Confession Time

Odradek · 2016-03-06 22:00:58

I really liked Escape From Tomorrow

Odradek · 2016-03-06 22:01:45

Musician and comedian Tony Goldmark, on his Channel Awesome produced webseries "Some Jerk With A Camera" (which also films on-site at the Disney parks), criticized the film in a three part review, saying "Half of it bores me, half of it confuses me, and all of it pisses me off. It's not even pretentious. You need ambition to be pretentious. This is just fucking inept."^[21] Goldmark also stated in his review that he is "not the least bit surprised" that Disney didn't push legal action against the film, claiming that "They would have Streisand Effected themselves into a laughingstock."^[21] Despite his dissenting opinion on the film, Goldmark also claimed that the film's existence shows what anybody can do with modern technology, Saying:

Drew McWeeny couldn't have been more wrong. This film wasn't just possible, It was inevitable. No matter what some soulless YouTube bot on the wrong side of history may tell you, no one needs anyone's permission to make stuff anymore. We never did really, we just thought we did because they had all the resources. But now, we all have HD cameras in our pockets and worldwide distribution at our fingertips. And the very existence of Escape From Tomorrow means more symbolically than its content ever could, but its content is borderline unwatchable. Like a less racist Birth Of A Nation.^[21]

Odradek · 2016-03-06 22:01:56

Wow that's noteable, huh Wikipedia?

glennmagusharvey · 2016-03-07 01:21:34

I once missed the chance to pick up Diablo II for free.

I also once missed the chance to pick up Looney Tunes: Back in Action for several bucks.

Odradek · 2016-03-07 01:27:25

That has nothing to do with this thread

Imipolex G · 2016-03-07 01:32:11

This thread is about Baldanders confessing a Cultural Sin.

Princess Alice · 2016-03-07 01:33:40

Confession Time, come on grab your friends, we'll go to very sinful lands

glennmagusharvey · 2016-03-07 01:42:04

Okay.

I didn't like Space Jam all that much and think Back in Action may be better.

Salix Babylonika · 2016-03-07 01:44:09

no, what Myrm means is that this thread is about the thing he posted in the OP. You are confusing it with the Odd Confessions thread.

glennmagusharvey · 2016-03-07 02:30:08

Oh, sorry about that.

Odradek · 2016-03-07 02:51:47

Jane said:
no, what Myrm means is that this thread is about the thing he posted in the OP. You are confusing it with the Odd Confessions thread.

Odradek · 2016-03-08 00:19:49

Baldanders said:
Musician and comedian Tony Goldmark, on his Channel Awesome produced webseries "Some Jerk With A Camera" (which also films on-site at the Disney parks), criticized the film in a three part review, saying "Half of it bores me, half of it confuses me, and all of it pisses me off. It's not even pretentious. You need ambition to be pretentious. This is just fucking inept."^[21] Goldmark also stated in his review that he is "not the least bit surprised" that Disney didn't push legal action against the film, claiming that "They would have Streisand Effected themselves into a laughingstock."^[21] Despite his dissenting opinion on the film, Goldmark also claimed that the film's existence shows what anybody can do with modern technology, Saying:
Drew McWeeny couldn't have been more wrong. This film wasn't just possible, It was inevitable. No matter what some soulless YouTube bot on the wrong side of history may tell you, no one needs anyone's permission to make stuff anymore. We never did really, we just thought we did because they had all the resources. But now, we all have HD cameras in our pockets and worldwide distribution at our fingertips. And the very existence of Escape From Tomorrow means more symbolically than its content ever could, but its content is borderline unwatchable. Like a less racist Birth Of A Nation.^[21]

Can we just talk about how non-notable this is?

Salix Babylonika · 2016-03-08 00:29:23

I think you can challenge it on those grounds if you're so inclined.

Obā-san · 2016-03-08 00:30:00

please do actually

Klinotaxis · 2016-03-08 00:35:03

channel awesome has a well written and sourced wikipedia article including mentions in the all-important Newspapers, so uh good luck i guess

Salix Babylonika · 2016-03-08 00:35:49

the unfortunate fact of the matter is that if it were ever removed, it would probably take you months.

It's very hard to actually get something off of a Wikipedia page the "right" way.

Odradek · 2016-03-08 00:38:05

I removed it.

Sredni Vashtar · 2016-03-08 00:49:13

Goldmark himself is actually notable for a few reasons, but that citation isn't. If I'm not mistaken, it was a set of rant videos, not a formal review.

Odradek · 2016-03-08 00:50:03

Well it's a dumb opinion and it doesn't belong there.

Odradek · 2016-03-08 04:30:09

They put it back and the reason was that I am apparently "probably a sockpuppet of a banned user"

Odradek · 2016-03-08 04:36:43

(cur | prev)01:50, 7 January 2016‎ 2602:304:cf6e:d6a0:35a1:5b72:802e:560a (talk)‎ . . (42,090 bytes) (+1,738)‎ . . (Undid revision 698422952 by Owlfarm88 (talk) Undoing edit war.) (undo)
(cur | prev)00:55, 6 January 2016‎ Owlfarm88 (talk | contribs)‎ . . (40,352 bytes) (-1,738)‎ . . (Undid revision 698419586 by TMobias (talk)User continually attempts to post review by a Disney fanboy with delusions of grandeur.) (undo)
(cur | prev)00:29, 6 January 2016‎ TMobias (talk | contribs)‎ . . (42,090 bytes) (+1,738)‎ . . (Undid revision 698317441 by Owlfarm88 (talk) User continually attempts to block negative review of the work by a critic more than qualified to do so.) (undo)

Odradek · 2016-03-08 04:37:08

(cur | prev)10:11, 5 January 2016‎ Owlfarm88 (talk | contribs)‎ . . (40,352 bytes) (-1,761)‎ . . (removed film "criticism" from an unrecognized (non-professional) source - not a legitimate media outlet.)(undo) (Tag: Visual edit)
(cur | prev)09:22, 5 January 2016‎ Jim1138 (talk | contribs)‎ . . (42,113 bytes) (+1,760)‎ . . (Undid revision 698129663 by Jim1138 (talk) rv own edit - oopsie) (undo)

Odradek · 2016-03-08 04:37:27

(cur | prev)04:52, 4 January 2016‎ Wikicontributor12 (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (40,353 bytes) (-61)‎ . . (→‎Reception) (undo)
(cur | prev)04:48, 4 January 2016‎ Jim1138 (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (40,414 bytes) (-1,761)‎ . . (Reverted edits by 108.80.14.30 (talk): Unexplained removal of content (HG) (3.1.18)) (undo)

Odradek · 2016-03-08 04:37:29

(cur | prev)04:21, 4 January 2016‎ 108.80.14.30 (talk)‎ . . (42,175 bytes) (+1,761)‎ . . (Undid revision 697940406 by Owlfarm88 (talk) Previous user undid a previous revisit, calling criticism (under the header of Reception) of the film a 'troll review') (undo)
(cur | prev)23:28, 2 January 2016‎ Owlfarm88 (talk | contribs)‎ . . (40,414 bytes) (-1,761)‎ . . (removed troll review quotes) (undo) (Tag: Visual edit)

Odradek · 2016-03-08 04:38:04

I guess I stepped into an edit war.

ANd I probably should have just linked or screencapped instead of posting all of that

Imipolex G · 2016-03-08 04:39:57

citation needed

Odradek · 2016-03-09 18:31:48

James Wikipedia, inventor of Wikipedia, would be ashamed were he alive to see this

Yarrun XIX · 2016-03-09 18:39:28

Fictional Jimbo Wales

Yarrun XIX · 2016-03-09 18:40:13

http://www.everytopicintheuniverseexceptchickens.com/

MetaFour · 2016-03-09 18:43:24

Fictional Jimbo Wales looks at what his website has become, and cries a single, rainbow-colored tear.

Klinotaxis · 2016-03-09 18:47:25

hm

Confession Time

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories