Soooo.... James "AVGN" Rolfe is in the news this week..

[Metalix Knightmare]

Unless you actually ARE basing your stance entirely on the characters he plays, which honestly kind of scares me.

Well, then, you can relax. I am not basing it off his video game characters. In fact, I find James less embarrassing when he's pretending to empty his bowels on video game consoles.

As for anything else? I'm not interested in a formal debate with you.

So, you make accusations of a person's character, but provide nothing to back it up, and staunchly refuse to do so.

 

[Something Amyss]

So, you make accusations of a person's character, but provide nothing to back it up, and staunchly refuse to do so.

I didn't say that, so please don't put words in my mouth.

 

[Exley97_v1legacy]

No, he didn't. He's a smart guy and a seasoned critic. He knew this would probably generate controversy and piss some folks off and probably get a ton of views (nearly 900,000). If he wanted to avoid controversy, he could have just not seen the movie and, if people asked, said "I don't want to see this movie, so there won't be a review." But instead, he made a big show of his "non-review" -- "Instead of doing what everybody else is gonna do -- go see the movie and then talk about how bad it is -- I'm gonna do something different. Something unheard of!"*

*Which is funny, because he's talking for six-plus minutes about how bad the movie is HAVING NOT SEEN IT.

He wanted to explain why he wouldn't be seeing it, and the current obsession with remakes and reboots that he finds exhausting. If he just responded to people asking for the curious absence of any "Ghostbusters 2016 review" it'd be ambiguous, and ironically it would encourage even more of this "reading between the lines" bullshit that happened despite his efforts.

That's fine, explain how important THE ORIGINAL is to you and why you don't want to see ANY remake of it. When you say stuff like this:

"judging from the trailers, it looks awful"
"Instead of doing what everybody else is gonna do -- go see the movie and then talk about how bad it is..."
"the Ghostbusters movie nobody wanted..."
"It's not the fact that it looks bad..."
"The jokes in the trailer make your cringe"
"[the effects] looks embarrassing when you compare it to the original"
"It looks bad"

...then you're wading into judging the movie without seeing it. Which is fine, we all judge trailers. But don't judge the trailers and then turn around and declare that you won't see the movie and give it a fair shake.

He didn't talk for six minutes about how bad the movie is, because he doesn't know that the film is bad. He even admits that he doesn't know if the film will be bad.

He literally said "If you already know you're going to hate it, why give them your money?" So it sounds like he made up his mind.

He just doesn't want to get involved, he doesn't want to be a part of the whole controversy because no matter which side you pick, you're gonna get shit on.

He didn't want to get involved? HE MADE A 6-PLUS MINUTE VIDEO ABOUT IT. No one forced him to do it.

So what did he do? He tried to be diplomatic, he only mentioned the whole "female Ghostbusters" gimmick once and that was out of necessity. And look at the response he got for doing that, "he's only avoiding talking about it so he can avoid looking sexist!" Seriously?

"Gimmick"? I'm pretty sure Rolfe didn't say that, and that "gimmick" is your word.

I honestly can't stand all of these bullshit assumptions about people, that they're horrible misogynists for not wanting to get involved. If the Wayans did a remake of or sequel to 2001: A Space Odyssey and I refused to see it, would that make me a racist?

I don't know who you're arguing with by presenting this hypothetical situation, but it's not me. I stated pretty clearly I don't think Rolfe's video or his decision is sexist or mysoginistic. My beef with Rolfe is this: you can decide not to see a movie (and announce that decision) or you can bash a movie but that doing both is a bad look for a professional critic.

 

[Metalix Knightmare]

So, you make accusations of a person's character, but provide nothing to back it up, and staunchly refuse to do so.

I didn't say that, so please don't put words in my mouth.

Dude, I don't WANT a debate. I want to know where you got the idea that James throws tantrums. You made an accusation about the guy, and refuse to back it up. Even TMZ would have pictures at least.

Also, you DID say that. You accused him of throwing tantrums and that he'll do so in the future.

 

[Something Amyss]

Dude, I don't WANT a debate. I want to know where you got the idea that James throws tantrums. You made an accusation about the guy, and refuse to back it up. Even TMZ would have pictures at least.

"evidence" is for formal debates. This is not. You don't want one. Evidence, therefore, is unnecessary.

I hope that's clear, because I'm not really interested in further discourse on the subject.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

Where's the outcry.

On Twitter. Mostly random noise, but Pat Oswalt showed his genius comedic abilities with this piece of comedy 'gold' [https://twitter.com/pattonoswalt/status/732634606982160388]. I can only wonder how his show could have possibly been cancelled /sarcasm

This bums me out. I really like him, but he clearly is missing AVGN's point about not feeding money to a movie he is likely to not like, especially since movies really tend to measure quality by money made, not actual opinions.

From Patton's side his recently deceased wife has a cameo in the movie. His point is still pretty weak but emotionally I can see why he'd react the way he did.

 

[Phasmal]

Mlady...

Bruh.

I was joking.... cool your jets.

 

[Karadalis]

Mlady...

Bruh.

I was joking.... cool your jets.

Hard to tell nowadays phas... theres alot of insanity going around int he name of "this" or "that" and you never know whos serious and whos tries to make lighthearted fun of it

 

[Metalix Knightmare]

Dude, I don't WANT a debate. I want to know where you got the idea that James throws tantrums. You made an accusation about the guy, and refuse to back it up. Even TMZ would have pictures at least.

"evidence" is for formal debates. This is not. You don't want one. Evidence, therefore, is unnecessary.

I hope that's clear, because I'm not really interested in further discourse on the subject.

You made accusations about a man's character (Basically calling him tantrum prone.). Again, even TMZ would provide pictures.

 

[Something Amyss]

Or how about the feminism that spouts lies like "1 out of 5"

Which isn't a lie.

or "the wage paygap!"

Which can, at best, be explained but not debunked.

and "listen and belief".

This is a lie, but not one told by feminists. It's a concept taken out of context and goes back to that first one about asserting the 1 in 5 statistic is a lie. Women are accused of being liars when they report rape, even with solid evidence (nincluding rape kits, which often go untested). "Listen and believe" was coined merely to tell people (especially the police, who shouldn't be prejudicial in such matters) not to assume a person is lying for reporting rape.

If you're concerned about lies, spreading one about what "feminism" is doing is probably not the best course of action.

Modern day feminism is a blight that worsens everything it can get its decaying claws onto simply because it craves relevance in an age that has outlived its necessity in the west.

That this discussion is going on is kind of an indicator it hasn't.

 

[Phasmal]

Mlady...

Bruh.

I was joking.... cool your jets.

Hard to tell nowadays phas... theres alot of insanity going around int he name of "this" or "that" and you never know whos serious and whos tries to make lighthearted fun of it

I mean, don't get me wrong, I'm sure there's tons of shit I disagree with you about around feminism, but I'm not particularly invested in Ghostbusters or this dude not liking Ghostbusters. And... after like 10 years, I'm not particularly invested in debating feminism over the internet, especially on nerd sites. The way I see it, I personally identify as a feminist in it's original meaning but I'm not responsible for other people's views on it or other feminist's doing stuff.

It's kinda like how we all collectively feel about those terrible gamers that are the minority.

 

[darthdenim]

No, he didn't. He's a smart guy and a seasoned critic. He knew this would probably generate controversy and piss some folks off and probably get a ton of views (nearly 900,000). If he wanted to avoid controversy, he could have just not seen the movie and, if people asked, said "I don't want to see this movie, so there won't be a review." But instead, he made a big show of his "non-review" -- "Instead of doing what everybody else is gonna do -- go see the movie and then talk about how bad it is -- I'm gonna do something different. Something unheard of!"*

*Which is funny, because he's talking for six-plus minutes about how bad the movie is HAVING NOT SEEN IT.

I don't think so. James seems really disconnected from online bullshit. He doesn't seem to have any social media presence at all. Mike Matei and some other guy run all that stuff.

 

[EvilRoy]

Dude, I don't WANT a debate. I want to know where you got the idea that James throws tantrums. You made an accusation about the guy, and refuse to back it up. Even TMZ would have pictures at least.

"evidence" is for formal debates. This is not. You don't want one. Evidence, therefore, is unnecessary.

I hope that's clear, because I'm not really interested in further discourse on the subject.

You made accusations about a man's character (Basically calling him tantrum prone.). Again, even TMZ would provide pictures.

I looked for any evidence and zero turned up. Unless he covers his tracks like a madman I don't think it exists.

 

[cleric of the order]

Guy refuse to review movie for personal reasons and because he doesn't think it will be good.
This is news somehow.
Can i be news?
I mean i wasn't going to watch the movie because it looks like shit and there has NEVER been a self titled reboot movie that has turned out alright.
This is just good sense.

 

[GrumbleGrump]

I love this so much, it's like a fucking Onion article.

"Man decides not to watch movie, sparks controversy".

 

[Mahorfeus]

It's a damn shame. The entire point of the video was to sate the curiosity of his own fans, whom were presumably the ones who asked about it in the first place. But even when I watched it myself, I knew that despite (or in spite of) how calm and reasonable James was being, somebody would manage to spin it into a shitshow. I can only wonder if he saw this coming.

Oh well... I figure this will all blow over soon enough.

 

[Metalix Knightmare]

I mean i wasn't going to watch the movie because it looks like shit and there has NEVER been a self titled reboot movie that has turned out alright.

Well there WAS the first two versions of The Thing. The 1951 and the 1982 versions were both pretty good.

Then there was the 2011 version. We don't talk about the 2011 version.

Edit: Wait, your point still stands. The 1952 movie wasn't called The Thing. It was The Thing From Another World.

 

[Exley97_v1legacy]

Guy refuse to review movie for personal reasons and because he doesn't think it will be good.
This is news somehow.
Can i be news?

If you think it's totally kosher for a professional critic to render a verdict on a movie while declaring that he will never actually see that movie, then yes, it's totally not news.

Serious question: what would the reaction be here if a professional critic said he refused to review the new Doom title and said in no uncertain terms that the game looked awful and it was going to fail, all based on the trailers?

I mean i wasn't going to watch the movie because it looks like shit and there has NEVER been a self titled reboot movie that has turned out alright.
This is just good sense.

Again, if Rolfe wants to skip it because he does't think it looks good (he doesn't) and his affinity for the original is too great (it is), then that's fine. I have no issue with that. I used to skip movies I thought would be shit ALL THE TIME when I reviewed. I wouldn't be caught dead reviewing a Transformers movie. But what I absolutely DID NOT do was get up on a soapbox and announce to the world that I would not be reviewing the next Transformers sequel because I knew for a fact the movie was going to be sh*t and it was going to be awful and bash the movie after seeing nothing but a couple trailers. If you're average movie fans wants to do that, fine. But a professional critic shouldn't be judging a movie based on the trailers if he's not going to actually sit down and watch the whole film.

 

[Exley97_v1legacy]

I love this so much, it's like a fucking Onion article.

"Man decides not to watch movie, sparks controversy".

I think the headline you mean is "Movie critic slams a movie he hasn't seen and will never watch"

 

[GrumbleGrump]

I love this so much, it's like a fucking Onion article.

"Man decides not to watch movie, sparks controversy".

I think the headline you mean is "Movie critic slams a movie he hasn't seen and will never watch"

No, I'm pretty sure about the first one.