of clout here Who conclude on the subject and then move on with his channel as if he got the final word What if that happened i'm not saying that happened, but what if that no, I could see that being the case Who knows never know though I'm sure this is just a genuine look into some ideas and he's reached some interesting conclusions. That's all absolutely Face that all conversations around art take place So to recap cant's theories so far taste is inherently subjective However to talk about the beauty of something you can't be biased towards it You cannot need it or see practical value in it and the terminology of the agreeable Let's set aside totally abstract personal opinions from those we think should have universal validity. Oh boy That is a lot of stuff cant is literally the most difficult literary critic to figure out Why do I not think there is necessarily true Okay, so first off cant's not a literary critic shut up. He's a philosopher He worked in metaphysics epistemology all kinds of other fields. This was very much a tertiary work for him Hell he wasn't even on about uh objectivity versus subjectivity The main purpose of the critique of judgment was to do with uh The traditions empiricism and rationalism being as previously outlined. Yeah It's it's just your opinion that cant's was not a literary critic. Okay, he's he's not objectively Haven't you based that on your assessments and your feelings southport? So isn't it just subjective that you think what he's saying is subjective about his subjective take on subjectivity? You are you are subjectively right? I knew it One more distinction to clear out. Oh wait. Yeah, did you want to say anything else? Uh, I think I might have thought can't remember it now Shit, I'm sorry dude. I didn't mean to be okay. Uh, it's fine. Sorry It's me You did say first of all he's not a literary critic. So I assume you wanted to go on to something else Oh, there we go. Thanks. Thanks for rewinding. You reminded me must be unbiased to judge beauty So this is a problem with uh cant's idea not necessarily with just rights depiction of it because that is a thing He says it's disinterestedness that allows for a judgment of beauty to take place But clearly we as humans are not fully disinterested Wow I don't understand how that matches taste is inherently subjective Combined with you must be unbiased to judge How would what would the judgment be at that point? Um by by by cant's assessment, I guess It's it is entirely and like just how the thing appears to you because uh Hmm I like part of it the idea that like if you're unbiased, you'll be able to judge it I mean, I want to use the word objectively, but I guess I don't know if that's where what this is doing Subjective universally objective universal. Why is he put it that way? I think he's done a mistake Let's say it wasn't that before right? It was Subjective universality and I saw someone in chat confirm that can't never use is that phrase In the critique of judgment. Well, yeah, so fyi psa Don't trust just rights take on these two philosophers look into it if you want to know what they actually think Read it don't take his word for it I have issues with reviewers Who look at a two-hour series of moving pictures and then try and recant it to an audience? I'm like you usually fucking it up massively And I use that word specifically So when someone's judging an entire body of work from an ancient fucking philosopher like yeah, don't Don't trust it. Don't Don't trust 90% of internet critics using philosophers to try and support their claims especially if their videos under like an hour Hey I can't believe how short this video is for the subject so funny and people will say it's concise. I'm like Okay What have you say validity who boy that is a lot of stuff Kant is literally the most difficult literary critic to figure out But there is one more distinction to clear up and it's Wait, didn't you say that kind of can't is literally the most difficult literary critic to figure out. Isn't that subjective though? I guess he would agree with you. I guess you'd be like, yeah, no with my opinion He's also not a fucking literary critic So so it wouldn't literally be the case then not that was human for that matter by the way He could argue again because he's slippery. He'd be like I was using litter literally the word hyperbolically But not literally He's using the word literally not literally what I would say in fairness is that a lot of people do use that word hyperbolically Down from some nature or some spinos. This isn't necessarily the time to be Fucking hyperbolic when you're trying to explain Philosophy whatever Can I one more thing? So so far we have tried to cover almost the entirety of the critique in judgment of judgment in about five minutes You know when I went through that small paragraph where I was like this this this this like my video on this I don't even know if I can get it done within an entire year First of all I need to read all their works and see how if I could understand it then get translations Then look into who they reference Then cross like figure out all of the ideas of everything they're talking about and figure out what words they're using And what they think they mean versus what I think they mean Like it's there's so many levels to this and he's just fucking shat out a 20-bit video Someone in the chat said that wolf uses literally hyperbolically all the time. We know that but we're talking about hypocrisy here Yeah, you're saying in reference to just write himself. It's pretty amusing Yes, the use it just writes hyperbolic usage of the word literally while trying to argue that Everything is subjective here and he's using it In reference to saying that these two people are the most difficult literary critics to understand Which is a subjective statement. I just think that's hilarious I don't care about yeah people. I understand that a lot of people use that word hyperbolically. I'm saying in this particular context, it's super hypocritical and ironic so Yep, the beautiful and the good and I think this one helps to explain the impossibility of objective critique I said earlier that things that are good have a specific purpose and we can say objectively Whether or not they are good at achieving that purpose. Yes, but that would be one standard So for example, I am trying to hammer a nail and my hammer breaks Like well, I can actually use this table leg as a hammer Like is it is it a good hammer? It's like uh By the standard in which it can hammer a nail to a degree Yes, but you're still damaging the table leg when you do it I seriously doubt it won't take a few punches to itself If you know what I mean But integrity goes down for every nail it hammers and to a degree a hammer does the same thing But it would be a significantly lesser degree You definitely shouldn't be using a scalpel to get that nail in And but this is the thing though like uh, he's like tying it to functionality is interesting to me because it's Not necessarily like what it is versus what it can do. I suppose I don't really The idea of a judgment of the good is how well something fulfills its purpose Yeah, so how well a hammer hammers a nail and such like the the problem with that when it comes to aesthetic judgments and judgments of art is uh I guess you'll get into that a little bit later on, but um We don't have a clear specific purpose for art Yeah, and it's the problem with using the weird art too. I try and avoid using it Oh, so do I and it can confuse what someone thinks you're talking about Like if you say like this is poor writing, so how can you say art is bad? It's like no, I said poor writing It's like how could you say art is bad though? Like again, it's like you talk about like stories and such like and here we are with a reference to count Who's talking about roses and natural beauty because he was very focused on natural beauty And I have to wonder how we got from point a to point b in there It was fast Unloose to say the least the impossibility of objective critique I said earlier that things that are good have a specific purpose And we can say objectively whether or not they are good at achieving that purpose The weird thing about things that are beautiful is that while they I'm really sorry to do this again. Just a quick Notifier, I don't think can call it objective even if you are making a judgment of the good Because the purpose is implanted by you I mean if you establish that He we literally can't have a take on anything that is objectively anything then yeah, he might as well throw that word out If that was can't take Essentially we humans are never going to deal with anything that's objective at least in the real world Yeah, we have to be elevated to a different plane or whatever Things things in our minds we can happily work with objectively like one plus one equals two It's happily definable as an objective statement Is he going to Is he about to argue that you can't say that art is objectively good because in order for something to be objectively good It would have to have a purpose and art doesn't have a purpose therefore. It can't be objectively good Is that really like where he's going here? That's where counts are going Okay, because I guess we'll give it a bit more time. Yeah The won't serve practical purposes they feel like they do so when we say that a flower is beautiful We're not talking about the practical purpose. It serves as the reproductive organ of a plant What's beautiful about a flower is that it feels like it was designed to please even though that is not its purpose I wouldn't even say that He didn't he didn't say designed to please. That's uh over simplification of what's going on there it's the purpose of an objective concept and uh Why would you leave them out? Why did you even need to say that because it's satisfying to senses? Yeah, well, then it's the agreeable designed to please is an interesting way to look at it So let's say that someone loses a family member or someone close to them and uh, they they receive a bouquet of flowers from from friends that hear about it in our sympathetic and gift them a bouquet of flowers, right and um It achieves the desired effect So can you say that that bouquet of flowers was good? from from the standard Gotta let him make that argument first. I guess we because i'm okay. Sure Let's talk about flowers a lot a piece of art is a little different than nature though Since we are constantly debating what the purpose of a piece of art is a painting or a film doesn't serve an obvious practical function um Not sure I agree Because okay It depends on So say for example, i'm creating a story the purpose then is to be a story Is i'm not like i wouldn't end up with a fucking camel So like the idea that it has no purpose is like well It's purpose is to serve like a video this purpose is to serve as what is a video um If you would say it's Sorry The idea of what a story is uh come from well Yeah, but like i'm on board with the idea that every single standard is created by humans Fair enough So how could it not be like it's But yeah when we create the thing And then we try and achieve the thing the thing is therefore got standards and that's how it works in science as far as I know And you well you could be like well the thing existed before While a video did not necessarily exist until we created it. I suppose you can try and distinguish them that way, but I don't know if that's uh So it's like you'd have uh I'm trying to think of a series of macaroni. I can call it what it is. We can categorize it and then I put it in a particular Uh formation and then i'm like now that's a piece of macaroni art whatever uh Technically just because no one else had made a piece of macaroni art up to that point does not make the definition any less significant um, I guess What i'm trying to say is that Saying the purpose of a story is to be a story of a purpose of a I guess well after you know Painting is to be a painting is that it doesn't really I suppose reveal much more about that uh about that subject Well, typically not I know but the qualities are entailed with them That's yeah, but there's only so far we can go with stuff like that like if you A popular idea as art's purpose is to elicit a reaction or feeling from someone in chat and it's like I mean, yeah, I don't think I do But it's if the problem is that with how subjectivity works Gonna be a guy out there He's the painting and doesn't react at all And therefore is it failed in its purpose and therefore is bad so So um, I went and saw Hobbes and Shaw last night and when I went there I went there Uh to to see the movie knowing that it was going to be pretty stupid And the plot was going to be paper thin and the dialogue was going to be cliched and the characters aren't going to have much depth But it was advertised as a Dumb fun action movie and I got exactly what I wanted out of it So it achieved its purpose rather well, even though I wouldn't rate it as high as like many other movies that are out there, right? um, however, if I'm watching a Let's say that I go into a star wars movie like uh, oh, let's let's rewind time back to December 20 December 14th 2017 to when I went inside the last Jedi and I was expecting a a good movie that had a story that would make sense and I got the exact opposite of that If the purpose of a movie for me, uh, depending on what movie it is. I'm picking of course Is I'm expecting a good story that I find intellectually stimulating because It features characters that are all smart and the good guys are trying to outsmart the bad guys and vice versa and um what I get is actually Everyone is making ridiculous decisions and the story only moves forward because everyone's an idiot then The story didn't achieve the purpose that The movie didn't achieve the purpose that I came in for it. You do you guys what I'm saying I think so and yeah, the the question is more of an inherent purpose versus one that is given by a The viewer slash creator Yeah Okay, that that's that's the big one is that inherently Because we're dealing with Philosophical that's why earlier I said like a story is it intrinsically progression isn't tied to story. There's no way Have one without it again Writing that can't be read the intrinsic values the ones that it has to be that to qualify as that Um, and that's yeah, that's how I see How you'd be able to judge an objective value because it's not something that you've projected onto it It is what it is and and you could be like someone else did though because it's a trying to be an x and it's like yeah, but And adhering to a standard you can still be objective And if the standard supersedes the thing in terms of the standard was created and then the things were created like in carpentry Or because what is objectively a dovetail joint Is objectively you can't get out of it. You can't go no my it's a finger joint is now a dovetail joint It's like you can't do that And you'd be like, yeah, but it's just up to that carpentry guy. He's the one who's saying it It's like exactly that's that's what it is. You're trying to achieve what it is and uh Yeah, I don't know I don't see I haven't heard uh Actually approached from that angle before so I can't offer any particular Oh, it's it's an ongoing discussion. I mean, I'll need to think about that I might get back to you on that about at some point Yeah, no, it's all good I've said before that it's like it's always going to be an ongoing discussion Well, I'm after I'm dead and well before I was alive and like that's evidence to some people that it's obviously not true then like what Like I wasn't going to end the discussion on art. How the hell was anyone going to do that? Nobody's done it yet In fact the the core blockades that were there are still the core blockades Like even from cancer time and the idea of a fact value distinction and defining an art object and the purpose of art and such Like these are all still big hang-ups The difference is that people have become more entrenched in their positions that they've become more nuanced The positions are more like intricate than they were before but they haven't moved forward in any sense It hasn't no one's gone right. We've solved it art Art is judged objectively or art is judged subjectively and even if we did You know, you could get a new wave of people who could Conclude on it because they felt it concluded on a completely different idea because It feels like it matches reality better or maybe it does like it'll just always keep changing You get rational people crazy people or people who saw the truth where the previous set of people didn't It'll just everything keeps changing everything goes on But it's fun to talk about in the meantime. We're all here for a small amount of time people Let's have some fun Oh, I just file a little bit We are constantly debating what the purpose of a piece of art is a painting or a film doesn't serve an obvious Practical function and even if the author creates it for a specific purpose art tends to take on a life of its own And can fulfill many unforeseen functions And this is really important if there's one idea I want you to take away from this video It's this one because how can you establish the object? Yes, so the purpose of art is uncertain is it again The meaning makes me go like well, I suppose because yeah art is very covers a lot of stuff Isn't this still just kind of irrelevant to the Discussion on whether something is well crafted Like the last Jedi has several shots that are beautiful You could say that the movie is objectively beautiful, but it's also objectively poorly written again I tend to throw that word out it would be like well composed when I talk about like strong cinematography You probably go straight to composition or clarity or And then talk about like the subject in the frame rather because beautiful I mean more so than good beautiful immediately makes people think of you saying it's it's pretty And it's like that sounds like the peak of subjectivity Okay. Yeah Sorry, sorry Well, uh, there was a certain Shot like on on crate that I was thinking of specifically when it when I was saying beautiful there, um, but I would say that something like the throne room fight. There's um, I would say that it's well shot There's no shaky cam. It's it's a wide shot. It's it's like it's Competently shot, but it's not well choreographed um, and they clearly there's a ton of mistakes that they could have fixed in Um reshoots or going for a different take or something um, but I just uh Now I've lost my train of thought. I'm sorry So, uh, the idea of judging out on a sort of Purpose level we call that teleology Over in philosophy based on the word tell us which means purpose in Greek Uh, the idea of judging out teleologically Uh carries with it some I guess issues in because let's say you take an element out of the work And you start examining that element to see how it fulfills a function Which is then fulfilling a purpose within the thing, but then you wonder What is the purpose? Like again Mola has to be a story and I currently don't have an answer to that. I'm quite interested to look into that so because I figure that was that easy of a solution Well, I think this is the thing. There's no way I'd be cracking anything. So it's just uh Ultimately, it's only everyone's take on everything, right? That's what everything is fundamentally I'd be curious to see what is said in response to that is what I mean Uh, but then like yeah, that's the idea is that it seems from what I have seen at least Relatively uncontroversial that the purpose of art is answer Which makes it hard to judge any given element of an art object To working towards an uncertain purpose Because we can't really set the standard. There's no nails for the hammer to hammer if you if that makes any sense We don't we don't know what we don't want to know what the function of the thing is We don't know what's trying to do. So how are we supposed to tune the elements of it to work towards that function? You worry goes I guess criteria for a piece of art when art doesn't serve a definitive Describable purpose like you can say that a particular hammer is a good hammer because it is good at hammering nails Since hammering nails is the purpose of a hammer, but with art. Yeah, see when he says the purpose So I would just be like it's by definition what it is Is what it's defined as so how does it perform in the attributes of what it's defined as? Um And there's always so many different ways to look at whatever that might be and like I said it supplies to all crafts And in the case of dovetail joints, I was really bad at making them Because you have to make them you have to be very measured. I was I always wanted to make finger joints, but dovetails are stronger They just harder to make because you've got to not be a spaz to get it like I was But that was back in DT in my school. It was fun. I liked making things The perceiver has to invent the purpose of whatever they're looking at Is it to entertain provoke thought communicate a message stir emotions or nothing at all with every piece of media You encounter those questions are up for debate So if your criteria for a story is whether or not it has logical consistency If that's the box you need checked to have a good time, that's fine What I'm arguing is that implicit in that belief are a lot of assumptions about what the purpose of a piece of art is I don't think so No, no Let me see if I can uh You guys can uh, take it from here. I guess I'm gonna try to figure out my own response to this Well, so when when he's like, uh, if if logical consistency is your box to tick And uh, you'll be waiting for that's what you'll be looking for in movies or whatever typically not with me and eric taxon actually Spoke to me about this and he sees it as I run too subjective Uh Sort of perspectives at the same time. That's how he sees what I'm doing I see what I'm doing is running a subjective and then an objective I will I will take it for what it is and I'll react as I do Um, for example with captive marvel when it finished I was like that was okay that I said to my friend at the time that it's like a four And then I got objective about it because I was able to watch the film again And really break down everything that happens and it conclude at like a two Or maybe even a one And then the reverse of that is end game which was like fucking 11 out of 10 We're watching it for all the payoffs and then once I get enough time to come down. I was like, yeah, okay, sis Yeah, that's pretty cool. Um these What makes me enjoy a thing is so God damn subjective. It's all over the place. It can also depend on my mood in the day Whether or not i'm hungry or sleepy like or whether or not there's a certain actor in there It's like there's there's just so many things that come into it Which is why the objective scale is just like it brings everything down to Well for lack of a better term ones and zeros just try didn't like my robot and now Didn't bring it up. It's a sd subject But that was an idea of conduits as well if we're all conduits of art explaining things the robot would be unable to Reference anything that was emotional The idea being that if I say blah blah blah is inconsistent with blah blah blah The robot would have said the exact same thing as me. So saying that I am biased And when I'm saying the robot could have said it you can't actually say a robot is biased unless you're going to talk about Someone who programmed it biased Someone put it in there that he was going to be biased. I don't know I guess in a sense though If I want to get pedantic about this the robot would have a bias towards So well the robot would be biased towards the standard set by his programming from the person who programmed him Well, I said that he was just looking for logical inconsistencies and Environment I'm pretty sure I'd have to actually listen over to what I specifically said to just write um I remember him His issue was the robot couldn't possibly exist. I believe I think I'm fine with the robot existing. Yeah, because it was theoretical anyway. Yeah The question is just again is what the robot says Valuable I guess because the robot can say all he wants. Uh, uh, the holder was inconsistent so on and so forth The question is is that is that valuable? I'd probably say yes. That's actually the opinion. Yeah. Well, I was gonna I think I talked a bit shad about that on the other podcast Like the the fundamental question of is an objective assessment valuable is like, well, it doesn't matter really That's down to the person Do you find value in it? Do I find it's like I certainly find value in it I my biggest deal with it as wolf mentioned earlier was that it's uh, it's going to lead us to better things Ideally, that's that's why we want to point them out And um, when you get to fundamentals like Words that cannot be written and weapons that disappear during battle to prevent characters from dying We've got problems that in in just rights view are almost objective because the majority of the planet when shown them would be like ooh And so is it not worth scrubbing those out? Um, and and then once you realize what the Like he maybe he agrees with that. Let's just say for the sake of argument. He goes Yeah, uh 100 of people agree that that disappearing weapon was a bad and we should never do that again It's like, okay cool Why though? Why was it and then you identify all of these parameters for why that was a problem beyond the fact that people just reacted to it Then you discover there's a bunch of other issues in your script that match that thing But most people didn't recognize only 60 percent down to 50 down to 40 And so it gets the point where he's like, why not erase all of them? Yeah, so let's say that there's um There's an inconsistency or a plot hole or flub or error or whatever That uh, can break your immersion when you notice it, right? So I think that we have an acceptable like like there's a threshold that we have where we will kind of um Like a like a mistake allowance that we give to um To movies like okay, we understand that no movie is perfect And there's going to be the occasional like fuck up here and there But as long as there isn't like a pile up of errors that are Very crucial to the story and how the story makes sense We're going to give it a pass But then you get to something like the dark knight rises level where nothing in that In that movie's story makes sense um, it's distracting like Whatever plot holes that just right is going to talk about with the dark knight I can tell you that none of those were noticeable to me on my first viewing of the dark knight, but First viewing of dark knight rises I was not having a good time because Nothing in that movie Famously said that he didn't notice the whole dough thing just run through But yeah, this is why noticing something isn't something I consider to be completely irrelevant because I could just be like Oh, I didn't notice any problems It's the works fine on my machine answer of criticism It's really annoying For instance, you may believe that movies are primarily about escapism And so anything that takes you out of the narrative is an enormous flaw There's just nothing that makes that belief any more correct or incorrect than any other assumption about what art should be What bullshit? No No, no, no, I'm sorry But if you've got a fucking if your if your story takes place in uh, in a If your movie takes place in a universe that's supposed to be realistic like the dark knights And then you're introducing bullshit like magic leg braces that that fix fuck it that fix the stupid bullshit lack of cartilage in bruce wane's leg and allows him to kick bricks out of walls and The whole bullshit with the stock market heist thing where yeah, they're going to just accept these trades that uh, basically defried Bruce Wayne out of all of his wealth Right after Terrorists took over the place and held hostages there and did some bullshit with the computers And oh my god nothing nothing in the dark knight rises story makes sense and when that's Taking you out of the film that's drastically affecting your ability to enjoy it Yes, it is a major stain on the film's quality Because the writing could have been better the writing could have been significantly better I mean, that's the point of this being philosophical. He would just all he needs to throw back at you is yeah according to you The question being The question being raised is what do you mean better? Yeah, because and then we get to yeah, it stands to concoct bias at which point he says it's not objective It's normative which honestly, I don't really care either way so long as the arguments are good Someone is saying that the dark knight told you was never intended to be realistic You know what I mean here. It's not meant to have magic leg braces. Okay, the leg race is bullshit I've never understood the point of them when they invent that he is weakened At the beginning of the film only to then undo it. It's like well the legs anyway, and it's like, okay Why not just have it so that his legs weren't to that degree crippled? Why why did you? A strange move, but yeah, it's Yeah, it's like a problem then and had to invent a solution to that problem for that film It's like it it's like chaffer was saying that lute couldn't have shown up on crepe because the x-wing was in the water Okay Rewrite the film so that you don't have the x-wing in the water. It's an arbitrary writing decision It wasn't that wasn't established in the force awakens. It wasn't established in return of the jedi It was established in the same movie where they did the force projection bullshit Whenever we critique the quality of art, we first make an arbitrary assumption about what its purpose is Then we invent criteria to decide whether that purpose is achieved And it's only after that that the analysis proceeds logically Let's look at a concrete example. Perhaps you're writing a review of oh, I don't know Star Wars the last jedi to pick a film totally at random. Oh god only halfway through the video Totally out of you Ben you disgusting degenerate Okay, so remember how I told you that uh I was doing some car work today. That's your opinion, but yeah Okay, well, we needed to buff out a bunch of shit, but we couldn't get the thing to buff out the um little scratch marks on the side so um Initially, I thought okay. Well, I'll just do it tomorrow or something when I can go to the store But then my dad comes back and he's like, hey, you got the buff stuff and I was like Okay, well may as well do it now And yeah, that's what I've been doing. I hope it worked out. You've missed. Yeah, nothing really Yeah, I didn't think I would a whole lot of nothing It he's just he's bringing in the last jedi just now. So I don't know this is weird typing, but Oh It's like wolf has the sixth sense that someone is about to praise the last jedi on e-fap Fuck that's a good thing. Oh my god, you know I ordered pizza while I was doing it. So thank goodness right Oh, I don't know Star Wars the last jedi To pick a film totally at random and for no other reason in the first scene The rebels use these big bombers against the first order and they get destroyed really quickly because they are big and slow But aha, you've been watching Star Wars your whole life And you know that there's another kind of ship called a y-wing which is also supposed to drop bombs So why aren't the good guys using godship? Don't tell me he's actually going to try and say that Use y-wings. Give him a minute. This is really funny. Keep this in mind He's not done with it yet since it's smaller and faster and would survive longer That would make more logical sense. Checkmate Ryan. Yes, it would. Okay Oh my god, right Because he's gonna he's making a wider argument here. So whatever he says within the last jedi He's making a wider point that I kind of want to hear it get to as well as whatever he's saying about the last jedi If you know what I mean Yeah, go ahead. You might have to let him talk for a bit actually Now it's totally fine to dislike any scene in this film But let's talk about why this is not an objective criticism It's partly because most people do not know what a y-wing is No, okay Okay, first off Fuckface Everyone knows what a fucking why wing is anyone that's watched star wars knows what a fucking y-wing is It's been here since the first fucking movie released 40 fucking years ago Don't tell me that people don't know what a fucking y-wing is you disingenuous faggot bag it. What the fuck? How could you possibly make that argument? Everyone knows what it is. It's been in every game. It's been in every movie. Okay, maybe not every movie, maybe not every game, but most games and most movies. This is so stupid. How could you possibly make this argument? You fucking idiot. Everyone knows what it is. Yeah, but the fact that some people don't mean it's me. No, I need to know just because you're an idiot just because you're a fucking retard that doesn't know anything about Star Wars does not mean that that claim is accurate. It is not accurate. It is the exact definition of inaccurate. Here's the thing. If it shows several shots in the very first fucking Star Wars movie ever released of Y-Wings, then logic goes, people know what a Y-Wing is because we've seen it in action before. We don't even need Y-Wings to exist for the fucking Bobas to be terrible. We don't even need Y-Wings. Oh my God. This is the dumbest man on the internet. All respect for you that I ever had in the past, gone completely. You're dumb. I would like to try to address something here. Let's say that there's someone that has only seen Star Wars, like just The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi, so they are unaware of what a Y-Wing is because a Y-Wing is not in either of those two movies. The point is, so I'm not much of a Harry Potter fan, and the latest prequel film, Fantastic Beast 2, shows a fully grown Minerva McGonagall at Hogwarts several years before her confirmed birth date that was detailed in the books. That's a massive contradiction, but I wouldn't have caught it myself just because I didn't remember that particular detail. It still is a problem, though, even if I personally was unaware of that. A fucking disappearing knife, dude. Most, if not like 90% of the fucking audience did not know that a knife disappeared during the fight. Yeah. Can I raise just quickly as well? What the hell does this have to do with anything he was saying before? I don't know. This is why I suggested, I suggested we don't stop, but he did make a point. Like this is a singular point here. Yeah. He's doing the same bullshit. He's doing the same bullshit that he did with you guys in your debate where he said that, well, there could be one person out there that actually unironically likes the room, and therefore it's not objectively bad. Also, let me add to this. Let me add to this fucking rant I'm going on. Go ahead. Just because other people don't know what a Y-Wing is, does not give you an excuse to not put in a Y-Wing when they are an established thing in the Star Wars universe over this slow piece of shit bomber. Hey, we could just because other people don't know about it does not mean that that's an excuse you fucking moron. We could just have like you go to see this film and it just plays just right. Never write anything. Never write anything. I swear to God, if you write anything, I might actually kill myself. I mean, I'm probably going to do that anyway. But you'll just make me do it quicker. Just to know you'll come back to say absolute thing I have ever heard on E-Fap unironically. You will come back to life just to kill yourself a second time. Yes. Be Wolf the White. Well, I've never heard of E-Fap, so him saying that isn't a problem. Oh my God. So like, yeah, what I was going to say, if it is truly based on memory, we just have anything in Star Wars episode nine. Like it could just be Lord of the Rings, the two towers. And someone's like, where's Luke? And then Rye Johnson's like, Luke? Luke who? Like Luke Skywalker? And he's like, no, I don't. Who's that? You're like, oh, OK. And then most of the audience are like, no, I don't remember any Luke. This film's great. You look closely. Barney, the dinosaur was piloting one of the bombers. I didn't notice it. And I'd watch it. It's not a problem in this film. But let's talk about why this is not an objective criticism. It's probably because most people do not know what a Y wing is. And even objectively modified that. You don't want to even make this. Wait, wait, hold on. Didn't he say most people don't know what a Y wing is? Most people. Fewer. Wow, I didn't even notice that one word. Shit. Oh. We're going to say that some people don't know. It's one thing. Most people, though, bullshit. And even fewer of them know of his military purpose. I'll have you know. Oh, well, I guess that's how it works. This is definitely high, dude. I fucking wish I was high. Yeah, this is no high. Well, this is pizza. Well, no, this is sober. And I really wish I wasn't because if I was high, I would think that I'm not watching a real video. Well, what is it with you? Like whenever I'm in a call with you, you go on these like absurdly passionate rages. I don't know. You just bring out the worst in me so far. We should fuck sometime. Agreed. It's partly because most people do not know what a Y wing is and even fewer know what its military purpose is. So to even make this critique, you have to have a certain knowledge of. You have to have watched the other films. You have to have watched a single Star Wars movie. Congratulations. Wait, so you mean to tell me that in order to criticize something, you need to be able, you need to have something of an understanding of it. This is a bad thing. Why? If you're going to argue to me that the the films that come before it and the line of it being a sequel are irrelevant when you critique it because people might have forgotten. Then when we talk about act three, we don't need to consider act one and two. People might have forgotten about it by then. When I watch this video, I can't help just go. Why the fuck does the object even matter? Just right. Why can't we just sit here interpreting like thinking about like TLJ came out? I didn't go and see it, but I have my interpretation on it and I have my assessment on it from that. It's about space Christians. And I'm right because. Someone said it's over, Anakin. I have the amnesia ground. Hey, you know, maybe he should have gone with the Ren's Reviews approach. He could have just said they never do show Y wings in the previous films. I mean, I'm trying to think of like how to how to get delved this state, but it's like it's not valid if you don't remember it. It's it's so upset. Do we have to rewind it? We can rewind it. It's insane that he was showing Rogue One footage, the movie that came out right before the last Jedi the year before the absurdity of the idea that it's a bad thing that you need like a certain level of familiarity with the subject in order to analyze and critique it. He's an interesting man. This this is just right. You know, I'm starting to think you might not just be right. That name, you know, this is why people don't like game journalists, because they're bad at games and review games anyway. Moller, can you add to your Godel notes? The thing where most people don't know what a Y wing is. I feel like that belongs on there. No, I want to go so more obvious. Most people don't know what a sofa is. Don't know what a planet is. What a person is. What I don't know what the people is. Most people don't know what a mask making laptop is. I think I do have quotes from Red Reviews to go into the next year. Remember now, you are expected to remember multiple faces, several names. You're also expected to remember. Well, imagine this criticism of EFAP, the amount of memes you got to remember. I can't believe I was about to resubscribe to this guy at some point. Well, good Lord. Don't do that. Well, yeah, this killed any chance that that ever happened. The Y wing is and even fewer know what its military purpose is. So to even make this one have to have a certain knowledge of the lore. But on top of that, you have to go lower. You don't know what the purpose is. It's a bomber most. Yeah, people know that it's a bomber. Ha, dude. I don't think it played that part for me. I'm overdosing on stupid right now. Teek, you have to have a certain knowledge. I'd like to overdose right now. But on top of that, you have to overdose on just right. I believe that adhering to the lore established in other films is more important than the immediate impact of the scene. So you have to establish that adhering to the law is more something than the impact of the scene, the implication being that they're dichotomous. Yeah, you can't do that. You can't just have both. Yeah, which is he says like a. He says that you need a certain knowledge of the lore as though this is like a Y wing is equivalent to understanding who Morgoth was in the Lord of the Rings. Like, what a stupid fucking person you are. You were actually the dumbest YouTuber I might have seen so far. Like, I'm not expecting the average Star Wars viewer to understand everything about like Mandalore, but Y wings. Yeah, yeah, it's kind of obvious what their purpose is. You see them from X wings, like in terms of what people should recognize. And if you could argue to me, yeah, most people don't know what an X wing is. I would be like, well, they fucking watch it at that point. Aren't their Y wings on the the attack on the Death Star in the first film? Yes. So the whole one of the teams are shot of it. Yeah, one of the teams is entirely Y wings. Yeah. And even if it wasn't in the first movie, it's still in fucking Return of the Jedi. Why is Wolf so autistic today? Gee, maybe it's because I'm watching a fucking moron. Tell me that nobody knows what a Y wing is in Star Wars. You see the screaming? Stupid is not clever or entertaining. Dude, please fucking kill yourself. Immediate impact of the scene. The fact that the bombers are big and slow is a nonverbal way of communicating an idea to the audience. It justifies in our mind why the ships are destroyed so easily, whichever side of the. Yeah, as if there's no other way to justify why a ship will be destroyed. You see the problem just right. This is post-hoc. He takes everything that happens in the scene and then justifies it as it had to be this way to be this way. But you want these results, you can get them in many ways. The story would not have happened, though, if the resistance weren't all fucking idiots. That I really am getting tired of people actually unironically making the argument that I need my characters to be retarded. Otherwise, I don't have a story. Like this story literally relies on the resistance going, yeah, we're going to take these bombers with paper-thin holes that can get destroyed by half of a TIE fighter crashing into one of them and then killing two others in the process that are designed to basically get destroyed if it can successfully deliver its payload. And they're super slow as well. They aren't even compensating this with speed or anything. And the bombs have to be dropped directly above the target instead of being sent out like a torpedo or a missile. Yeah, we're going to use these bombers instead of Y-wings, which are better in virtually every way. That's where the plot relies on. The plot relies on the stupid that it would take these terrible fucking bombers that make no sense as to why anyone would choose these things over the fucking Y-wings that are previously established. We need these bombers because it's nonverbal communication that... The drednought doesn't have shields, but it's nonverbal communication that... I mean, I would still argue, even despite this video that Just Right has some of, if not the best videos on the hobbit on all of YouTube, how the fuck did you go from that to this? What is wrong with you? Did you get like dropped on your head when you were 20 or something? A picture of like it is in someone's arms getting fed milk and they drop it. Did you go from a good YouTuber to a fucking moron? Didn't we ask him that in the debate? Like, what if his hobbit videos led to people disliking it? And he was like, that would be bad. I think he like... He said something to the effect of like, man, I think it would be bad if my hobbit videos that are really good led people to disliking it, even though the hobbit movies are fucking garbage. Really? I can't stand that position. Show some fucking balls, you sackless little pussy. Don't make a whole series of hobbit videos shitting on them and then say that you would feel like a bad person if you got someone to dislike them. That's the whole point, you idiot. It justifies in our mind why the ships are destroyed so easily, whichever side of the argument you land on. It's simply a personal preference and it's based on a bunch of beliefs about which aspects of a story are more important than others. Wait, but we you say that as if it supports the idea that why we shouldn't be there or something or that that isn't an actual like criticism to be presented and acknowledged. He's just like, well, you know, you need we wanted this to happen this way. So is that really more important than why wings being there? It's like, this video is it's predicated on like this really weird. Like it's it's not overly stated, but it's it's implicit in the videos that this really weird idea that this the piece of art could only ever have been one way. Fucking Patrick Williams said about Holdo. Like, if Holdo wasn't retarded, we wouldn't get our story. Yeah, the film could not have been made in another way. You I will let you say those two things at dichotomous adhering to the law or the emotional stakes of the scene. I don't have to have one or the other. You can't have both with a different set up. What a sad way to look at white in. You definitely can't have the visual of of Paige Tico kicking the ladder to get the detonator to fall down. You wouldn't get that in a wide way because that wouldn't be logistically possible in the Y wing. And there would be no reason for that to happen in the Y wing because we are not designed terribly like these terrible stupid fucking bombers are. But the scene itself where you're having these bombers get obliterated in this bombing run. Yes, it could still happen if you replace them with Y wings and they functioned the same way as they functioned in the previous movies. You still could have had the purpose that this scene plays into the story play out exactly the same way, just in a less retarded way. I don't buy the you have to have everyone in your story be retarded in order for this to happen. No. Yeah, if you need a sacrifice moment, you can make it happen. That isn't the exact same way, but in the same spirit. No, but you have to understand TLG. TLG could only have ever been like this. It could not have been at all different from what it is, apparently. Is TLG like the last TLG? The last Guardian? The last gay, that's the one. And in others, even though none of them are inherently more important than the rest, artists are constantly faced with these kinds of trade offs where they can choose to sacrifice the logic of a scene to a degree in order to improve implying that the logic in the scene is actually something they care about. And then you ask why and then you find out there's a principle document and then they sacrifice that principle the second they want to cheat. I just feel so bad for all the writers out there that are going like putting in a painstaking amount of effort to have their stories make sense as opposed to writers like Ryan Johnson and Colin Trevorrow who clearly don't give a shit about that kind of thing. And you're having morons like just right and Patrick Willems defending this garbage. So you have writer one complete in a year and it looks like the last Jedi writer to spends five years and it's the last Jedi, but way superior. And then he's like, just right. What do you think about my story? I worked really hard on it. And he goes, it was pretty great. No better or worse than TLG because ultimately, TLG couldn't have existed in any other way. You'd have to sacrifice emotion if you wanted logic. And the guy wrote the five year story is like, wow. Like there's no purpose. There's no purpose to putting in effort into your writing if this is if this can be accepted. This is the whole purpose of having a standard for objective quality. I mean, does he redraft? That's just right. Redraft it. If I could, if I could agree with just right and Patrick and just change a word in their arguments like, yes, it couldn't have been this retarded unless it was this retarded. That's what I agree. That's true. Yeah, I can agree to that. And just the other day, I was like showing some of my writing to Fringy and I showed him like the notes of like, OK, this is how the thing is going to go. Please tell me if this sounds retarded because I want someone to tell me if my ideas are fucking stupid and I need to rethink them. Yeah, but what the fuck do you like? I mean, I just really spend an hour and a half a year and a half. And a year and a half writing the book I'm working on now just to get the first draft done. And I'm still trying to think, OK, what's wrong with this? How can I fix it? How can I make it better? And then go from there. If anything, you know, Johnson, you should just write by the seat of your pants. Don't redraft at all and then just crap it out. If anything is happening, have a character get killed in a really dramatic way. If anything logical is going on, just distract the audience with a dramatic why am I wasting my time putting effort into anything I do? Why do you care about making it good, about making your story make sense and not contrived and logically consistent? Why do you care, Wolf? It doesn't matter. It's all subjective life apparently. Yeah, idiot. But other qualities of the film. Here's another Star Wars example that is the purest version of this. It's not the first Star Wars film was saved in the edit. You can check out Rocketjump's video for more on that. And one example of the editing changes to the film is that the original edit lacked the ticking clock elements in the finale. Instead of the Death Star being moments away from blowing up the rebel base, which imbues the scene with an incredible amount of tension and makes the heroes feel like underdogs, the original ending had them being the aggressors. The Death Star was just hanging out in space somewhere and the rebels went and blew it up. But changing the ending introduced a handful of plot holes. Leia says that their ship was being tracked and yet the heroes foolishly lead the villains directly to the... Yeah, but it's with the risk because they have the plans. It's with the risk because they have the literal plans to the Death Star that can get them to destroy it. Yeah. She acknowledges it. The idea that she says this in the film and you consider that something that the film isn't acknowledging, it's like weird. So a plot hole I feel would be, let's say that the empire is not actually tracking them, but then they somehow find a way to get the Death Star over to Yavin 4. But there's no established, like there's no throwaway line or anything that would explain how the empire would be capable of doing that. That would be a plot hole. This isn't a plot hole. This is absolutely a stick and trivence. I mean, all we would necessarily desperately need is for her to say that it wouldn't matter if they're tracking us because X or that we're desperate to get these plans to the team. But that's what I thought was implied when she says they're probably tracking us and that's why we escaped easier. They have the most important thing in the world on that ship and it needs to go to the people who can actually do something with it. The Rebel base on the moon of a planet called Yavin. The Death Star teleports into the Rebel base's solar system but on the other side of the planet meaning that they have to wait to blow up the moon base when they could have just teleported right next. Teleported. Stop saying teleported. Why is he saying that? You know, we talked about this on a previous EFAT but when you get key flags that give away that someone's not actually a fan of something. They teleport styles. You're like, mm, okay. Ballard, do you remember that video? I think we watched it on my channel last year from Annihilation when that one guy was like, they walk into another dimension and it's like, it's not another dimension. It's on the other side of a wall, you stupid idiot. It's like, it's not another dimension. You don't know what a dimension is if that's what you think is another dimension. You moron. It's the exact same thing. Why are we surrounded by idiots? What is wrong with this people? And yeah, the idea that, yeah. So they turned up, they're on, currently if I'm wrong, Yavin is the planet. They're on a boon? Yes, Yavin 4, the fourth moon of Yavin. So for the Empire, unfortunately, when they turn up Yavin 1 to 1 on the opposite end of the planet, so they have a choice of, I suppose they could blow through Yavin and then charge the death star back up. I can't remember what the charge time is on the fucking laser. Or they can move around it, which takes X amount of time. The idea that they could have just hyperspaced pasts. I don't know that that's even possible, that they can just hyperspace to like a few meters. We don't know that they can do that. That doesn't sound like that would make very much sense if you hyperspace just a few meters. I suppose they could have hyperspaced away by X amount and then back by X amount. But the thing is, they were right here. They're about to shoot them and the very important detail. And this doesn't apply to TLJ when people go, ah, you see Hux chose not to attack the people because he's stupid. This is, Tarkin does not believe for a second that they actually can destroy the death star. He doesn't even consider this a ticking clock. He's like, no, they've got no chance. I'm axing you, Malloran. I'm axing you. You know what? Tarkin wasn't wrong. Tarkin wasn't wrong. He used the fucking force to nail that shot. Tarkin's a good guy. I had Tarkin for 2020 present. I agree. I miss Tarkin. The competence of the fucking empire was just him personified. The entire idea of the death star immediately firing after Tarkin has this great visual in my mind. It's the thing just appearing in the system and just immediately snapping off a shot and then just teleporting away again. Yeah, teleporting by the way. Like a troll. Like, hello. Malloran, I'm axing you. Are you willing to give Hux leeway for being arrogant? He called him a boy. Oh no. To the moon and at any time, they could presumably shoot their laser at the planet and let the rebel base spin out of orbit. Now, if you were in the shoe... Oh, so yeah. But that wouldn't have stopped them from existing. You know, like blowing up the thing directly versus throwing them off orbit. I don't know. If I was making decisions, I'd be like, maybe we should just obliterate them. It would be better because we're trying to erase the rebels. Not, you know, who knows how much they could escape if we just throw them off orbit. Those of the great Marsha Lucas, the editor on the original Star Wars. Wait, did you just say the great Marsha Lucas? What makes her great? I think that it was just because of her decisions as an editor. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. I'm making fun of him. But there's no such thing as that. Oh, you're right. You're right. I'm sorry. It's just, I'm forgetting that he's being a total fucking inconsistent hypocrite here. I mean, but you know what? He's consistently inconsistent. He is, he is arguing that inconsistencies are not a bad thing. And he is being inconsistent himself. And he's being consistent with that, at least. George looks like he's wearing a dog on his head. Hey, man. It was the style at the time. Two versions of the film stand before you. The whole thing has already been shot. There is no third solution. So you have to choose. Do you and Georgie release the cut that has tension for the one that's... Georgie. Hi, Georgie. That's not the case just right. That's not actually the case. You've just said it is. Laurie. There is not an objective answer to this question. What? What? No. He does have more tension. He just said what is more logical, what is more tension filled. So he's objectively making those statements, no? Yeah. Yeah. He's claiming that those are the case. One of them is more tension filled. One of them does make more sense. Yeah. He's... You're able to be objective about it. He's just begging the question here. He is just begging the question here. And he doesn't have like an alternate point of view to scrutinize the bullshit that he's spewing. Can I ask you guys a question? Go for it. Yeah. Where did Kant and Hume go? I don't know. I missed them. I like the idea that he was like... Kant had many opinions on Star Wars. First of all, the Y-Wings were not... And you're like, wait, what? Hold on a minute. Oh, and by the way, this to me is just residue from his experiences with not only me, but a lot of people who would have criticized his channel. He's sped so little on philosophy just to be like, the Star Wars isn't that bad, okay? He's so dead. Frank so desperately to justify his love for this piece of shit fucking movie. Listen, listen. Mihai Cheek sent Mihai said this thing a long time ago. And that means that Star Wars The Last Jedi is okay. All right. No. Spain will just seem like a semantic grievance to insist that the terminology of objectivity versus subjectivity is wrong here. But I think it's more important than that. Implicit... Kant and Hume disappeared like that damn knife in Wolf's Patience. This is, I remember that. I can't believe I joined just in time to hear him say the dumbest thing ever. Yeah, that's probably the dumbest thing he said throughout the whole video. So nice job. Your timing was just immaculate there. Christ. Objectivity is wrong here. But I think it's more important than that. Implicit in the terms is a hierarchy. The idea that objectivity is better than subjectivity. No. Since when? No. So if I tell you that I feel that Endgame is blah, blah, blah and it does this shit for me and then I go objectively speaking, it's a, it's poor spaghetti narrative where everybody is making poor decisions to make the narrative run smooth. That doesn't then make me go, well, my subjective take and go out the window, no one's ever gonna talk about that because objectivity is better than it. My fundamental reasoning for why I like the discussion on objectivity is because it's the part that we can all agree on. What we took away from it personally is the part that we take away with ourselves and we can share it with each other but we can't share the experience as in like, I don't know, I fucking adore civil war but I can't make Wolf adore civil war. I can only explain to him what I think, what gives me those feelings and then he can understand them and be like, yeah, I still don't experience what you're getting and I'm like, yep, that's just the way it goes. For example, I think the gray is amazing but I probably don't think it's like, I don't have the same experience watching it as Wolf does. Or how about the Mission Impossible fallout debate? We convinced Ren that it's not a bad movie. He doesn't like it, that's okay but he agreed it's not objectively a bad movie. Like, it does exist. There are people that are capable. They stated that just to get out of the rest of the debate. That is true. That is true. He did also unlist the video actually that he made. Oh, okay, well, that may mean I'll rescind that. I think that he genuinely got like a change of heart or mind about saying that it's objectively a bad film and he understood that he made a bad video on it, so. I mean, that's unironically our goal and I'm not gonna say it's an altruistic goal because some people will be like, well, you try to fucking make people change their minds and they're like, well, I mean, I don't know. Sit to a degree. Unironically, my goal is to delete my channel before the end of the year. Well, there's only a couple of buttons. But we'll, yeah, I mean, we can always kill him to prevent that from happening. Yeah. I've only been interested in drawing the line between the two. And if someone said to me, but Mola, you always talk about the objective elements not your subjective experience. So of course you value one of the other. I'd be like, oh, well, it depends on what the topic is. If we pick stuff that's like Piminet 2, for example, would be something that's really close to my cold, dead heart, Buffy and Angela, Aliens, films that I watched when I was super young and then I can talk about some experiences I had with them and why I adore them to the ends of the earth, but there's also, you know, there's reasons for that and then I can talk about them. But I've been subjective in my videos. It's usually when I can't make an argument for why something is poor beyond a preference I have, which is absolutely fine, cause that's what we do. And then there are times where I might admit that despite being Tizamy, I actually still kinda like it. But oftentimes when I'm redrafting, I'm like, do I need to say this? I don't know. So people, it depends on how interested my fans might be on my personal feelings on a thing, which is a thing that happens. You'll get people who are like, where would you see Shazam? For example, did you like it? And I'm like, Just as a side, thank you to Big Moller and Blessed Southpaw for fucking telling me that movie was shit. Cause I was like on the verge of wanting to go see it cause the trailers were like, hey, that looks not terrible. But then you told me it was terrible. And I was like, oh, okay. Yeah, like there's fucking bullies that carry nun chucks on school property when they establish like five minutes before that, that the school has metal detectors and they, and the bullies fucking beat up a disabled kid on school property in front of a bunch of people who all don't do anything. And then there's like this little eight year old girl or whatever that tries to do something about it. She doesn't get picked for Shazam's champion even though the criteria that Shazam needs is someone who's pure of heart. So obviously he goes for the much older kid who is more capable of fighting off those bullies who decides walking away until they say something that personally offends him because they make fun of the disabled kid for not having a mom, which the main character shares in common. Yeah, and then you've got the fucking TV with the news report in the mall. And oh my God, there's so many fucking problems in that movie. Yeah. I'm sorry to everyone in the chat that likes Shazam, but it's a bad film. Sorry. So I was very unimpressed with Shazam's support where I watched it with Battle of Fortier and Battle was ripping into that film so much it was so much fun. Oh, by the way, Metal watched John Wick 3 and he got so upset about how terrible it was. He demanded I come into a conversation with him so we could rant. That's quite funny. That movie was so... I am forgetting most of it, just like John Wick 2. It was just... I don't think I ever said it on the chat, but, or on the chat, on a stream. But I walked into John Wick 3 on vacation because I had nothing else to do with my time and it was raining. And I was like, okay, I'll watch the third one. When the movie opens up with John Wick running with the fucking other dog, I had forgotten John Wick 2 so intensely that I genuinely didn't even remember where the second dog came from. And I was so confused for like a good 10 minutes until I was like, whatever, I don't care anyway. The knife fight was cool. It was dumb, but it was cool. I had fun with John Wick 2 and 3. I enjoyed how stupid they got. I liked the knife fight and I liked the scene with the dogs. That was pretty great. But the story itself is not good. I like that the fucking German shepherds were more relevant to the plot than fucking John Wick was. I like summing up the plot to someone who has no idea what the plot is and being deliberately vague. So it's like, John must go to a library to collect a necklace to go to a Russian lady to get a boat that takes him to Saudi Arabia to get instructions on how to go to a desert to be found by a man once he's near death that can chop off his finger to be able to get out of the fact that he killed a guy on continental grounds. You'd be like, what? The world building is so stupid. I love it. Like you pointed out, Mahler, every single character is like, I can't help you three seconds later. Okay, I'm helping you now. Ironically, I think they usually go, I can't help you, but I won't help you anyway. And then he talks for five hours, he's like, okay, John, I'll help you. But guys, the assassin Vatican, though, the action in that film is super impressive from how it's choreographed and shot, but the story is terrible. I'm sorry. It's just... The secret odor of assassins. We should stop having fun talking about movies. We need to hear more from Just Right and make sure we watch this video fully. No, no, fuck Just Right. He's ready yet. He's gonna teach us. And then we have to agree on what something is objectively first before we can even get into subjectivity. The terms empower those who want to end discussion rather than go to... Ooh, remember the guy who said that earlier. He wants to... They actually think that we want to like stop it, like prevent people from having different perspectives and stuff. He's like, no. And as Rags pointed out, if anything, it encourages it because people want to challenge the statement. Can I point something out? Mahler, you might need to push the video forward like just a second or so. Because I'm noticing something about these bombers I never noticed before. That is... Okay. So at the bottom of the bombers, there's that little glass ball turret. Yeah. But it's on... It's really far back. I think that's where the bombs drop out from. So the gun is pointed right where the bombs drop out from. I want to encourage. So if the bombs drop out and he's shooting the cannon, he might shoot one of the bombs and blow up the ship itself. Yeah, but I assume they'd be aware of it. I think it might actually be in front of where the bombs are and not behind. Don't be so funny if they were shooting and then they drop the bombs. Just explode them. Oh, my God. Oh, shit, sorry. No, wait. Frank, Frank, no, don't shoot. Dude, dude. As long as the bomber takes out the entire plane. They hang off the bombers like a ball sack. They do it. Oh, my God. What idiot is that? Oh, Brian Johnson. By the way, I'd like to pause it as crazy as this sounds. Hot take. Subjectivity tends to end discussions. I'll give you an example. Hey, Wolf, fucking the gray is bad because all the characters are like the same. Don't ever say that. That's my opinion. Your opinion sucks. That's his opinion, Wolf. Shut up. Shut the fuck up, Wolf. I've reached that point in discussions many times where you're trying to hash something out and then it just falls back to someone's opinion. You're like, can't we still discuss the references and stuff like that? Wolf, what is your opinion on Metro Exodus? I'll say it now. Video is coming out. It'll be my last and it'll be a three hour one. There's a lot of work to do. But I love it. I really love it and we're gonna talk about it. It'll be a long video. I'll be the long man now. End discussion rather than those who want to encourage it. Okay, so up until this point, I've been arguing about why it's impossible to say whether a piece of art is objectively good and you've done a horrifically bad job. Also, can I just say, it's impossible. I guess the discussion's over. Sounds like an objective statement to me. Yeah, we're bad. And if you want more on this, I'm... No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. No, no. No, I don't want to. No, no. Oh, no. I'd like to... I'd like to... No, no, no. Oh, no. Oh, no. Oh, no. I recommend checking out. Chat, press F for Wolf's Sanity. Oh. Oh, no. It's the du-wa-la-chif-a-lee, it's... You're fucking moron. Can we just not even watch the rest of this video? We know what it's gonna be. He's like, he's actually on a radically increase of Jack Sainz. Like, what's even the point of even pretending like we give a shit? He's f**king wrong from the kick-ups. You're such a terrible person. Don't worry, it's okay, I'm a terrible person too. The video on this topic which just came out last week and touches on a lot of things I haven't talked about here. But I also want to speak more broadly about why the things that are typically brought up in these kinds of discussions aren't as important as they are often treated, mainly plot holes. And I want to make the case... So I have a question, are we going to watch his Game of Thrones season 8 review after this? The plan was actually to watch his video on The Last Jedi in the 7 basic questions of narrative drama but we'll save that for another time and we're nearly at 6 hours and it takes me... Because his Game of Thrones review of season 8, he's basically going with the objectivity type analysis. It's so confusing for him to make that video after making this. Wolf has become Ed from the Link. The comparisons I had with him in the future compared to his season 7 analysis of Game of Thrones, he just goes back on a whole bunch of sh**. It's a shame, honestly, but he evolves and there's nothing we can do about it. He evolves and then devolves and then evolves again. Revolves, that's what they call that. In my opinion, other kinds of criticisms are, from my perspective, just plain better. Now, a lot of great... The limitations of logic based... A lot of great... How dare we use logic! Dude, I like the idea that he's like, let me tell you about the limitations of logic. You got Patrick Willems there, it's the holy trinity. I was about to say that seals it. The adventures are assembled. Shut up about plot holes, it's ironically such a f**king bad video. It helps kickstart EFAP, that's episode 3, I believe. Two, actually. Yeah, because I think that's when we... People were like, do more of these. And this was like the perfect video for it. So basically, the people that made EFAP are... Jared Genesis, Toan Floak, and Patrick Willems. Three pillars of EFAP, warrior. Founding power. Does Jonathan McIntosh count? I think so. I've already talked about this, too. I recommend checking out Patrick E. Willems' video on it, as well as film Hulk's essay. The point I want to make... You could have made a better video, honestly. Than this, citing all of the EFAP enemies. This is the prenup, man. This is the start to the 50th episode. We're getting this... This video feels like... Episode 8 of a season. This feels like the straw man we would come up with. The really ridiculous idea we would come up with. Man, can you imagine what a just right video would be? He'd probably cite Jack Saint and Patrick Willems. And then he unironically does it. I was just saying, who knows what we'll cover in that 24 hour? This is like, full shadowing. I'm surprised that this wasn't picked for the 24 hour. Everybody's been wanting us to cover this for so long. It's so bleh. This video is just bleh. This video is horrible. Someone said he should have just titled this video, shut up, EFAP. Look at how they massacred my philosophy. This video is absolutely one of the worst that you guys have covered. Like, I will accept that the Jack Saint video that he... The hatchet job that he did on Mauler is the worst. When Satan 1 and Satan 2 decided to lie about everyone. Satan 2. Ren's video on Fallout is the worst representation of a film I've ever seen on YouTube. Ren, you're a nice guy. I respect you a lot. But that was a terrible video and I will never, ever take that back. This is up there, though. This is up there with the worst that's been covered on EFAP. I can't remember... We've covered a lot of bad videos. I mean, Major Lee's video. Yeah. Extra credits. Major Lee. Subjectivity is implied. Patrick Willems, I mean... The right opinion. We've covered a cavalcade of horrible... It's only the best for us. I just want to say that this picture of the old woman glaring at the screen. It's like what I looked like during my initial rant before I lost my collective fucking mind in this stream. Oh, I forgot. I forgot legal, legal. Oh, God. This is what I mean. I feel like we say that it's the worst video. We say that too much on here. And I'm sorry. It's just hard to know because in the moment, they're all the worst video. The point I want to make about plot holes is this. They are usually not the real reason people didn't enjoy a movie. They're our own... What? The fucking horse shit. Signed line sources. Signed line sources. You didn't really dislike it because of the issues in the story. You actually disliked it because of something else. That's the real true, actual, legitimate, very... The mark of a true critic is to tell other people why they feel things. That's how it goes. The solution to the problem, to the conflict in your story is something that should not be possible. Again, the astronaut murderer. Who's on the moon when the victim on earth is killed. There's no explanation for how this happens. And it is the crux of the story. So, yes, that ruins the story. That's an exaggerated example, of course. But there are other ones. I can't really think of them off the top of my head. There's a ton of them in The Last Jedi and Dark Knight Rises and Fallen Kingdom that are ruinous to those films. I can't comprehend all of this. This is too much stupid for my head to process. Yeah, I should probably... I didn't weird that well. What I meant to say was when a critic tells you how you're lying to yourself, I guess. Or the implication that he's saying that we've been lying to people about why we actually don't like a thing. So, is it not subjective then? If we can just pin it down like that, there is a truth to why I didn't like something rather than simply the experience I had. Who do them? Meaning subjective. No, because apparently it is true. This is why you didn't like it. I don't care what you think in your head. Your head is wrong. It's so presumptive in there. So fucking cute. I like that their side of the aisle is always like, you guys are trying to say that you can't like things. Your opinion is objective. You're telling people they can't like movies. And then this motherfucker's coming here and telling us why we don't like movies. The true reason we don't like it. I'm curious. Not to mention that they're also the ones that tell us that we're watching movies wrong. Oh, yes. Hey, he cited that video as being great criticism. It was a real reason for great response to criticism. Luckily, luckily, I can say that we only have four minutes left because I can guarantee that last two minutes is going to be like a Squarespace ad. Oh, let's hope so. People didn't enjoy it. I know so. I know so because he always puts a giant chunk of his videos toward an ad at the end. I mean, we've we've earned an ad. I think the ad is like the reprieve from the video. There are always deeper and more personal issues with a film that prevented people from connecting with it, which aren't as easy to identify or articulate as plot holes are. The plot holes are very easy to explain. And since you didn't like the movie and the plot hole is a problem in the. So just right. Just, you know, not being condescending here, but the reason the plot hole will bother someone so much is because it'll fuck entirely with the stakes and the stakes with the whole reason that you were invested in the progression of the events in the first place, i.e. Danny cannot possibly take King's Landing because there's about a thousand scorpions when three of them killed her dragon in the last episode. And then the show just says no, she can. Yep. So now we're like, OK, so anything can just happen then fuck it. Why am I even watching? So Bruce Wayne traveling from where the fuck is Stan to Gotham with no montage showing us how exactly he does it. That's not necessarily a plot hole because it doesn't contradict any prior information, but it would definitely be a giant blank that needs to be filled in by the filmmakers and not the audience. Yeah, I call it a stream convenience. It's because basically he's spawning resources off screen that the writers don't feel the need to actually come up with themselves. And I really appreciate that Spider-Man Far From Home actually did the exact opposite of this. Mueller, we talked about this a while ago. So Far From Home spoilers morning. Peter ends up in the Netherlands because he gets hit by, wait, Wolf, you've seen Far From Home, right? I mean, you can explain this without any spoilers. He ends up in a similar position as Batman and he binds access to a phone and then he calls someone he knows to help him. They show that on screen. They just take a couple of minutes of screen time to show it and it makes sense. And they then are able to show how he gets to where he needs to be instead of being in a different country from where the action is happening. So Far From Home does exactly the opposite thing. Even Hobbes and Shaw actually, they have characters travel from one country to another and then they briefly have a little bit where they're talking to the guy that hooked them up with a plane that got them to where, and they're talking about this. So at the very least there's a throwaway line about how they got there. This is basic elementary bullshit about how to tell a story. They're not real reasons to enjoy or not enjoy. The true reasons are much more meaningful and intrinsic. No, they're not real reasons. I am in this theater and I'm wondering how the hell did Bruce Wayne, with, I'm assuming did they take away his leg brace? Apparently not because that's, I don't know why they didn't take his leg brace. And then fucking, no wealth, no resources that we know of or that are established and then he just makes it back to Gotham in time to save the day after he spends his entire day painting a bridge and gas. Yeah, it sounds cool. He fell into the trap. That's not a real criticism. Real ones involve much more meaningful things. That's not meaningful. So you just explained how you fell into the trap and the dislike of a film to a plot hole rather than the real actual times two reasons. Do you explain? Yeah. Since you didn't like the movie and the plot hole is a problem in the movie, it's very easy to fall into the trap of saying you didn't like the movie because of the plot hole. And I believe this because there are a bunch of It's very easy to fall into the trap of thinking. Hold on a minute. He just said, he just said the plot hole is a problem in the movie. Is that objective? He didn't agree with us on that. I don't think. Like the movie and the plot hole is a problem in the movie. It's very easy to fall into the trap of saying Yeah, because he's tacitly agreeing here that plot holes are an actual problem. But they're not meaningful problems. They're not actual real super... Such a... So slippery. If the solutions here conflict relies on a plot hole, the stakes are gone. The immersion is broken. He's very slippery, this man. You didn't like the movie because of the plot hole. And I believe this because there are a bunch of movies with a ton of plot holes that pretty much everyone really likes. Remember what I said about the Dark Knight a million years ago when this video started? I wouldn't be done with my fucking intro at this point. This video's been going so long. It really does feel like that. As more plot holes than any movie can name, the Joker's plan makes no logical sense in virtually every scene he's involved in. It requires him to have information he couldn't possibly have, move things to places they couldn't possibly get to, or need literally months of planning despite the fact that he claims that he doesn't plan anything. He also changes his like origin story like three times. I was about to say that doesn't mean he doesn't plan anything. That's dumb. The crazy man told us he doesn't plan, so he must not plan. His whole thing is that he's insane. He's just trying to fuck with people. Also, just right. Pro tip. The references not just vague statements like is bad, is bad, is bad. I need a reference. Just because he doesn't have a plan when he says do I look like a guy with a plan doesn't mean that he's telling the truth there, especially in a scene where he is manipulating Harvey Dent. Don't they say at one point that he all of his clothes are custom made with no traceable elements? Idea being that he plans to wear things that can't possibly give away any of his history. Yeah. That sounds like a plan. But he doesn't make plans. The crazy man said he doesn't make plans. Yeah, he told us he doesn't plan. It's not like... Even though literally every single thing he did in the kind of requires a very complex plan like the first scene, you know, which needed an extremely complex plan to kill everyone and still get away. But it's not like there's... It's not like there's anything in the movie establishing that the Joker is very competent and would probably have several backup plans in case one of his first plans didn't work out. This is like the whole thing with like in Fallout how that whole thing makes sense is like you're talking about spies that are very competent at their jobs. They can improvise pretty well when things go south. I would say that the Joker is probably the same way. I'd be willing to accept persons if you just like give me one, you know. Just give me a specific one just right. Don't just be vague. If the fact that he claims that he doesn't plan anything money doesn't burn this fast. What? Okay. Dowson gasoline, you fuck! I'm pretty sure they poured oil on it, yeah. They did. It's been a couple of years but I'm almost positive they poured gasoline on it beforehand. Yes. What's actually happening? I remember it. So they're pouring gasoline on the money. The Chechen guy is confused and he's asking about why burn the money. So it's before Joker even throws the fucking match on the money when they know, oh, you're going to burn the money because you're pouring gasoline on the money. Why would you pour gasoline on the money? I was going to say I got control of a good ol' EFAP arrow. I'm just going to play the clip in the background so that people can see it. Pouring gasoline, man is upset, and they continue to pour it. I'm sorry, just right. The first time you make a reference and you fuck it up. That's not exciting. It's not the first time. I mean, how to look at everything he's done so far. Look at that! He literally can't be correct on anything. No, no, no, no. It's only there for a couple of seconds and it might be CGI, you know? It was too small for the amount of fire that was made. Even if we give him this criticism, like, did you guys know that apparently all flaws with a film are equal in size? It's purely... Just right. There's no grease of scale to it. Just right. Go fuck yourself. Go fuck yourself. I can't wait to evolve as a critic myself and become a fucking idiot like him. Fucking taking movie scenes out of context. Taking movie scenes out of context to concoct a plot hole from thin air. Fuck you! You're a fucking garbage video creator. You're terrible. Let's just hear it again, though. To have information he couldn't possibly have move things to places they couldn't possibly get to or need literally months of planning the fact that he claims that he doesn't plan anything. Money doesn't burn this fast. What happens at the party after Batman jumps out the window? That's not a plot hole. What happens at the party after Batman leaves is not a plot hole. God damn it, just right. The plot didn't hinge upon that party, you idiot. Like, yeah, is it like he wants to know if the Joker killed any people or if the Joker just left? Yeah, I don't know. Recording this uses purely a tally chart thing. There's no scale or scope for that. I like it, and this is the thing. I like it if they make fun of people like Cinema Sins. At least Cinema Sins is like partially accurate. Hold on. Does anyone remember what the purpose was of Joker showing up at that Gala? Kidnapped Harvey Dent. And Harvey Dent wasn't there. Well, as far as the Joker news wasn't there. Yeah, well, exactly. Harvey Dent was there, but he was hidden. He just sees that Harvey Dent isn't there, so he leaves instead of masquerading everyone there, which I think is fine. Like, I don't get why you're expecting him to just massacre all those people. Well, if you remember, just right, this movie is filled with more plot holes than any film you can name. You're right, because Money Doesn't Burn That Fast. He's gonna need to try harder. Get out! Get out of that! Money Doesn't Burn That Fast! That's true. This is a good video. I like this video. This video hurts. Yeah. You guys, go ahead and stay in yourselves. I'm gonna write this whole thing down. Entertain myself. Okay. How are we? They never showed how Bane's mask was made. Are you kidding me? Fucking plot hole. It's a plot hole in Dark Knight Rises. Sorry, I'm done. I'd like to imagine that just right when the Dark Knight Rises even happened and when he went to make this, he was like, okay, okay. How do you... While just right kind of forgot that the Dark Knight Rises happened, the EFAP guys definitely did not. It's because of how much we probably fucking loved the Dark Knight and that's why we remember the Dark Knight Rises being terrible. Goddamn. I can't wait to make an eight hour long video series talking about why that movie is one of the worst written movies I've ever seen. That was the first Batman movie I ever saw, too. You see, I was the only person in my group of four friends who thought it was terrible. Everyone was like, no, man, it was great. And I hold this over Alex's head forever, Smiler Al. He said it was the best of the Nolan trilogy when we came out of the cinema and I was like, um... Um... It was like, yelk. Well, funnily enough, these days you'd be like, no, it was fucking terrible. It's like, oh, look at that. It's like the subjective take can change and the objective take does not assuming it's accurate. Yeah. Okay, so why is the comp stand in the cell? I mean, sure. That could be... I'll give him that one, actually. That could be an issue of incompetence. It's still not on the same scale. I'm just gonna say it's a brightly lit room and they have access to all of the double-sided mirrors. I don't see why they need someone in there. Yeah, and I agree with that. But I would like to say, again, he's saying that he's using The Dark Knight instead of The Dark Knight Rises and I would say that the decision to send all of the police into the sewers at the same time in The Dark Knight Rises was significantly dumber than this. This is a terrible example to use. It's like... I think he's using The Dark Knight instead of The Dark Knight Rises specifically because he knows that The Dark Knight Rises is going to be... It's gonna have fewer defenders in The Dark Knight. He's using this because he wants to show that even great films have plot holes on certain plot holes. Which doesn't... It isn't the reason you don't like a film because great films have some. But even if that were true, that wouldn't necessarily dis... be during our position. Yeah. Subjectively, it could be amazing while still having objective issues. Anyway, some people in chat are saying in fairness, the Joker says a bunch of shit that pisses off this guy. He does that after this scenario begins. Like, I think it actually may have made the scene a bit stronger if the Joker was talking at the mirrors, like, goading the people behind them and then one of them came in to beat the shit out of him and they fucked up. The Joker and this cop have an exchange where the cop basically reveals that the Joker has killed a couple of his friends. So is it possible that the cop got in there in the first place because he wanted an opportunity to come at the Joker? Well, if you're gonna make it that... There's no reference for that. He's just standing there casually and then the Joker says you wanna know which of your friends were cowards? I think that's the line. And then he looks at him and he says, I'm gonna enjoy this and takes off his coat. If you... That's, like, after the fact. If you had that before, I'd probably let it slide. I'd be like, yeah, but as it stands, it's like, wow, it's fucking convenient for the Joker to have a guy in there. And you see what we're doing here? This is the process of objectivity where we're trying to come up with different reasons for why this would still be a problem or why it wouldn't be a problem and seeing which one holds up against scrutiny better. I think that your argument there, Mahler, is certainly better than my defense. There you go. And that's the thing, you know, you didn't respond well, in my opinion, it's fine. Because it's just like, oh, okay. That ends the conversation. And then the conversation stops. And you're like, ah. Oh, well, yeah. It happens at the party after Batman jumps out the window. How come none of the bus drivers are alarmed that one of them drove into a bank and had... So how come the bus drivers went alarmed that one of them may have happened there? We don't know if the Joker, like, fucking just drove off with the bus. We don't know if the buses were so like, what the fuck just happened? There's not enough... There's no necessary contradiction. There's just a loose end. What happened next for the Joker there? And I think that it does require a bit more than... What you could have done is have him drive out into some kind of alleyway. All the smoke goes off him and he gets onto the road and then he joins up with a bunch of buses necessarily in the middle of the line. Yeah. So, yeah. I think that's fair to a degree, but I'm not sure how much of an impact it has. Out of the Joker still get away with this. Why does a cop stand inside the cell with the Joker when they already have him safely locked up? Since this creates the risk of a hostage situation, which is exactly what happens. Can you really get a fingerprint off a shattered bullet? How did Batman... I mean that would be a tech thing. Recreate the pieces of the bullet and extract each of them. There's a lot of future tech. Is it really possible to have the AV of every single person ever projected by their phones from this guy's basement technologies? Yeah, I guess so. Is it really possible to have realistic looking rubber masks and voice changers that allow you to basically mimic any person in the world? No. Not in the real world, but that's how it's established an impossible series. It's tough to make technology criticisms in what is essentially almost sci-fi stuff. It's like soft sci-fi. It's like the nanotech for Stark. It is just in Infinity War. In the holographic stuff. It's like, you know, what it is, it's not, it's there. Or like the holographic computers in Iron Man 1 and all of the MCU. We don't really have those to my knowledge in the real world. That was 2008 that he first had that. Is it really possible to be as dense as Just Right? No. He's not from our planet. Build the super computer while everything else is happening. Why is Batman so worried about not killing the Joker when he very clearly kills several people in this very movie? I don't know though, the shot he just showed doesn't necessarily mean he killed people, does it? It looks like they would have taken some damage. So there's this concept of there are some lives you could say that maybe there's some lives that Batman took there out of necessity due to the emergency of the situation and there's not really a way for him to dispatch the threat and preserve the lives of the people that are causing that threat. Whereas what happens at the end there with the Joker there is, he has a grapinal gun that he's able to hit the Joker's life. He has an opportunity whereas he's trying to save Harvey Dent's life and all the cops that are in the van with Harvey Dent and Jim Gordon like he doesn't have that luxury in that scene but he does after he I just want to look at that scene again because I don't think we do know that he kills Harvey Dent at the end of the film but it's to protect a family from being killed. He technically kills him anyway he drags him off the edge and falls with him so if it's anyone's fault of a hostage situation which is exactly what happens we really get a fingerprint off a shattered bullet how did Batman build the super computer while everything else was happening? Why is Batman so worried about not killing the Joker when he very clearly kills also he tackles Harvey Dent off of a ledge to save Jim Gordon's son and that kills Harvey Dent because yeah, yeah there are instances where you're not going to be able to save the lives of the innocent people and the life of the threat but then there are cases where you could and if your principle is to preserve life whenever you can like within reason basically then yes it's consistent for him to do this there will be some situations where look he's not God he can't control every situation equally. Well it's part of what some have an issue with this Batman is that he's not 100% not going to kill more complicated than that I think and yeah, Harvey Dent does get killed it's not something that I don't think he desperately wanted to kill him it seemed to be a result he didn't do it in cold blood it was a necessity. Result of circumstances, yeah while with Joker he has a choice to let him die at no necessary cost other than fucking pulling a wire I think he would have saved Harvey if he could have and these guys if he can dismantle them or you know knock them unconscious without killing them I'm pretty sure he would have chosen to do so but this seemed to be the the necessary like I don't see this as any kind of contradiction yeah several people in this very movie you could literally talk for hours about the logic in this movie not adding up and yet people still love the film because it has incredible pacing probably because there's a difference between objective and subjective how about that how about that and the film is strong on other merits I love that he says that go ahead I was just going to say that I love how he says we can talk for hours about how the logic of this movie doesn't make sense and then he has yet to really bring more than one entire criticism that's valid I would say that pretty much like all of the crucial plot points in the storytelling beats have a very consistent through line like the cause and effect that results in the events of the dark night taking place you like for the most part make sense even if yeah there's some problems here and there but again it's like it's trying to take a film that has like a relatively low percentage of issues compared to something like the last Jedi like there is just a giant disparity in the number of issues that the dark night has versus the last Jedi you can even accept that the dark night is a very flawed film but it's still going to have a much higher score than the average film I'm going to highlight that it's a long confusing day but it's the low-key and car lock whatever there's a quote from the first film I'm not going to kill you but I don't have to save you he says that to Razzal Ghoul and then Razzal Ghoul gets killed so it's technically in line with his he's not someone who directly kills with his prior established character and you might be like I said inaccurate to him in the comics let's not get into that the comics the character of Batman of the Nolan trilogy does seem to be on board with the idea that people will die be it by his hand indirectly or as a result of desperately trying to save people that's just realistic occasionally if you go out at night and beat people to a pulp with your fists you might give one of them blunt force trauma and kill them and there's many other situations it's not very realistic you know if you have absolutely no mortality rate when you're going out and fighting crime I think that it's just kind of unless you're unless you're actually someone with powers like Superman or Spider-Man then it's pretty difficult to actually achieve a 0% mortality rate Batman is just Batman he's just a human being I have a question at what point do we factor in the innate superhuman durability of film characters because you know that's a thing it just seems to be a natural thing in films where people survive things that they they wouldn't if everything was played straight and I would happily accept references for that I'm pretty sure they show Batman takes a lot of damage isn't it Alfred is like looking at him with loads of bruises and he's like it's like how John McLean would have died like 30 times over the course of Die Hard from all the damage that he takes and John Wick also I think that John Wick takes way too much damage in all three of his movies there's no way that any the end of the third one is so funny what do you think of the building we have for two and a half and a fucking ass is all fortunate oh my god that was so good it hits like four things on the way down to straight up Harry Osborn from Spiderman 3 at least it breaks the impact a little bit of the final fall but still have you guys heard of the bodyguard with Sam Jackson nope the bodyguard now it's a film with him and I think it's the body is it something oh Hitman's bodyguard that's what it's called oh yes yeah with Ryan Reynolds so there's a scene in that film the whole film is like a parody of the action movies and it's a comedy as well and I actually had a lot of fun with it there's a moment where Sam Jackson fucking jumps off like a building and he slams into the side and like does a backflip slams his head on the back or something I think it's like the trailer I burst out laughing and it's like one for one what's in John Wick oh my god like I want someone to do a comparison it's just like oh my god it's like the same fucking thing John Wick plays it straight straight yes awkward but anyway great acting compelling characters intense action interesting provocative and relevant themes and gives the viewer the on all those things like partially outside of interesting all of what he just said is provable to a degree we can we can work with this regardless yeah this is a thing does he remember what he was trying to say with this video like a half of this shit could have been in a video we made but you know we would actually get our references right but not really give them back some left for the vicarious sense of being Batman along with a hundred other reasons which all successfully distract you from its logical failings successfully distract you implying that they are there regardless of whether you see them and isn't that our whole thing what if they didn't what if they didn't successfully distract me I find this fascinating fucking argues against himself but also again it's like so isn't he kind of trying to argue here that any film that has like a certain number of plot holes is bad like having any plot holes means that your movie is now bad as opposed to like having a few that are like spread out pretty far across from each other in the film as opposed to being littered in every single scene or every other scene like is there is there not like a difference here are they all the same apparently I mean he's he's he's trying to say that the dark night has more plot holes than any other film but he's not like he's listening like what 10 different examples and all of them are different things by the way not all of them are plot holes and not all of them are valid as in like he's actually got the references wrong exactly like if you have to yeah if you have to make if you have to ignore context like them pouring gasoline on money in order for your plot hole criticism to make sense maybe there aren't that many plot holes in the dark night because given that context you could have just picked a different one that was actually valid huh how you like them apples just right hey you didn't notice you didn't notice your criticism so it's not real yeah you didn't notice the fucking gas being poured on the goddamn money in the very shot there are some terrible films where the logic holds up and some excellent films where it doesn't now this is not to say that the logic of story never matters of course it does when does it matter just right tell me when it does matter literally every choice in the artistic development of a story matters and it's totally fine to have an appreciation for films that get the logic right but what I'm saying is that to make a is he saying that Winter Soldier got the logic right I guess maybe we had to cut back to that and then back to Dark Knight better case against the film it's important to demonstrate why the presence of a plot hole impacts other aspects of the storytelling if you notice a plot hole in one movie and not in the Dark Knight because the Dark Knight has better pacing not necessarily no it could be for any reasons better pacing means better movie that was a I wouldn't say that the last Jedi has that just came out of nowhere yeah aside from Kanto boy I wouldn't even say that the last Jedi has particularly bad pacing just a bad movie pacing is complicated to actually like break down what does he mean by that the only time you notice plot holes is when it's badly paced how can you possibly make that remember the plot hole isn't the real actual literal very real reason hey Mauler I have a question for you do you feel like Shazam was pretty well paced overall in spite of it's other writing issues because I felt like it was pretty well paced so the part where the bad guy first gets to the kids and Shazam is first having to deal with that I feel like from that point but like you skip forward like 40 minutes and you're essentially in the same position still in the story like they really pad that shit I remember I was just looking at the run time because I found the film pretty terrible but I would make an argument against that particular portion of the film but I think I'm going to agree with your overall point anyway that pacing good pacing does not equal good film regardless of plot holes yeah yeah because I don't know there's a I'm trying to think of other films that have pretty decent pacing where the plot holes are still noticeable because I think The Dark Knight Rises is a film with many plot holes and the pacing is pretty bad so it's not as strong to counter-argue here but still movies have solid pacing but there's a lot of issues with them I think that like also the size of the plot holes in The Dark Knight Rises are significantly bigger than those in The Dark Knight again one cop being like waiting in that little cell with the Joker or interrogation room sorry is not as noticeably stupid as literally sending every cop into the sewer it's stupid I will grant you that but there are several orders of magnitude more stupid that the cops into the sewers is like that's just it's on a different level there's stuff that's just going to be more noticeable because it's dumber if you understand how pyro classic flows work the thing with Star Lord surviving them and falling kingdom is going to make no goddamn sense well if you can survive them so easily why do we care about them at all like you know oh they seem to or about that part where he shoots through the bullet proof ball yeah underwater where the bullet shouldn't even be in fairness all I have to say about that is one when you see a bullet fired at the thing in the first film it makes a crack I believe and in the second films that that ball has already been like broken cracked and smacked by a bunch of things the idea being that it's structural integrity would be down I still don't think it should work but ultimately it doesn't necessarily work he has to get the knife to do it robot head also mentions list Batman's tech as a plot hole making Batman a plot hole in a Batman film well this is the thing I don't think you can criticize the Batman tech we get told how it works and what it does and as long as it remains consistent with what we understand about it it's fine the idea you're like Batman shouldn't have I think one of his criticism was like how did he make it so fast that was something he said yeah how did he make the super computer while everything else was happening we don't know how difficult it was it might have been something that he just had to check a few boxes or I think he even says like he did a thing he took whatever Lucius made and he made a few adjustments and now he's unlocked the ability to blah blah blah Lucius is like whoa not something you should be using it for are we given reason to believe that such a thing is improbable or highly unlikely or even impossible I don't think so well this matter why am I so committed to the idea that this kind of criticism should occupy a smaller fraction of I don't want to hear opinions that disagree with mine what is the correct oh god so three reasons why we should stop talking about plot holes as much as we do yeah not completely stop remember despite this remember despite an objective analysis being impossible we shouldn't stop we should only occupy a smaller fraction so and wait didn't he didn't he also cite Patrick Willems video shut up about plot holes shut up implying stop talking about them completely he just right is already inferred how we truly feel so let me infer how he truly feels he hates that we talk about it when it comes to things he likes go ahead on things he doesn't like like game of thrones but do not do it when it comes to the things he enjoys okay Jesus okay I lost the debate against Wolf and Mahler and I despite for they prove them wrong because I'm too stupid to say it to their faces and make myself look like even more of an idiot than usual I mean he fucking counted himself in this video so we didn't even need to congratulations just right you actually made yourself look worse in this video that you did in the debate against us three reasons my channel is dedicated to writing and is meant to be useful to writers I think it's especially important how can it be useful to writers if there's no way of getting better as a writer you turnip writers to embrace other forms of criticism analyzing the content of media the ideas it's communicating and not just the form is the best way to improve the content is the four it would create the form since when do you not do that how is the how is talking about plot holes not talking about the content just right can you hear me out in the field of the straw who are you talking to move your own writing if you treat stories purely as logic puzzles to be solved I think you are only setting logic puzzles to be solved what are you talking about any of this yourself up to produce superficial pieces of art so if you follow our ideas you'll end up with superficial pieces of art wait I'm sorry so Mahler what time stamp are you at right now 1836 oh 1836 okay I'm not 1840 so I I'm a first yeah same here can we like synchronize a little bit treat stories purely and now back at 1830 yes all right we'll stand you for a second good night robot head he said he just like to pop in and hate on stuff with us night robot head night robot head sweet dreams if I was to this could be a straw man as far as just right is concerned but I don't really care because I want to talk about this regardless of if he's what he's actually saying so when we're babbling on about plot holes and all this shit he's like what does the Dark Knight truly tell us about society and morality or the ethical stance you take on how crime should be dealt with all of this stuff and we're like the bus is blue and it should be green and he's like oh my god these guys are getting stuck on all the minutiae and they're not actually paying attention to what the film means and my position has always been fucking make a poem or a sentence if you want to talk about an idea like should we kill or should I don't know should we protect children from the idea of death till a certain age how important is innocence so if you want to say it when you make a story to represent those ideas it's very important that the story does that so when you go oh failure is the best teacher lol let's have Po not fail and then learn a stupid lesson that gets near enough all of his team killed at the end because that supports the idea that failure is the best teacher if anything it's the reverse that success is the worst failure to teach you how to be more of a failure that's sad with the hell and then they're sitting there like wow boy your folks at all might do sure you don't take it to the lesser but failure is the best I'm aware that you can learn from failures and if you can have a story that gives you that sort of presentation that idea I fucking hope to God that you're consistent with those ideas otherwise you're going to confuse the shit out of your fucking audience what you should be doing is talking about possible interpretations and wider literary context for some because it's despite being a different conversation I like the idea that we can learn shit from stories and we can draw large amounts of meaning as part of what makes my favorite media my favorite but good God I can't stand it if they bungle their own message and you need to be logically consistent fucking nine times out of ten to be able to do that obviously comes down to context you can tell me a message does not stand if it's poorly communicated or poorly expressed through the work despite work telling us that there is that message by definition yes how about the fact that Shazam tries to try to depict Billy as being selfish and mean with his powers and in order to deliver that message they're having it come from a handicapped boy who's been exploiting these powers himself yes living like curiously through Billy to give context to what Southpaw just said you have this character who doesn't like getting bullied and he's aware that his friend is a superhero so he's like hey superhero's gonna come here tomorrow and show all you guys it's like dude shouldn't be doing that that's not only like irresponsible blah blah blah and then he doesn't turn up and so the kid gets angry at him for not turning up and then he criticizes him for spending his time entertaining people with his powers and it's like you have no leg to stand on I know that's contextually cool you have no leg to stand on when you're talking about that when your whole thing was I wanna impress people with you you would do the exact same thing you have no fucking right to complain it makes no sense can I also just mention that there's an establishing shot in the movie where there's a student watching a youtube video that these two have been uploading because they upload youtube videos of Billy testing his powers and not only can you hear Freddie's voice behind the camera in all of these videos and a couple of them he actually like shows up like his entire body shows up on camera and there is one that is being watched by another student on their phone so he could literally just pull out his phone and pull up that video specifically or even just his youtube channel go hey look I'm in control of the youtube channel that is uploading these videos of the superhero and here I am I know the superhero so he doesn't even have to have the superhero come to the school anyways so the whole could be resolved instantly if he just pulls out his phone and opens the youtube app on it and then he goes on to bitch at Billy for being irresponsible with his powers when he does not have any moral high ground whatsoever fuck Freddie alright is logic puzzles to be solved I think you are only setting yourself up to produce superficial pieces of art oh yeah and so I think your art would be more than likely I can't say it definitively but you're more than likely going to project much more of meaning if you can actually line up with the fucking point you're trying to make with your story so in the case of The Last Jedi I would actually have Poe be headstrong and maybe make a mistake that he can learn from and thus create a better scenario in the end of the film instead of doing it all inverted and backwards because for some reason Ryan Johnson doesn't have any idea what he's doing and if all you have is a theme that's it it's like it's a nice theme it's like doesn't even make sense the film's like okay so you're fucked up I see you have to read deeply to write deeply second because the quality of art and the quality of criticism are interrelated it's hard to say if greater want of skill appear in writing or in judging ill but of the two less dangerous is the offense to tire our patience than mislead hey I'm sorry can we quickly address this tism in the chat today a day saying LOL a child doesn't use adult thinking movie bad how would you respond to this exactly because I think that it's rather simple I thought we were on the topic of the lesson of the film and we were saying that characters were being conflicting with it also I'm not I'm with YMS on this I'm not a huge fan of being like oh it was a child character that did it then therefore it has to not make sense yeah apparently even though this is like a 14 year old kid who's established to be somewhat intelligent with some modicum of common sense and this is a common sense thing where if you know that you have a means to prove something to these bullies that you want to impress and you don't do it it's pretty level headed outside of that moment that's what I'm saying is he has a modicum of common sense throughout most of the movie I don't understand how how this this I don't see how this is adult thinking you fucking moron Ray Day sorry terrible argument wow I'll just rip it into chat also Theo you can respond to this argument from just right go nice poem it is hard to say if greater want of skill appear in writing or in judging ill but of the two less dangerous is thigh of sorry what the the fence the fence to tire our patients don't know what it is some few in that but numbers there in this ten censure wrong for one who writes a miss a fool who might want himself alone expose now one inverse makes many more in prose thanks buddy alright that's not an argument those lines are the opening words of Alexander Pope's essay on criticism published in 1711 I don't care about Alexander Pope how dare you look at his head that bad criticism does more harm than bad writing since come up with your own ideas stop taking them from other people bad critical more than you bad criticism does more harm than bad writing we agree with it no I don't think that we can even quantify it and who is this guy again Pope the Pope Alexander the Pope Alexander Pope Pope the Pope bad criticism will influence more writers in the wrong direction so the implication being just right that you think that we're influencing writers in the wrong direction while we would accuse you of that I guess we're an impasse except we have references and you don't because you don't know how to reference a bad story for Pope criticism creates the grounds from which great art springs and so if we want better art we need better criticism I agree we gotta start with you buddy I wanna know what good criticism is to you also yeah I'm sorry if we can't have good films how do we have good criticism I'm curious how that works what are the things that are too focused on logical inconsistencies will lead to art that is too focused on logical inconsistencies what a terrible thing how dare art try to not be logically inept I love the idea that you have like there's a supermarket getting held up and you have a character that may be a hero and it's like wait I have to consider this logically would you have gone to the supermarket maybe he wouldn't I can't have this scene you're like Frank it's okay just have it no logic dictates he would not go to the supermarket my vision is ruined just a bit of advice just a bit of advice to you know everyone in the world if anyone under any context says that logic or implies that logic is bad in literally any context you're in trouble maybe you should stop listening to them or taking them seriously hey Mahler I have a question for you and this goes to you to Wolf and Theo would you rather watch John Wick 3 which has an absolutely stupid plot with really cool action scenes that are shot well and everything or would you rather watch Mission Impossible Fallouts which has a great plot and all of those great action scenes not even competition I will take the John Wick 3 please how dare you that's supported my expectations John Wick I'm waiting for the action scenes with Fallout I was just like shit man what's gonna happen next you're good all the way through you're not having to sit through a terrible story to get to the good action well I'm saying it's the hope of a king assassin hope of a king assassin go check this anybody Metal brought this up to me he's like an aspiring critic right now I couldn't believe it if you slow it down when they say you're gonna get cut 7 times the sushi salesman man cuts Laurence Fishburne 6 times there's 6 slice sounds and you can clearly see 6 movements why doesn't he cut him 7 times oh my god I'm getting alpha and omega 8 it was so funny because I was when he said it I was like oh it was probably 7 he was like no I checked it 4 times it's not and I was like ok I'll check it and I was like oh my god it's 6 no you're on par with the alpha and omega but that's not a good thing I need a HD version because I had a DVD version so there's potential for me to be wrong but I'm almost certain there's only 6 slice sounds so is that at least there's someone saying are there people who watch John Wick for the plot so here's the thing a lot of scenes in John Wick 3 that aren't going to have action in them as a standard for action movies you can't have action be literally 100% of the film so if those scenes are not well written then it's definitely a less enjoyable experience than if you're watching an action movie that has a ton of great action and also a great story to compliment it that was the purpose of that question in John Wick 1 so yeah I'd say that John Wick 1 is absolutely the best film in the series I can't believe you guys aren't on board with the assassin Vatican yeah you know what it's honestly perfectly provisable as a standalone film well for me I wish they never made more than one but I understand that people really like the action silences in the subway I adore how stupid the world building is it never fails to make me smile when the hobo faction the assassin Vatican the hobo faction get wiped out by the sushi faction the sushi assassin story, character and theme how are we not going to mention there's like people getting stabbed in the middle of the subway and no one fucking acknowledges that we gotta stay on track there are assassins too we gotta finish this video please alright consistencies will lead to art that is too focused on logical inconsistencies at the expense of story, character and theme do you notice how when he was writing that he was probably like they'll focus too hard on it and then he was like oh wait I need to actually highlight why that's bad well it'll come at the expense of character and it's like stop that's not true you just said it's not true just assume it is because for some reason you lack imagination it doesn't have to be that way Terminator Terminator 2 Mission Impossible Fallout Predator there's a ton of movies that can be just excellent on every level logically and also being emotionally satisfying and having even deep themes you don't have to sacrifice one for another you can strive for excellence that's a thing that you can do you don't have to settle for mediocrity there is a far superior version to like every bad film that has been made all that it took was just effort and care and talent and when sorry nevermind go ahead I don't want future artists to decide actually I won't write this story since it doesn't make perfect logical sense nobody fucking said that nobody on this fucking planet said I'm not going to write my story because it doesn't make perfect logical sense no you don't stop writing it you sit down and you think about it for more than three seconds and then you fix it give up idiot but I want to have to imagine having this mindset imagine having this mindset where it's like man there's a problem do I fix it or do I just leave the problem knowingly which of the three I'll just leave it in because I'm lazy and terrible there is a version of the events that happened there is a version of Game of Thrones season 8 where the events that unfolded were actually earned you know it's out there somewhere in the ether it had to be it couldn't have been any different guy asked me if I have Asperger I relate to so much you say and I too have Asperger I don't think I have Asperger now no that's me we all have a bit of Aspergery inside of us once you live in the universe the Wachowski sisters don't make the matrix because their idea didn't adhere to the law of thermodynamics so now he's straw manned the shit out of us that we don't want them to make stuff unless it's logically consistent perfectly and also abiding by the laws of thermodynamics I don't think that we'd necessarily give a shit about that in science fiction per se I think that when it comes to way of surviving the vacuum of space that's a bit out there and Indiana Jones surviving a nuclear bomb by climbing into a fridge that's also a little out there that when you have jarring moments of total unrealism I don't know if that's a word but I've made it a word now in your film yeah that's one to stand out more than having scholars knowledge of laws of thermodynamics fuck you just right and we want people to do the best that they can but there's no fucking way you're not gonna make at least one mistake everyone makes mistakes it's fine Jesus like holy shit the idea is that you get better that you Ryan Johnson yourself and go well I've not heard any fair criticism not really you need to fucking grow do all of the things yeah judge a thing for what it is don't be idiot the idea that we don't want any stories unless they 100% logically consistent it's like Jesus Christ I'll take any story just want to see what you did with it you know what I said I was willing to look at a Tommy Wiseau Star Wars film I'll do it I mean Big Shark is like unironically I enjoy the shit out of end games it's still logically inconsistent but Mahler we wouldn't have gotten Indiana Jones in the crystal skull of the writers you know what it's not gonna be realistic of Indiana Jones survives a nuclear blast by climbing into a fridge and Shilabuff swings on a bunch of vines with monkeys that's not realistic so let's not make it although actually never mind I'd rather that they had not made it but it's a pity they did dynamics our culture would be a measurably poorer for it yeah if this nightmare scenario that nobody's advocating for came true we'd be worse off alright good job for both writers and non writers I think this conversation matters because media analysis can for lack of a better phrase nourish the soul listen to this emotional music you've got playing in the background nourish the soul g'dalba can nourish the soul and that's why you're wrong about why you didn't like the film nourish the soul man if that was true then I wouldn't be depressed ever because my soul would be nourished that's why objective analysis is wrong because of soul helps you make sense of the world often when we see a piece of art we are confused by it confounded by it it's only through the act of creating and absorbing criticism that we can bring sense to that experience sometimes art makes sense if you don't necessarily have to watch a critique of art think about the people that made those critiques of art in the first place obviously they understood it without having to someone else analyze it that's bullshit there's some art that doesn't require any analysis like that in order to make sense of what? who's the grandma guy the grandma guy don't answer him don't answer him I just wanted to think for however long it takes to figure out himself I just love the term grandma guy I'm sorry I just have to make this reference my grandma what massive teeth you have oh fuck I get it big gay and bring the insights of that process into our everyday life the kind of criticism I think you should seek out or produce is one that seeks to understand what is being communicated criticism and I think you should seek out for ones that communicate the idea consistently instead of confusing the shit out of the audience because communicating ideas is one element communicating ideas is a contingent on the communication anyway by his logic anyway the communication of whatever is being said could be entirely subjective as he pointed out with how styles is apparently religion versus science if you take one specific thing and ignore how everything else contradicts it I'm sure he considers that valid because that was his point that puts those messages into context one that demonstrates how art affects us both personally and socially and that shares a unique perspective that can make something beautiful even more so criticism can do so much more than say whether something is good or bad and oh good I'm ready because if that's what we are only capable of anyway we could only ever say something is good or bad and then that's it the conversation is over yeah because of my 3 hour upcoming Metro Exodus video when I criticize the hell out of a ton of aspects of it and give very good reasons as to why it's bad and tell them how they can fix it I'm just saying that the game is bad that's great and Jamie Lannister says he doesn't care about innocent people all I'm going to say is that's bad and then move on I'm not going to talk about him whatsoever not going to reference past elements of his character not going to mention how it strips away everything about him conversation starts and ends at that I want to do more to show you what criticism can be that's why this episode is the first name new miniseries on this channel which by the way he has not continued yet this is the one and only part waiting on this one please make one when I want to tear it to shreds no no no don't ever make another video again it was like a pilot please tell me what Aristotle had to say about the art it was a tv pilot for this aborted sitcom if they played one episode of it like alright we're done I'll give me just rights reading of the birth of tragedy I need that you know that there's actually a tv show that it was a sitcom called hyal honey I'm home that was centered around Adolf Hitler and how Jews like move in next door to him his wife and it got cancelled after one episode anyway channel that I'll be calling the history of arguments hilarious as if he's going through the arguments even a little bit on the one hand I really want this but on the other hand how dare you sir well this is the thing I would actually argue just right you're gonna do some damage to discussion if you make this series how fucking dare you positive that you're gonna write a history of argument series after what you did to Canton Hume you fucking monster I'm actually under the impression this might be the most pretentious youtuber on the entire website it's pretty bad it's up there yep it's up there I cannot believe I respected this guy I'm so embarrassed to say that I was ever subscribed to you you should be embarrassed you should be embarrassed there is a 2,000 year long play in Oscar Wilde a small collection of interrelated questions that I want to explore foundational questions like what is art what should it I don't think you're the man for the job I'm sorry I don't think you're the one that's how we talk about art today I'm really excited to get into all that and if you want to help ensure that those videos get made then click on over to my patreon meaning that the reverse would be if you want to prevent these videos from being made please unsubscribe chat chat please go to his patreon and fund him so that we can have more e-faps like this why would you awful devler agree no no I have a better idea southpaw do you have a do you have a patreon I do not but I should set one up make one and everyone go to that one go to mallers and Theo you can probably set one up too I keep seeing people every now and then in chat saying hey where's Theo's channel and then I get a little bit sad yeah Theo I'm working on it kinda I actually just support everyone that is not just right subscribe to literally every youtuber he's just right I don't think he could just be youtubers I can like support Bryce O'Connor an author who's self published who's actually good and cares about consistency go to his patreon he only has like 36 patrons so go fund him making good books and don't ever give just to write your money trian and chip in as little as $1 a video this video was brought to you by so if you've seen my other videos then you know that this one looks very different than my previous work is that his real name Sage Hayden I like the idea that in the mission to go and support everyone who's not just right someone goes and supports Patrick Willems because the hardest choices require the strongest of work now we had to be done the hardest choices require the the animations I think that's it for the video though we're good now what a nightmare so many people want to just respond to that for so long I hope it was everything you wanted I now have one hour and seven minutes to go through every super chat good luck so I'm gonna have to seriously machine gun through these in order to get to them before splitting this in some kind of weirds like I don't want to do it so that I begin the next eFap responding to them because that's just we can't have a roll over here so yeah I'm gonna have to do this I'm sorry if we can't give detailed responses to a lot of them but short answers only guys so the it's always good to see how people come and debate with you guys in a chill manner and explain the point of view by the way do you guys know I'm made by make stuff the last Jedi restoring balance to the Star Wars fandom it was pretty horrible that I believe is in the backlog for a potential look at I probably would like to have Jeff and Jeremy back on for those types of ones because it's just so funny seeing the two sides of the quote-unquote fandom and it takes to let them see the toxic brood me man that was just glorious and that was with them so I don't see boycott what was your opinion on once upon a time in Hollywood if the panel has seen it I have not seen it I've seen it I liked it I liked it a lot it's good a bit behind but that dude's name sounds like something doodle Bob from SpongeBob also hi-rax I think you uh is that me hide you okay um hulu holds the title for longest video live stream at six days seven hours 11 minutes and 32 seconds could if that be capable of beating that for episode 100 no we're not gonna I can't do that we couldn't even do that if we wanted to because YouTube caps us at eight hours or whatever so you know like a continuous live stream would actually be halted hey Theo's back howdy everybody hey hello from EVO 2019 that is but fighting game event that sounds like the gay nice nothing like eFap on a Sunday with some freshly brewed iced tea wonderful if a man pushed Thor from behind so in return he smashed him in his creamy meat stick into Mjolnir do you think people would defend him like Captain Marvel no it would be a sexism even if he did it to a guy take me to quite bad well the man of steel has a scene where Superman like wrecks a dude's truck and I don't think that that was approved of by a lot of people because they agree that that wasn't a Superman thing to do hey I remember he lets his dad die that's something everyone has a problem with right dude he was doubly dadded and left woefully dadless uh rags you massive why do you all right I'm just gonna copy that so we can check it out next year Molo is your unbridled rage for the bells we're starving to death it is currently at one hour of edited visuals um the audio's got a little bit left to do I've got someone else doing a certain section of it not editing well technically editing wise but it's a certain special little segment you'll know what I'm talking about and you see it um I'm hoping to get it done this month that is that is it it's coming it's gonna be like two and a half hours at least so you got two chunky videos coming from me and Wolfe soon enough uh TFA part 3 critique as a guest for 24 hour efeb I don't know how that would work but uh it's it's always coming it's always coming I would say I said the captain ball video was coming for a billion years before that finally came so you know I'm good for it guys it's coming that's your most watched video now hi rags I demand you sing akbar's theme on 24 hour stream in honor of drunk rags and we'll we'll have him answer that I'm gonna have to relay that hey rags this is for you spend it irresponsibly also what's your I'm gonna have to copy that God my rag is not being here he's gonna make it so that we can go through these really quickly it's great um movie binge update why do people like kingdom of heaven Orlando Bloom is a massive Gary stew and he also doesn't have any emotion at all the only good thing I can say about it is every shot is stunning you reckon anyone I'll have to watch it again I remember really liking it and it's not but I mean it's been a few years so maybe my criteria has changed but I remember the actual like director's cut which is really the only cut you should watch the theatrical is really messed up I remember that being really good so um I said one out of two but I don't see a second oh and yes I watched the director's cut okay that's the second part I'm all a big boy and Theo your pfp is looking hot as always remind you y'all should watch Mona Gattari ignore him okay oh hi rags three-way split right I will sort that out I'm a e-fab 13 I'll catch up with you guys e-fab 13 that's gonna happen look out for me at 16 here you go Theo who was on e-fab don't spend it all oh damn I have to keep making notes about everyone who needs different pieces of money can't you guys just donate to them directly don't give me money I don't give you anything in return well you were here you provided help with the philosophy aspects you uh I mean I guess and if salad king wants to give you money then you know it's I was just gonna say you guys get right that sending money through this takes 35% is it off it already so if you can get direct donations to any of the people you want money to go to I would totally recommend it instead of pushing it through my stream or anything I'll still sort out I've got notes of all of them I just try to wait until they're up to a chunkier number before sending it instead of sending those mini payments and then having to pay the payment charge through paypal it's this whole thing um have you ever played monster hunter world yes I love it but I haven't played it enough because I've been busy with everything else that happens I've been back on that game recently it's awesome it's great fun friend of mine is making a video essay what should I tell him do it good don't listen to just right just just get going uh fundamental advice redraft that's always my fundamental advice just really rethink through everything you want to say and what you want to do anyone else got fundamental gems of advice um try to make sure you're saying something you think is worth saying I suppose whenever you're saying something that sounds very basic I know I mean mine was pretty basic that's what I go through with like essay writing at uni and with my attempts at video script writing just try and make sure that you're saying something worthwhile with every second give this money to my favorite massive n-word doggo named ragers shall be done random comment that won't be understood in five hours I mean I understood it maulsly I'm working on another e-fap comic stay tuned for the next few days very well sir I hadn't seen captain marvel or aquaman I just watched them out of some weird sense of obligation back to back and now I hate movies and brain left no have love you chaps yeah those two are those two are great to do back to back speaking of that comic that he was talking about in the memes did you so show that picture I uh sent you of Daenerys like leaning over the burning child oh no you're free for charity so I'm just collecting memes right now we've got a shit ton to go through they're all going to be for the 50th 7 hours memes I was going to say we got fucking we got plenty of times it'll be fine I was just rewatching your outlast critique and I must say burning yourself on a Jesus stick is a great way to die yeah so um of many of the critics I covered for outlast one of them was like this kid he referred to a crucifix as a Jesus stick it's like the best thing ever Jesus stick saw a lion king with family today it was meh be prepared was an atrocity though talk singing cut the song by three minutes best best part of the original yep oh yeah I saw the video footage of it and it was horrible I listened to the uh the upload like the uploaded version of it on YouTube and it's literally just a slam poem version of be prepared and I immediately was like no I'm not fucking seeing this film just not even to see how bad it is like that uh long live the king scene was so embarrassing long live the king smack I think it was meh moller and for me to be watched together and we just lost our minds it was amazing so terrible so how's your day going guys my day's going pretty good it was a good day did EFAP we're gonna go sleep wake up do editing go sleep wake up do editing be great I return on EFAP so pretty great I wrote something of a script I hope to someday make and I was on EFAP it was a good day one who was blessed and one who was on EFAP thrice now this time we actually you committed to your purpose you see in the previous one you did not commit to your purpose therefore you were a bad Theo but what if the middle of the sandwich is made of another sandwich oh no everything about sandwiches is just too I know people named Sarah ohara and clear a day funny names come from everywhere I agree that was from me is anyone interested in seeing the lighthouse and thoughts on the trailer I'm surprised to see Edward in a good movie Defoe looks on fire so what I've heard is the Edwards what's his name guy from Robert Pattinson yeah apparently he's a good actor I've just not seen he's in a lot of indie stuff and apparently we're supposed to be watching that if we want to judge him because judging him from Twilight is unfair and I was like yeah fair enough I wouldn't know the lighthouse is like a four by three black and white movie that's made by the guy who made the witch which is critically acclaimed I watched the trailer it looks interesting I might check it out that is and yeah Defoe looks kind of crazy in it which is always great I don't know if you any of you guys have heard of it or I don't know if I'm thinking of the right movie let me look up the trailer I've seen the poster not the trailer I tend to keep up with video games a lot more than films I just typed in the trailer that did come up with what I wanted the trailer the trailer it came up with like every single trailer oh no I have no no no I was thinking of something else okay yeah I haven't seen it Robert Pattinson is also going to be in the next Nolan movie he's the next Batman isn't he yes hello gentlemen for instance that in my time zone EFAP started in the middle of the day oh like I said I can't make any definitive comments about the middle the middle is a controversial subject where is wolf is he love make is he making love to pizza well we can get the answer where is no I hate it oh god he he fucks it and eats it you like a praying mantis or whatever oh my god you think Rose got everyone that she captured before Finn killed seeing as she left on a pointless adventure and then hold o kamikaze oh yeah probably all those people because there's a shot where you can see her taking Finn towards this like holding area so I guess everybody on the holding area was just killed because everyone would have without them imagine being in there and suddenly you enter hyperspace and get obliterated like what the fuck all because of the fanation bitch it's closed ism you think rose always sorry hey you guys have got to get hello future me on your lineup of guests if not you need to increase effaps australian harem we have a few australian come on I actually really do like his channel well then getting contact really good youtuber rag him on if you want well I can't get into contact with them useless useless you guys have helped me to think more critically about media thank you also high rag is no no we've made you think more about logic which is ruining writing congratulations on your more superficial takes yeah you'll have superficial characters doing superficial things like being logical so get fucked haha our evil plan to dominate the world with logic is working yeah have a great have a great stream guys hello rags did the ancestry thing did the ancestry thing and it turns out how have a very Welsh bloodline good to know that my ancestors were long men also high rags yeah it's a lot of long men over in well where Welsh land what they call it nowadays um after chat last episode explaining what happened to me when I made a spelling mistake night terrors etc in a chat I made two more I no longer wash live on the streets and rim hobos for pennies also high rigs that means you serve under the hobo assassin king that's got to be a good life I mean he's cut up right now but he's probably healed up by the time you get John Wick but I found out there was a John Wick 4 before John Wick 3 by the way I was like what why isn't it ending um oh yeah it makes money I am running out of time I gotta speed this up more if you could live in America which state in what city would you like to live in I'd literally just pick the one that will full rags are in whatever it is just so I can hang out with I am that sentimental I wouldn't want to live somewhere in like Alaska so fine I go there more you said please too hot James more fun this you said your TFA critique was supposed to be safe for kids yet you spoil that Santa Claus and the tooth fairy aren't real sometimes you just call the pole that bandaid early sorry you can mute that part for your kids I guess I raggy rags I may be massive but at least I don't wear glasses also what happened to cornstarch girl did she give birth to the cosmic chick I actually remember here oh that was a weird thing wasn't it that was weird but yeah I don't know how she fits into the law that's gonna to be decided I suppose more my brothers and I want to rip off EFAP how do we format OBS and also shout out our channel please format OBS I'm not sure what you mean by that but get streamlines OBS this is how do we format it when I think format I think I think factory default hard to reset yeah yeah that's what I was thinking streamlabs OBS and then Google the rest I'm not even kidding just Google the rest everyone always asks me the same question discord comes up as black on my screen and you can see this in the reupload of J stream I do it live you just Google the problem and you have your answers it's how I figured out pretty much anything that I can do on the internet but yeah that's three brother three brothers movie reviews that's the channel they want to do a similar sort of EFAP thing check them out dear EFAP would it be worth it if you got a one-time payment of five million dollars but you would forever involuntarily involuntarily involuntarily and every sentence with this is my favorite part regardless of structure or context sincerely mr. massive I wouldn't agree to that because it would be insufferable I would agree to it only because I would like have a legitimate excuse for not having to talk to people and yeah you could just take the money and then I'm sorry I can't speak to you but I do find the music that you just constantly hear like learn sign language pretend to be a mute my favorite sanctum peter cuttium deus in ray unum hippitus hopitus reus domain also high rags it's your fault I'm addicted to e fapping I to speak retard the reason why hack creators push subjectivity is because it makes it so nothing they can ever be nothing they can ever make can ever be considered bad it's a cheap shield for cowards it's certainly can function that way more you said that Thanos was overpowered in endgame but infinity war he beat the Hulk in a fist fight yeah it's a bit I'd say it's harder to beat Iron Man Hulk Iron Man Captain America and thought at the same time that it is to beat Hulk especially since you have a power stone when you're fighting Hulk yeah I don't know I would imagine that that makes it a little easier to fight the whole didn't fall kind of knocked out Hulk in Ragnarok yeah it'd be weird while he didn't win overall because of the the the name electric you and him but yeah it'll be weird for Ray and Kyla to be in relationship if she time travels and turns out to be Anakin's mom I've seen a lot of talk about her being Anakin's mom what is this Ray's gonna be Anakin's mom why what is happening I want I want it to be the case just because it won't make any I want that to be the case just so that attack of the clones can be made slightly better when Anakin's mom dies I just so we can start calling my anticipation of the absolutism in episode 9 is gonna be through the roof on the night I go see it I'm gonna be so excited how did they fuck this up Smirre Smirre Smirre who is Theo and why does he look like such a massive weeb Mola check out the trailer for Carnival Row Cara Delevingne plays a pansexual a pansexual theory how do you play a pansexual theory with great difficulty I'd imagine in this upcoming tv show also a lot of bloopers in the show alright sounds interesting I guess hello eFab have a kit cat it goes well with rhino milk thank you doctor Martin Luther Pepe good guy Hitler being bad is subjective well it depends on whether or not you think people getting killed arbitrarily is a bad thing as well don't even start on morality well if you missed that I would random guess the day had a whole back and forth about the holocaust oh dear in which the guy accidentally applied to the holocaust that happened wait what he accidentally said essentially the holocaust is a fictional event hold on was this today yes I gotta rewatch this now have any of you read content from SCP foundation yes I've played the game briefly but I have not read any like stuff from I guess the website or wherever it's from yeah the website is the original thing if I'm remembering right um there's a question for rags I'll save stuck at home on ivy antibiotics for the next week and a half so far I've had a marathon of 29 eFabs and counting drink antibiotic milk perfect for when you're feeling under the weather hi rags well yeah I was gonna say if you actually have all free time and you spend solely on eFap you probably can get through it quite quickly actually three episodes per day stupid as that sounds as far as that's gonna take more than a day no not typically I think the average length right now is probably 6 hours so 6 12 18 24 it's like 4 per day I think we had one the slowest the slowest the quickest one was with appabend I think when we covered why the last Jedi is so great which has one of the best highlights of eFap in it if you remember Wolf um that one was you mean when we were losing our minds yeah that one I think is three and a half hours it was shocking how short that was now looking back but I still remember thinking that three hours should be the average and these days it's like how could I possibly cosmic chicken the one true god death to the infidels completely off topic what are you guys opinions on the writing of attack on Titan for those who have read it I like it I think it's way more airtight than people get it for I can't say I've read it but I started watching it and it didn't appeal to me so I quickly fell off of that I know nothing about it yeah the writing is really good especially later on it's pretty slow at the beginning but it's got really good writing yeah watch EVO or eFap why do you make me choose like this more I think the answer is obvious I mean I picked this over Sicario and Sicario is really fucking good so I'm looking forward to watching it now that I know Rags hasn't seen it I always love it when people haven't seen films I love but I also chastise them for it like how do you not see this god let's watch it right now what mics do you guys use I'm planning on buying a mic and a headset separately that doesn't have gaming on the box something professional I use an AT2020 that's why alright then blue snowball Southpaw uses a blue snowball I do filthy casual yes that was unironically the first microphone I ever had I had time I've never bothered upgrading but I will eventually of course I went from crappy headset to snowball to yeti to AT2020 and then it's AT2020 it's just I think AT2020 is pretty much top of the consumer line that you're gonna get the next step up is the one that everyone uses who's like got really fucking really popular channels like the h3 podcast or Joe Rogan I think uses I don't know what they're called but you guys know I'm talking about those microphones that a lot of people use them I think they're sure microphones or something like that they're the next step up from AT2020 as far as I can tell at least in that sort of tier I'll invest in that you had a backlash for being in Sargon's video I've not had one but I know that there are people out there who when they want to guess my politics say that he's spoken to Sargon that tells you everything when I'm like several times wanted to speak to people like H Bomb Guy or because apparently if you talk to someone that means that you share the same politics this is the thing I fucking unironically said I would do voice work for Quinton Reviews if you wanted to on Twitter I'm not joking like if he said he wants me to have a British character to say something like you know oh dear we need to get out of here now I'd be like yeah I'll do that for you why the fuck not like it would be fun but then it's like oh so you endorse Quinton's politics so but uh yeah maybe a better example than that would be someone I don't fucking I'm not blocked by on Twitter I don't know but yeah no I haven't really gotten backlash for it beyond the standard people usually say it's like he's got a vague association with Sargon he's the worst thing ever so it works that's why I don't associate is DS2 75% off a good or bad buy please help unless it's free no even when it's free they owe you money so they owe you something for your wasted time Moeller undo the rag oopsie I'm not sure what that's referring to it might be the the objectivity is the opposite of subjectivity thing he didn't mishear that everyone thought he did but I think people misunderstood what he was trying to say the opposite of X is not Y it's anti-X I think is what Rags wanted to say but I'm not sure where I stand on that idea the opposite of objectivity is subjectivity is a weird statement to me but it's not necessarily untrue I'm just not sure how I would look at it but yeah that was playable theo DLC when okay just write your quintet is showing remember to never answer a phone during sex even if you hilariously answer with I can't talk now I'm going into a tunnel the room is like a cucumber if needed to sit in a jar and marinate for a while to become good it became a pickle also hi roga I guess the room was out for a while before people absolutely adored it right it needed to be out for like a few years I guess when how long did it take to become like a cultural icon of so bad it's good I figured wolf would know maybe how long did it take for the room to become like a cultural icon of so bad it's good from release was it like a year two years ago well I don't know the exact number but I know that it was pretty popular amongst people for quite a long time before I got popular everywhere around the internet there's like pictures and the disaster artists of people from years and years ago watching the movie and theaters I think there's been a theater in LA that's been playing the movie every year since it came out it makes sense it's a great film it is a great film teaches us a lot about what values are important I'm framing objectivity is the end word of criticism undeniable truth objectively I came here for Theo and objectively I'm staying for Theo well thanks I feel like this guy's problem is that the Tim objective is not as meaningful sounding as other words I mean you can replace it with other ones I suppose but yeah a lot of people I think a lot of people have a problem with how they feel the fact that he said you can only define words one way was a red flag I suppose as Ragh said that's a big no water is no objective clearly is thought bath water objectively good for you yes stop using words that have more than two syllables please it hurts my brain objective has three McQueen is an objective good is Alan objectively or subjectively in the middle gonna have to be both my first super chat ultimate fatty congratulations thank you how's your Game of Thrones video coming along Mola I've answered that a few times it's coming along wonderfully I'm working on it every day I'm looking forward to releasing it it's gonna be fun I'm nice and vague but there was a Twitter update with a bit more detail if you want to check it out GTA 5 online currently has an exploit in the track race betting capitalized on it before it's patched there you go guys what do you guys' music tastes also high rags Wolf what's your music taste I gravitate toward rock metal and classical okay but that's actually kind of similar to mine then again I'm really not picky with music I like it for many walks of Tism but my favorite would be metal and Theo Southpaw what do you guys reckon I tend to stick with dark synth but I'm not too picky that's just my usual deal wrong with light synth you know it's not dark enough I mean I just go with like alternative rock generally or even alternative pop like have you guys ever heard of the band churches spelled with a V instead of a U they're a Scottish synth pop band and they're very very good it's not music I normally listen to but they're one of my favorite bands check out churches guys there you go what's everyone's favorite type of meat mine is buffalo I mean I would say chicken but it's poultry so I don't know if it counts I think it's still meat it validated me I would say there's like some good elk burgers I had in Colorado so I'll go with that burgers it is got two more votes to come come on guys fuck if I know I don't know that meat what's your favorite meat oh tri-tip a what tri-tip roast that sounds like a sci-fi animal but I'll agree with you it's a calif it's a calif writing teachers grade students work based on an objective standard they don't judge the works content but how well it adheres to the standard yeah but they would say that that standard is arbitrary based on the teacher or whatever but um it's a it's definitely a way to be objective though another part that some people don't agree with from southpaw mission impossible fall out an unbridled praise when actually a potential it's just that I've got a lot of films I'd like to do that with and I'm just super fucking busy with everything else things will happen things will happen that's my promise definitely definitely a movie worthy of an unbridled praise though yeah I topped characters in children's media that are more role models than characters such as many of the disney protagonists that's in reference to us talking about how um characters don't always have to necessarily represent a person as opposed to an idea in stories they're often characters are often stand-ins for a perspective or an idea or whatever because they're not fully fledged that's true question when you do a 24 hour stream are you going to reach super chats during or at the end because otherwise we might be looking at a 48 hour stream um the plan I think will be to when we reach seven hours of the first second and third stream I'll start reading super chats every time I'll get through them consistently I think if you survive an event you shouldn't have then that's IRL plot armor we'll see in in real life it will be luck in writing plot armor because the writer made it happen as opposed to it happening naturally um but yes damn it you guys my husband did the this is my favorite part to me rags I mostly blame you for this one way to ruin the mood I knew that was covered up in the previous e-fap I was so excited to show people it well for context we were covering um video was talking about walk in dead like I mostly wanted to skip the video and just talk about the ad at the end and it's this guy trying to sell a mobile game and he sounds like death like this is what you do you put this here and this is my camp and it's meticulously designed now I'm going to have to defend my characters from zombies this is my favorite part it's like oh no you put so much energy into that it was great you can just you can use it on anything this is my favorite part I really like that I like the fact that we have husbands and wives watching our stupid show oh yeah the power of them all of video this is my favorite part if you imagine if you guys ever get to a tonal look video where he says this is my favorite part and just about the same I'm still waiting I'm still waiting for him to acknowledge and like say tonal like even if he's just he acknowledged it on twitter no no no I mean like I want him to verbally say tonal in a video I want to hear it from his mouth I don't know if we can tolerate that kind of you know that's going to be that can ifap contain that level of holiness I wonder if he does like twitch streams where someone can we can like rate him and just spam tonal well just guess someone to do a super chat where it says my name is tonal then have him read it we can do it hey rags I think you're purchasing a handgun what recommendations are you going to copy that god rags there's so many questions he's gonna have to deal with your mom has plot armor because she didn't die giving birth to a massive oh oh shit no plot armor yes so the super chat about plot armor and sicario 2 which I addressed get back to playing your devil monster cry 5 world instead of hanging out with these schmucks theoth will hold some hugs to moler and rags though your character I guess I'll just go back to playing video games soon enough you will be allowed to oh god I've got 34 minutes your character in 49 vegas should 100% be dead there was shot twice in the head and buried in a shallow grave and god knows how long it took victor to drag you out with his lobster claws I don't even I haven't played it so I'm guessing it's ridiculous that you survive whatever you survive in that game shrug I didn't play it I have a question about the guy who got shot through the cheeks in sicario 2 one that could annihilate the film even further did it send them high his cheek may have sent him high how do you guys feel about narrative shortcuts detective shows often have tech to speed up the plot not related to unknowable info but slowly acquired oh do you mean just like often times in those kinds of shows the pacing of the unlocking the secret to the next part of the plot is just a piece of tech and it'll operate as fast as it's required to because that's mostly okay if is reasoning for it to okay that way I would just go as far as saying that as long as it's not arbitrary in one direction or the other gotta be careful I think it's yeah I think it's like an unfortunate um uh of the medium that it's telling that story and I think it's just you know like it like a sort of necessary evil it's like usually within reason if you know Batman for example in the dark night they were like we need to find this guy who's an ex con and he's gonna be with like some kind of parole officer it's like that shouldn't take them five seconds to do they have like access to save levels of shit that if you're doing some kind of uh private investigator who has limited resources in like the fifties I'd be like oh that's gonna be tough for him to do that so you have like limitations but you can still just tweak how long it'll take for them to do X, Y and Z uh wolf get high and rag on sagot again Trudy says Victor pulled you out of your grave right after Benny in the cons left your character in Fallout New Vegas could survive that uh again that's an argument between superchatters I would actually do because I haven't played it um beef up on Sunday's makes it'll need to be high to riff on Sargon by the way I could do a stone cold sober beef up on Sundays makes sense remember the Sabbath by keeping it objective yes uh how much money do I have to give you guys before you finally do the right thing and condemn my friend for constantly DMing me scat hentai every every stream every stream that's disgusting I don't want to think about that uh rags can you leave a link to your book in the description rags has a book yes wolf yours is called iridescent right yes that available not okay um a bad character in my opinion I'm not gonna yes tonal and just right could team up for quite an interesting video I would imagine I don't know if we should allow it though so because it would be it would like infect him I don't really want that to happen to me can you foreshadow subversion yes I guess the red wedding I'm not sure actually how you do that like the foreshadow egg over the bed that you don't expect to like I mean the red wedding was foreshadowed and that's definitely not something anyone was really expecting conventionally that is would you call it foreshadowed or you call it set up there was a pretty good video I saw on it that I don't really remember all the arguments too because I saw it a couple months ago but uh there definitely was foreshadowing example in that video I'll have to find it and show it to you sometime I love you guys have some taco money wait why are you guys talking about character arcs don't you know rhino milk is out hey rags muller I sent you a message on streamlabs a few weeks ago and you weren't streaming do you still read streamlabs yes but um I'm afraid that one's probably lost by now I should have the same name I might be able to search it uh rip wizard friend friend Karen wizard friend Karen oh that's a dnd jerk okay from a dnd I wasn't in you sacrificed it to come on every frame of a massive what was it I said about the the hardest of choices earlier strongest of will just wanted to say hi hope you're all having a good day now I'm off to watch your ds2 playlist for the thousandth time oh well keep you that it's good yeah uh blade runner 2049 an unbridled rage praise or meh for muller it would be a rage if anything because unfortunately for blade runner 2049 I'm not invested enough in blade runner the original to be pissed off but my friend is and he wants to make that video one day he hates that movie and he's explained all the reasons to for it to me and I was like holy shit later on 2049 is terrible um but it needs to go out to the world because a lot of people think that movie is amazing um even blade runner fans so it's it would be interesting to see what the conversation might lead to but I'm not passionate enough about either film to make that video would you guys do an efab on rob aga's uh later under 2049 plot fails youtube video I have not watched it but if he highlights similar things to what my friend wants to then um perhaps it's a well reasoned who knows but again I would have to rewatch the films and then maybe if it was like particularly would you rather try your hardest at something and be seen as mediocre or not try very hard and be called the worst of all time at that something probably the former I mean would I know that I was going to be seen as mediocre before putting it out because I would just try even harder until I would feel this is great this is genuinely great yeah I just rather try my best um regardless of what everybody ends up saying I did I guess give this to DX I don't I don't think like I don't think that's gonna work unless we bring it on as a guest sometime just to DX okay uh hope it would hold out a bit longer but my computer is officially dead big F for the meme machine meme machine 2.0 coming in September when the AMD 939 50 X comes out video essays also coming that's from meme repository so looks like we will have a deficit of memes from him for now but we've got plenty to use for uh the 50 so I hope that all works out my good man um can you use all of your force milk time powers I sick that's something we can do here do we have force milk time powers not out of force works I mean it might be it might be by episode nine even though there's still one spider count dooku 26 minutes all right a vote for Trump is a vote for more Quinton I really hate Trump memes that's all folks I think that's reason enough to vote for Trump all right we're done there was a question in my paper to a paper to a level a level economics exam how does a fall in how does a fall in real incomes affect subjective happiness so dumb what the fuck how does a fall in real income affect subjective happiness it's it's a pretty easy line to draw fallen kingdom no it was it was apparently at a level question okay uh oh yeah now that you guys have switches I would highly suggest getting monster hunter generations ultimate is a much deeper game than monster hunter world hortla did nothing hortla didn't do nothing as well the mental gymnastics oof odor did nothing wrong is being consistently bad objectively worse than being inconsistent yeah consistently bad worse the big inconsistent oh so like context context oh yeah I was gonna say I need to examples of what you mean but if the question is is always being inconsistent worse than being sometimes inconsistent I would vote for the the worst being the always inconsistent imagine this stuff unless ultimately if you're making a fucking comedy I'd probably gun for the always inconsistent so you can end up something like uh actually no a comedy probably wouldn't work as well if everything didn't make sense you need some things to make sense you have like a grounding yeah uh finally a live efap I'll watch live later as I'm leaving moeller I have something for you please DM this I don't uh discord thing I'm not sure what that is like too many numbers for um primary on twitter person uh the solution is poison who's wolf watch this fucking show what question is that he's a bad youtube don't worry about him wolf are you to do a review on shad's book once you're done reading um probably not although I am gonna talk with shad about it message him the other day getting references and everything um here's some money for wolf very well grab his worst girl cat for the win grab his worst girl cat uh yeah reference to the anime my profile pictures from yeah yeah what if jay watches lord of the rings and thinks they're objectively bad he'll be killed yeah literally if you watch lord of the rings and you go that was objectively bad it you just detonate like it was part of the living experience you can't say it I thought your neighbor just felt a sudden compulsion to enter your house and do whatever it takes to it's within your own body we all come with a stick of dynamite in our stomachs oh shit the cosmic chicken basically you know hypnotizes the nearest person into having a sudden urge to fucking bash your skull open with their bare hands um eh philosopher man bad get louis levi and please rewind on the show they're both both on a very long list we're getting people's uh gimli's actor jonary stavis is going to be at hawaii khan want to try and want me to try and get his autograph for you wolf for me yes so I mean I would say get his autograph no matter what I guess they're all for for you as well yeah I'm not giving not giving out addresses for that uh was it just right who started crying or was that someone else no that was great debate man they're not so great debate man they're really sad oh wait you answered that question already uh damn sorry I'm late was busy wiping my willums after dropping a massive quintan in the jack saint but anyways guys here's an extra large donation this week to celebrate by raise at work gotta go but have fun shitting on just rights trash well thank you Zach um our movies art like art and design aren't the same uh this is the problem we haven't actually discussed that on e-fab I don't think but like what counts as art some people take it to the extreme and they're like a leaf of the weed is art they're like okay but good luck essentially defining art yeah good luck can't stay for the whole thing but I can't wait for you guys to get to his reason as to why why wigs weeded tlj it's terrible well yeah boy we got a reaction out of that to a degree oh we did um yeah I think that he likes that art a bit he thought it was great let's just go through the super chats james more said wolf no don't go you're upsetting james wolf well you know it's okay people will be upset for 10 minutes and they'll forget well you often talk about a standard being achieved with objectivity what's a great example film of the being of a high standard lord of the rings is the easy one to go for because it it excels in a massive amount of aspects of filmmaking um it's downright it doesn't make sense that the lord of the rings is as good as it is to be honest with you it's really good yeah um rlm appears to think tlj is not as bad as the prequels calling it a mess with interesting ideas get them on eFap to debate it rich evans is a god i don't think they'd ever come on eFap we would gladly have them on but yeah they think the prequels are worse than tlj that's their take i would happily talk to them about that because it's just so unfair the fucking sequels are a disaster at this point and if you remember they were very much in favor of tfa and you can since tell they're not sure about that anymore um and it was it was kind of the same for me with with tfa i was on board with it but then once you give a real critical like this narrative that went around that was um it's a clone of the ot and it was like it's not just that though it's not just that it's a clone of the ot that's not a it's a horrible clone it's like a botched clone it's not a good clone because good clones can actually be okay look at the lion king that did pretty well didn't it people might think i'm referencing the live adaptation i'm not i'm referencing uh the kimba wolf that's the name oh yeah the white lion that there there's a video out there that shows like just how much the lion king stole from it and it makes me it made me lose a lot of respect for the lion king it's insane it's actually i mean i don't think i can remove how much i like that movie but at the same time good lord that is the clear act of plagiarism i think i've ever seen uh you are wrong wolf your videos are excellent please don't leave from chip chip play he's convinced clearly uh wolf have you heard about the upcoming lord of the rings game where you play as golem it takes place a couple hundred years before the hobbit it comes out in 2021 you can find the logo how would that even work i don't i have never heard of anything like that i'm curious i haven't either so yeah all right i would like to thank all of the e-fab viewers who sub to my mark the cyborg channel my newest video is a review of wolfenstein young blood and i end it with one of wolf's favorite quotes rhino milk cosmic chicken i think um but yes mark the cyborg i remember that name uh check it out i guess if you want to wolf how many slash which lord of the rings games have you played um i played both the middle earth games i played a bit of lord of the rings online um i tried to get into war of the north but it was really boring and after two hours i stopped playing it and i think that's it uh just writes a version to objective qualitative statements appears to be a kneejerk reaction to tlj criticism your discussion with him was fascinating i didn't realize how fundamental that discussion has become in terms of like a originating point in terms of the discussion as a whole and what it did to him and his channel it was such a casual stream that be a wolf and set up we're just like okay i feel like wolf was was it wolf were you doing it anyway no we were watching a video we said should we stream it that's what it was yeah and uh i think it was actually your idea to stream it and then we did and we didn't expect anything and then he just happened to be in the chat and that's how that came about we're gonna have to do a part two for this aren't we i've got like 17 minutes i think i might really do it more you should consider comparing tlj and kotor i'd have to play it first and uh i think there are people who are doing a way better job than i ever would at that already online so fair enough uh is doth vady gonna dave to force choker bitch maybe um yes i dialan volo i'm destined to be king my immortal mid crimson will erase the middle of the next 10 seconds of time and i will finish my enemies that's a jojo i was gonna say there's a couple references in there that were effab related too so i guess just a big old reference uh wolf if you leave effab you won't be able to demand art from beowyn anymore also i'll cry and become a bad adaptation of spider-man uh this is as uh this is as bad as the niche he is a nihilist this is colon i feel like there was more to that but it got cut off or something um would anyone consider sloth from the goonies to be subjectively beautiful his mum didn't a face even a mother can't love uh wolf thank you for banning raw in that one stream that's from creepy sheev band raw he did uh 20 minutes equals a billion years i don't know i don't know i don't know 20 minutes equals a billion years i can't remember what that's referencing but yes oh when uh just right said uh remember the dark knight that thing i referenced a million years ago oh right because to him a 16 minute video is like a lifetime uh jesus oh 16 minutes of time anyway here chad stuckman take our monies ends well bad stuckman that's not so bad you know like that chad also stuckman uh the just right guy is a salty bitch would just right argue that films are objectively subjective well this is the thing a lot of the time with the whole nothing is objective thing it's like isn't that an objective statement it's like no like hmm seems like you're pretty definitive about it and it's like how you proven that how do you know you know the counter argument being that how do you know when not being objective just by accident in your world view we could be committing to it but we don't have the necessary framing to understand that that's definitively what we're doing is this whole thing well if i want to buy your pizza with this but i want it to be a healthy pizza maybe even some pineapple on it or at least some cosmic buffalo chicken oh good lord don't when is just right going to stop making excuses for his logical shortcomings by claiming subjectivity how long can the charade of sophistry go on well it's already he's already gone back on it in his game of thrones season 8 video but nobody cares because he'll make the claims and then be like oh it's all subjective lol anyway this game of thrones really backs logically and consistently yeah but it's all subjective like you just apply the same thing to everything he says in that video you go hey just right you say this thing is incongruous with this other thing but ultimately if they had done that it wouldn't be as emotionally resonant they needed to happen for the story to happen just right right you're not making any sense just right so it'll just go on forever i don't think his fan base are paying enough attention to notice anyway not you know no offense to them i'm sure they're wonderful people i just finished shads book while listening to this and i enjoyed it but you should make fun of him for making the symbol of one of the factions suspiciously similar to his own logo that's it's a reference if i was making a book i'd probably throw a whole bunch of evap references in there like i'd have this faction that have a name that you know like is ea e f e f p maybe with an a like e f p a just people could be like oh subtle references that's the that's the key if i had a send for every time someone cherry-picked things a philosophers said to suit their agenda i mean it works apparently yeah twist your words does orphan art have value no also someone in chat said i googled youtube stream max length and says 12 hours i've looked into it several times the most common answer i find is 8 hours and i'm pretty sure that is the case and if ever i try and test that it'll mean that we'll actively delete part of an evap as a potential so i don't really want to push it further than that at that point i hope that they extend it someday for sure e fap is the red pen of death for video essays potentially flowers literally proper use of the word designed to be pleasing to the senses there are plants way to trick animals into doing their work because they didn't evolve legs oh well that's just your opinion that's a big old tin of worms that we don't have time to get into no we don't no wolf your diet oh i guess they're saying because you had the pizza oh you literally made the argument that if i don't know about it it doesn't exist yeah so glad i got to watch just right give wolf a dad yours of life wonderful stuff know what the millennium falcon is so it's not a plot hole by not being in the prequel okay i'm not even gonna go over that terrible argument how it explains anything i don't know enough about it tell you what tell you what nobody knew that the millennium falcon had l-337 as the navigator when the original trilogy came out no oh maulah give this to wolf and it must be for drugs and alcohol all right hello maulah hello there literally more people know the name of a y-wing than most people know what the bomber and tlj's was called go to hell just right i would agree with you on that just right you made a really good video but i truly deeply really deep down in my heart think that those videos were an accident you should stop now you guys need to focus on praising what you love not critiquing what you hate just tico inspirational at weird of wolf i can't take any more of just rights video i'm gonna go out for a bit before i kill myself hopefully you guys will still be on when i come back love you massives hope you survive oh yeah either actor could have played either character oh damn that's a good point metalman bad john wick 3 is objectively good tism but it has a lot of tism it's all good tism it's good fun it's good fun tism fine i'll give you the fun tism the action scenes are definitely worth watching on youtube i'm incredibly biased because i adore how silly it is it is really silly exactly stupid as world building is it's it's like up there with hops and shy and like dumb action movies wolf are you actually serious about deleting your channel crying face yep and silence hmm it's a bit of a bombshell mm-hmm there's a moment of silence for an excellent youtube channel leave for two i'll say you won't be missed all these super chats are about it i leave for two seconds and wolf is going and saying well if wolf wants to delete the channel we can't stop him but we'll make sure he's aware of how much we'll miss him peace of shit lol as we know jack saint is honest absolutely here's my tithe for the holy trinity of dumbassery thank you wolf is keith and natani a good couple cute also when do you think they're gonna do the nasty wolf is keith and natani oh oh i read that wrong okay no i know what he's talking about yes they're actually better than the two main characters in my opinion and it's never going to happen because tom likes to mess with his fanbase in that way guys calm down stop being immature you should just evolve as critics right guys just rice kind of forgotten how to make valid points only when it's on stuff that he likes objectivity ends conversations efap six hours plus yep end conversations my brother walked in during the freak out about the y-wing he went on a straw man rant that criticisms of tlj are out of stupidity and con artist reasons in a kermit voice what we criticized tlj out of con artist reasons okay alright i was watching iron man one i was watching iron man one and tony should have died like four times him flying in the first iron man suit out of the cave and just landing in the sand was so jarring yeah actually uh we me and alex rewatched that after endgame just for like nostalgia and i remember saying it was like this is a bit weird that he survives that it's such a major fucking blow like and the suit is destroyed when he lands and you're like wouldn't that have okay i'm telling you even non superhero characters and films have superhuman durability oh well that's the thing i think there's valid to point those things out but i think some films do take measures to try and you know keep them at least a little bit grounded they'll show them taking wounds or something well they never actually have them attacked by something hugely significant i personally i'm just happy to like accept that the tolerance threshold for damage for a film human is higher because it allows for more stuff to take place it's just me though uh but what's the secret to mario's jump we'll never find that out it should be noted a new hope talking did say he was risking a lot by letting leia get away with the plans even if they were tracking them yes uh but it was more of a it's absolutely a risk versus having them kept prisoner but uh i'm assuming that's tied to the fact that it was leia specifically too and losing them compared to but the thing is it did pay off as far as he was concerned yes we got him and then um there's a line where he says um abandon the ship in our moment of triumph i think not for something like that i can't remember the actual quote just writes theory is crap history already proves art continues despite objective critique what if i said i'm not going to write because subjectively someone might think my work promotes murder exactly you can absolutely make the argument in reverse i don't know why he thinks it only applies to his side um well this is from me repository wolf i wanted to say how much you video on depression and mental health meant to me keep up the good work you beautiful massive i will he'll get another video soon i'm glad to see that you guys are still going gives me more to catch up on later if rags comes back ask him when his next video is coming out uh split this between yourselves we'll do put that in for rags as well as far as i know his next video is on the way uh i guess similar to all of us wait two thousand years we only started arguing 19 years after jesus oh i don't know uh big crap uh also surprise you live through this slash make the dmc content you coward oh wait dmc content uh that's what you're doing don't make r5 video uh well please say all right steady slow and easy and okay you guys can come and pick me up now guys hello and wolf they want you to say we are ready to go what are your feelings towards our success rate we're ready to go what are your feelings toward our success rate yeah but i guess this from meme video i'm guessing so they probably want you to say it in a way that sounds like you're saying that hey that's okay okay we're ready to go what are your feelings toward our success rate altheo i am platinum mad okay bobson here's some money for wolf's next pizza also hi rag worried say hi back how long have i got oh four minutes okay more ignore theo and watch mono gattari it's important you do it is theos favorite thing yes i'm spending five more quid to dab on theo wolf 91% of ori so glad to be out of spiky windy hell was playing while listening to this stream and had more fun than you did tonight okay saw once upon a time in hollywood loved it excellent speaking of memes i got a couple coming out soon as well as the first part of efap the movie can't wait for efap 50 oh neither can we i want theo who was on efap to read my bedtime stories or read me bedtime times oh yeah damn you guys are still going to miss the streamer wanted to drop by to say how you're doing well and also we should repeal the 19th of course raw could you release videos where you guys react to memes separate from the actual efap no that's part of efap any chance you'll have sargon or Shapiro on efap 50 i doubt we'll have him on efap 50 efap 50 is like gonna just be past guests coming back on so um but who knows what'll happen in future uh i'll take a few years but i'll get to work on moving efap to a beautiful home in alaska i promise there you go james so wonderful project for you to engage in right i got three minutes i can do this thoughts on 3d anime bad burn it yeah who knows could be good could be bad i don't know anything about that a red cross report said 200 000 died of typhus by the way what does that have to do with anything we were talking about okay okay sorry uh thoughts on next james bond wait for it to come out it's probably gonna be terrible but who knows that's next 007 to you yeah attack on titan is based it's core conflict is the world's most important important issue right now people who disagree deserve to be thrown off rooftops in mere did nothing wrong more i want to thank you right now for watching rise of skywalker so that i don't have to oh yeah i can already recommend it's probably not worth it and then i will confirm that for you soon after it's released probably thoughts on black sails on stars i have no idea what that is uh do an endgame critique like the tlj one i am tempted to do that i'm not sure what i'm going to be doing exactly with endgame though but it will be something you should do an efap with ryan dorsen to discuss chindler's list united 93 zero dark 30 in sicario guaranteed top tier episode yes i don't know who that is though wolf when will be able to when will we be able to buy your book again don't know mola what's with the drawings in your soma vids they were supposed to be funny stupid and represent the fact that i'm just a randy dude who's trying to comment on stuff but they were also great but not how to convey emotion in what i was saying so it's a little bit less emotive back then but um i might bring them back oh god i have a minute uh watch the doom eternal presentation with the dev plays it on stage is amazing there's still a developer listening to fans thank you id software oh yes it's probably going to be a very good game whoever said crab is worst girl and cat for the wind deserves to be burned by one giant ghost tiger hey thanks again bobson wolf if you leave i will genuinely miss your faithful promotion of one of life's great joys pizza it's fun to point out whenever you go on mute okay uh wolf you sound like boogie in eye of souls dm's oh i've heard about that uh i don't know what that well i'll talk to you about that after the show i've got 50 seconds that i've got four super chats as the son of the philosopher it's nice to see philosophy on e-fap also crab best kill cat second best kill it's two bullets by bennie talk to the forecaster or against legate lanius at hoover dam also how could you say that wolf i couldn't forget my favorite e-fap host you're the one i found first James Moore as well uh pothead wolf bans me me out am i oh out am i i know that reference uh in ogtlk at the stampede zazu says he will help and scar knocks him out 2016 scar tells zazu to help him and he lets him leave zazu proceeds to do not do that and instead chills with brufiki what the fuck and the final one is geode yeah that movie sounds terrible um so end of stream thank you all for generous donations on the watching we will see you next e-fap toodle pip cheerio bye