A more monumental hypocrisy is that he says he's doing it because he's "not willing to sacrifice art and culture" but is championing AI generated images.
I think where a lot of the animosity is coming from is that they are changing characters and franchises that a lot of people liked and that that is almost all they create now. And it is not based on fan preferences. It's one thing to say "I don't like it but if you do that is fine." if there are making things you like too. Make all the Madame Webs you want as long as you don't force that into the main story regardless of fan opinion. It is the "We are going to make these changes to your favorite franchises whether you like it or not" that is causing the resentment.
I unsubbed from Ya Boi, because everything he was saying was wrong, people he said who weren’t watching the movies had done videos going over the entire plot of the movie. Other people he mentioned saying that hated a movie had said the movie was fine. This all started because he loved the Furiosa movie, and because everyone else didn’t love it he had a complete meltdown.
Zack became unbearable years ago. A broken clock phenomena that lured many into thinking he was the voice of reason. He is guilty of exactly what he is attacking others of doing.
I was unsubbing from pop culture channels, before Zack Furisoa Crusade. I just found them more unreliabile and becoming mostly negative. The times I did enjoy those channels when they went off script about stuff they had legit passions for.
His Furiosa anger was wild, where he basically accused Drinker and others of not promoting Furiosa enough (because Drinker and co. did actually like Furiosa, so his original accusations didn’t work), but also completely ignoring how it was the marketing by the studio that obliterated Furiosa (as well as how niche even Fury Road was).
@@davidgantenbein9362 He comes off like such a grifter to become so suddenly obsessed with the non-woke reviewers. Yes, some of them are def grifters as well, but Zack was eager to lump everyone into the same category. And a non-autistic person would make one, maybe two vids, discussing it and move on. But Zack just CANT. LET. IT. GO. And that's just so negative, tiresome, and unappealing in a similar way that EVS just drums up drama with his never-ending list of enemies like Rippa. But I think while EVS is doing it for views and money (along with narcissism), Zack harping on the reviewers feels like legit OCD on his part. So while it looks like grifting to an outsider, I think he's earnest about, and it's not an attention game. Furiosa, of all things lol, was the hill he decided to die on.
Drinker authored an add-on book for one of "Zack's" campaigns. Drinker completed his work on time, but it would take "Zack" two more years of lateness to finally finish. Drinker took it upon himself to ship out his add-on book separately, so backers could actually get it, and so Drinker wouldn't be associated with the ridiculously late and unprofessional campaign that "Zack" was running. Drinker never spoke on this publicly, but "Ya Boi" decided to start relentlessly smearing Drinker. It's for the "crime" of actually getting a book done on time and making "Zack" look like a tardy weirdo who can't manage his time, money, or effort.
Perch I think you didn’t actually look into what Zach was saying, he was constantly harping on about Drinker not watching the movies. Every single video he does he’s obviously watched the movie. When he does a panel stream at least 2 of the people on the panel have seen the movie, they go over the plot & the rest will comment. So they either HAVE seen the movie or have been given the entire plot. You should know what Ya Boi is like, he’s like a dog with a bone when something annoys him & gets tunnel vision. And when people didn’t like Furiosa he just snapped. That went on for weeks, it was ridiculous.
I don’t know about all the videos and content. I do know that the review for Squid Games 2 was factually wrong around major, first episode plot points. 🤷♂️
I remember that. I gave him two weeks to get over it but he just kept going. Finally after a couple of months I unsubscribed. I hope he gets the help he needs.
@@ComicsPerch Ok I’m talking about Furiosa, I had never watched any of these channels he was talking about, but I looked at all the ones he mentioned and everything Ya Boi said was wrong. But is he harping on about Squid Game now? And it’s also a lie to say these channels hate everything, I’ve seen them say good things about multiple different movies & shows.
@@br.augustinejewell5005 Same here, I watched most of his videos for years, but he just wouldn’t stop going on about Furiosa until I just couldn’t listen to him anymore. And the constant calling everyone a “birthday party clown” was so annoying.
Yeah, reviewers should at least see the material before reviewing it. However, these movies and comics don’t exist in a vacuum. The last 12-16 years of comic workers, actors, athletes etc insulting innocent every-day people happened. Studios and publishers discriminating against people with their hiring practices happened. These people do not deserve the benefit of the doubt. And what’s worse is they’re still there! They’ll just do it all again when they believe public opinion changed. I understand this isn’t the point perch was making but I don’t care. These jerks deserve every word of criticism they get, fair or unfair, until they go back to serving me drive-thru coffee. Which is where they belong.
I agree with the sentiment, but where does criticizing actions or events that we didn't read because we knew we wouldn't like it but still left an impact that affected future books or others within a line; or even a whole franchise or just a singular character? Like, I didn't read X-Men Green nor knew anything about Nature Girl prior, but knowing what happened in the first issue through discussions and seeing the panels where she murdered a civilian for no good reason - I definitely won't read it and I now don't care for that character or how she's connected to the X-Men. Similarly, a character I loved since my youth, Nightcrawler, was made into a murderer in one of the final Krakoa books; in a malicious fashion as well. I don't want to see one of my favorite characters randomly kill bad guys and seems to enjoy it, especially when most media I see him in would never stoop that low. I want to complain and criticize these types of things when they affected something I cared about (the X-Men franchise and Nightcrawler), but as I didn't actually read the book is there nothing I can say about it? I would get it if I was giving my opinion about Game of Thrones, didn't watch nor care so I understand that my criticisms of a show like that doesn't matter; but I do care about Nightcrawler and how he's portrayed.
It really depends on your investment. I don't like the new X-Men, but I do have a general investment in the property. For years I purchased their books, movies, and games because I really like them. That is worth something. If the bar is having to buy in then nothing would change. Not buying is a valid statement on the direction of a franchise.
The extent or depth of criticism does depend on how much you want to engage. By the time X-Men Green came out, I was already done with X-Men. So anything I might criticize about X-Men Green would not be specific about the quality of the writing about that specific comic. My criticism would be more about the overall morality of what is in the book, based on confirmed plot details. If I remember right, that book was written by Gerry Duggan. A LONG time ago I liked some of Duggan's work, but that time has passed. I gave the Krakoa stuff a try but I didn't like it. I don't feel the need to have kept buying it in order to have 100.0% confirmation that I wouldn't like it. Is there a chance that X-Men Green would actually have appealed to me? Yeah, maybe a 1% chance. But I have already confirmed the awful morals and bad storytelling of Krakoa-era Duggan. As long as I don't start speaking about X-Men Green as if I know that the dialogue or storytelling definitely "IS" bad, I think I'm in the clear for pointing to where the series went and stating that it's (generally) bad.
Wait until you get to the point you’re not wondering if the person read the book/watched the show and if they just had AI write the article. In dungeons and dragons world there was an article that appears to have taken a conversation on a stream, or a forum post, and in china published an ai written article. The site has many posts like that which kinda look like real articles, anyways this got picked up as a “report” and was recycled in news on youtube and such for a few days before people realized this report was entirely bogus. This is going to happen more often as people grow with this new media literacy, people really need “trusted sources” for criticism and all that. Sadly we kinda ruined that business.
I have biases. I know and admit this openly. (In tech, I'm kind of stuck in 70s-80s.) I refuse to pay for any streaming service (I prefer to own physical media). All that confessed, there is so little contemporary culture - irl and entertainment - that I have interest in consuming b/c of what I perceive to be dramatic negative shifts in both. But if, after Sunday dinner, the gang would rather get out the smartphones they live on and play a Jackbox death-centered trivia competition then revel in the amazing work on the silent 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, first film to employ the newly developed ability to film UNDERWATER, I reckon, "If it makes you happy." With movies and TV, if enough vloggers whose views I respect, such as Perch, Dave Cullen, et al, say something is good or bad, I'll lean to accepting that b/c of the trust they've earned (like if your best friend commented about a production or comic). But I always remember that, yes, I HAVE my own biases shaping my own Why.
If I review a trailer, I make sure to note it's the trailer and what it's trying to sell me that I'm commenting on. A lot of problems people have when they see (X) is that every other time they've seen (X) it's been terrible because it was done for the wrong reasons, so they prepare for what they know is coming...and are often proven right.
Question is how do you review something when you don’t want to give money to something bad or waste your time watching something bad? At this point, I’m not bothering with anything until someone I trust has said it was worth my time.
•just don't review it, maybe not even mention it, unless it's relevant to something that is reviewed •maybe ignore all the contradictory opinions, read/watch it, and judge for themselves •if they're building a career as reviewer, then it is THEIR JOB to review things that end up being bad, they should have professional integrity notwithstanding and their money is going to go there.
"I haven't watched/read it, but based on everything I've seen from this creator I don't think it will be very good. I might review it in the future if I hear goods things about it"
He's trying hard to convince himself that he isn't a victim. He has Stockholm Syndrome because of how Daddy Government treated him and used him in a pointless war.
I don't know. It would be cool to hear what are the things you are excited about from solicitations, but at the same time, if I was in your position, I wouldn't really want to sway people one way or another into books. (Then again, as you've acknowledged, doing the bit of making fun of everything might've swayed some people away. Who knows?) But yes: acknowledging the bias is important. I was more of a "pick up past runs at a swap meet" reader in the 90's. I picked up Spectacular Spider-Man because it actually looked like the 90's animated series. But when it came time to start a pull, I was shopping around stores. First store I went to told me: "Oh, you want to pick up Ultimate Iron Man? Don't do that. It's awful." I was baffled. I almost wanted to say: "So. . . You don't want my money?? Okay." I went on to another comic store. They just rang me up, said I'd get 20% off if I started a pull list, and I've been a customer for almost 20 years now. Goes the same for any store. I recently went to a record store less than a mile from me. It's seriously walking distance. But the clerk always judges things he hasn't heard of. I bought one Built to Spill record, but the amount of insults the clerk gave me for not picking up whatever 70's prog was enough for me to never shop there again. I will literally drive 10-15 miles to other record stores now. I did crack once this year where I called the local record store to check for the release, and he (no joke) answered with: "Yeah? What do you want?" in the rudest tone. And I think people just go into businesses thinking it's easy. Like, owning a business is just a money printer. And it's usually these kind of people who have no tact or sense of being cordial. They got a business degree with no idea that customer service is one of those soft skills they're going to need.
I think Zack has realized that the anger-culture fan base surrounding a lot of TH-cam reviewers is something that he helped cultivate for years… and I don’t think he likes that. I generally trust Zack’s reviews of action based comics (as they are often in line with my own opinions). I generally don’t share his tastes for movies/tv stuff and almost never agree with his takes on humor in entertainment, so I don’t really watch many of his reviews anymore unless it is for an action-based, non-humorous comic book.
It’s kind of like Alan Moore blaming himself for the trend of grim and gritty comics following Watchmen. I don’t agree with many of his opinions, but I can understand the point he started from.
Uh, yeah the point stands about how anti-w0ke reviewers fall into groupthink, but the specific criticisms made by "Zack" don't hold water. He ironically has very poor "media literacy" himself, so he's often misunderstanding the movies and then flipping out when critics don't see them the same way he does. His crusade (it's not too strong a word) against Critical Drinker is full-on schiz0. He calls out Drinker for saying that the female lead of the Crow remake was an unappealing lover because she was an addict in a s3x cult; and Zack's correction is that the character was "only" an addict in a s3x cult because she was being controlled by a criminal underworld figure. He thinks that caveat somehow makes the character appealing to a would-be lover, and that therefore Critical Drinker didn't see the movie. He's a fool. I'm not a Critical Drinker fan, btw. I don't care about him or watch his content. So, yes, again, there is definitely a groupthink that catches hold of reviewers, but "Zack" is pretty much the worst person possible to carry that message to the masses. He's legitimately mentally ill and irrational. And as of January 1st, 2025, he now has three late books.
A side question: over the years Stark's business has been taken multiple times. (SHIELD, Midas, Stane, Morgan Stark, Arno Stark, Orchis) Perch, do you find any of these stories realistic enough/acceptable? I think, as readers, our standards have gone way up.
Retailers, once they order a comic magazine and receive it - regardless of how many copies and titles - his/her business responsibility is to sell and sell all the copies, whether they like the comic magazine or not. For the reasons that you have stated, people have different opinions and if I like a comic doesn't mean you or anyone else will like it. Let them decide but a Retailer's job is to SELL and sell every copy ordered! Likewise, a comics publisher's is to produce comic magazines that will have a general audience appeal, hopefully and to stay away from political agendas. Reason I don't buy any comics, NEW comics, from the mainstream comics publishers. They have changed the characters so much from when I read them as a kid and as an adult. AGL
I'll be honest, when I watched Squid Game s2, there were parts I didn't like. The part with a certain character, almost had me pre-emptively shut off the program. Surprisingly enough, I found that it wasn't a huge issue, and the character grew on me. Netflix has just conditioned me to assume the worst when it comes to diversity/identity and bad stories.
Another fantastic video Perch, very conciscly put about watching/reading something before forming an opinion. I think im one of the few people who thought High Gaurdian Spice was pretty good. Not the greatest thing ever, but I really enjoyed it. I went in with an open mind and discovered its not a woke show whatsoever and was more focused on telling a story. Not sure what everyone else saw. And it actually mimicked a certain anime aesthetic quite well, 2000s magical girl shows like Doremei.
I reviewed Justice League Unlimited on my channel. I didn't like Mark Waid saying his work would get worse after the election. However, I was able to separate that and say that the first issue was still good to me. People need to separate the BS from the work itself. That goes both ways. When ringing customers up in a shop I would avoid pooping on what they bought and say I didnt read it. BUT if its something someone else had mentioned in a positive way I'd mention I heard good things from others.
That only works when all parties agree to it. Right now you're willing to cut people a break who would absolutely destroy you on a whim. You will only ever get as much mercy as you give. Don't get it twisted, history matters and these people are unrepentant. They never stopped. It's like leaving a bad ex. My attitude is informed by a long history of provable experiences, so excuse my curt attitude but it is warranted.
@joncross9264 not sure what you are referencing when saying "willing to cut people a break". If a comic is well written and good, then it's well written and good. To lie and crap on ot because I don't like how he said his work could go downhill after the election is problematic IMO as it would be disingenuous. A tribal one way or the other doesn't help anything.
To be fair, Waid probably wrote that book six months ago, or more. That said, it's certainly commendable to separate the art from the artist. I wouldn't want to buy anything else new that Neil Gaiman was producing, for example, but I have no trouble rereading his older stuff and enjoying it just fine. There are different levels to consumption and support. I'm quite militantly against supporting the Big Two... but if it's a recent back issue that a shop has put out on deep discount, I have no problem dropping a dollar to check out a random Mard Waid comic, just to see what he's up to now. And half the time it's decent.
@SuperFaxx If it's on the shelf at your LCS, not buying a comic will only hurt the LCS at that point. DC/Marvel already got the money for it. 😜 Now, going back to JLU, if it takes a nosedive in quality, I'm out.
One rule for criticism should be a.) tell me whether you think it’s good and b.) if you mention any politics, you fail. I think this test would be difficult for more people you think.
Perch, hope all is well. I have to agree. Read the first 3 issues of the new Iron Man run, I have to agree with you., This series is lack luster and heading for a reboot.
After 15 years of creators trashing the paying customers--treating them unfairly, THEY HAVE MADE THIS BED FOR THEMSELVES. If there is any remaining hostility out there from fandom, it's the creation of the industry itself. The creators tried to profit (clout) by demonizing the fans, so now let the fans profit by demonizing their comics. To hell with them. Giving a book a 'fair chance' should only be done on a creator-by-creator basis. Jeremy Adams? Give him a chance. Mark Waid? Kelly Sue Deconnick? BURY THEIR ASSES in bad reviews. That's what they deserve. I loved this hobby up till about 2010. Now it's dog crap, imo. And it's all their fault.
@@spaceknight793 When we become bitter and petty as them we become them, nfw. Anyway I buy 98% preowned so the resellers get most of my coin. Every Mark Waid book is preowned even if I give a good review.
Zack's too scared and insular to ever take questions. He's super sensitive. He wouldn't even go on big channels that were friendly to him. Which, honestly, if he's shy or whatever, then I don't blame him. But then he created all these rationalizations about how livestreams were bad and livestream "culture" was bad. I'm not a huge fan of livestreams, but the cope was immense with him on that point.
Yes have a monetary investment does add more credence than a freebie/gift or people sailing the high seas. I'd rather read a review from a verified purchase.
I don’t support piracy… ever. But I really don’t care if someone paid or not when reviewing a show/movie as long as they are upfront about it. I decide on 95% of what I will see/read before I ever see a review. When I watch a review, the reviewer is basically applying to a job to me… I watch their reviews, then watch the shows, and if I don’t agree with the reviews about 90% of the time, then I stop watching the reviews from that person.
Great video. This has been bothering me for a while. I won't name names but there's a popular youtube channel that, for example, the youtuber hates Tom King, which is fine but he's constantly criticizing things that the characters did which never happened in the book. It's obvious that he just flipped through it or something and just came up with his own assumptions without reading it. Same with the krakoan era, he would talk about the Sinister storyline in immortal x-men when it was obvious he hadnt been reading and keeping up with the story. And then all the comments will be criticizing the book and thanking him for pointing those things out. It's so inauthentic it drives me mad.
Is it factually wrong, or is it a matter of interpretation? A lot of people including yourself give very nebulous comments without proof. I've not seen any of Rob's or Benny's videos contradict what others have said. In other cases it is essentially a read along where we can see the whole of the comic. I've seen opinions differ, leading to somewhat different takes, but neither would be considered dishonest.
@@joncross9264 I'm not sure who Rob or Benny are so I can't comment on that, but the youtuber I was thinking about was factually wrong. An example was that when reviewing Human Target, he stated that King had given Martian Manhunter a sexual fetish for flames. This was never in the comic, and even if it was, the entire issue was a psychic battle with Manhunter against Human Targets psychic defenses, so everything in the comic was manipulation and illusion anyways. Long after the series ended, he also said that one of the reasons that the series was bad was because Ice killed Guy Gardner. If he had actually read the series he would know that Gardner and Ice faked that scene. He's also made exaggerated or false claims about what happens in Kings Wonder Woman and Batman. I can definitely understand why people don't like King, but you still need to be honest otherwise you lose your credibility.
Good ole Perch with the 💩 sandwich technique. Look how awful those TH-camrs are... that Iron Man book sucks.... those TH-camrs are really terrible people.
Gulp! I admit I've been liking this current Iron Man run. The introduction of magic and some surprise character appearances have been enjoyable to me. Will have to read it again to see if my opinion changes or if I just like lame dialogue.😄 I do not have corporate board experience. I wonder if our huge difference might be what specific knowledge you bring to the table. I remember a point during Batman Failsafe when Batman makes it from the moon/JLA satellite to the fortress of solitude on earth without aid of a ship, neither freezing, suffocating or burning up. Though impossible, I was so engrossed in the story and this over-the -top Batman defies all odds event that I threw disbelief out the window and enjoyed this epic Batman comic book moment. I later found that it was too much of a leap for too many out there, and probably all of the astrophysicists. I totally understand their point of view, but still think it was an awesome Batman story! With differences in taste and opinion, though, you are smart as a retailer to live by Mr. Krabs' motto: The Money is always right!
Zach is a full on skitzo now.
Zack's monumental hypocrisy is that he is criticizing videos that he didn't watch.
A more monumental hypocrisy is that he says he's doing it because he's "not willing to sacrifice art and culture" but is championing AI generated images.
@@MWLynch100 Richard fancies himself an "artiste" with really refined tastes. It's absolutely laughable. He's defending the honor of Disney slop.
I think where a lot of the animosity is coming from is that they are changing characters and franchises that a lot of people liked and that that is almost all they create now. And it is not based on fan preferences. It's one thing to say "I don't like it but if you do that is fine." if there are making things you like too. Make all the Madame Webs you want as long as you don't force that into the main story regardless of fan opinion. It is the "We are going to make these changes to your favorite franchises whether you like it or not" that is causing the resentment.
I unsubbed from Ya Boi, because everything he was saying was wrong, people he said who weren’t watching the movies had done videos going over the entire plot of the movie.
Other people he mentioned saying that hated a movie had said the movie was fine.
This all started because he loved the Furiosa movie, and because everyone else didn’t love it he had a complete meltdown.
Zack became unbearable years ago. A broken clock phenomena that lured many into thinking he was the voice of reason. He is guilty of exactly what he is attacking others of doing.
I was unsubbing from pop culture channels, before Zack Furisoa Crusade. I just found them more unreliabile and becoming mostly negative. The times I did enjoy those channels when they went off script about stuff they had legit passions for.
Zack is Walter in the Big Lebowski.
His Furiosa anger was wild, where he basically accused Drinker and others of not promoting Furiosa enough (because Drinker and co. did actually like Furiosa, so his original accusations didn’t work), but also completely ignoring how it was the marketing by the studio that obliterated Furiosa (as well as how niche even Fury Road was).
@@davidgantenbein9362 He comes off like such a grifter to become so suddenly obsessed with the non-woke reviewers. Yes, some of them are def grifters as well, but Zack was eager to lump everyone into the same category. And a non-autistic person would make one, maybe two vids, discussing it and move on. But Zack just CANT. LET. IT. GO. And that's just so negative, tiresome, and unappealing in a similar way that EVS just drums up drama with his never-ending list of enemies like Rippa. But I think while EVS is doing it for views and money (along with narcissism), Zack harping on the reviewers feels like legit OCD on his part. So while it looks like grifting to an outsider, I think he's earnest about, and it's not an attention game. Furiosa, of all things lol, was the hill he decided to die on.
Hi Perch. Hope your health is improving. Best wishes for you and yours in the new year
Learning how to fake authenticity is the most important step to success
As a former watcher looking in, Zack seems to have some personal beef with Critical Drinker that has clouded his opinions.
Drinker authored an add-on book for one of "Zack's" campaigns. Drinker completed his work on time, but it would take "Zack" two more years of lateness to finally finish. Drinker took it upon himself to ship out his add-on book separately, so backers could actually get it, and so Drinker wouldn't be associated with the ridiculously late and unprofessional campaign that "Zack" was running. Drinker never spoke on this publicly, but "Ya Boi" decided to start relentlessly smearing Drinker. It's for the "crime" of actually getting a book done on time and making "Zack" look like a tardy weirdo who can't manage his time, money, or effort.
@SuperFaxx Thank you for the breakdown. I figured there was bad blood from that campaign. Good on Drinker for being professional.
Perch, what ever happened to that comic you were writing and drawing?
Someday…
@@ComicsPerch do it man that shit looked good
Perch I think you didn’t actually look into what Zach was saying, he was constantly harping on about Drinker not watching the movies. Every single video he does he’s obviously watched the movie.
When he does a panel stream at least 2 of the people on the panel have seen the movie, they go over the plot & the rest will comment.
So they either HAVE seen the movie or have been given the entire plot.
You should know what Ya Boi is like, he’s like a dog with a bone when something annoys him & gets tunnel vision. And when people didn’t like Furiosa he just snapped. That went on for weeks, it was ridiculous.
I don’t know about all the videos and content. I do know that the review for Squid Games 2 was factually wrong around major, first episode plot points. 🤷♂️
I remember that. I gave him two weeks to get over it but he just kept going. Finally after a couple of months I unsubscribed. I hope he gets the help he needs.
@@ComicsPerch Ok I’m talking about Furiosa, I had never watched any of these channels he was talking about, but I looked at all the ones he mentioned and everything Ya Boi said was wrong.
But is he harping on about Squid Game now? And it’s also a lie to say these channels hate everything, I’ve seen them say good things about multiple different movies & shows.
@@br.augustinejewell5005 Same here, I watched most of his videos for years, but he just wouldn’t stop going on about Furiosa until I just couldn’t listen to him anymore. And the constant calling everyone a “birthday party clown” was so annoying.
His main focus is Drinker. What happened between them since Drinker wrote a comic for him? Something went down.
Yeah, reviewers should at least see the material before reviewing it. However, these movies and comics don’t exist in a vacuum. The last 12-16 years of comic workers, actors, athletes etc insulting innocent every-day people happened. Studios and publishers discriminating against people with their hiring practices happened. These people do not deserve the benefit of the doubt. And what’s worse is they’re still there! They’ll just do it all again when they believe public opinion changed.
I understand this isn’t the point perch was making but I don’t care. These jerks deserve every word of criticism they get, fair or unfair, until they go back to serving me drive-thru coffee. Which is where they belong.
The placement of text makes this thumbnail funny
I agree with the sentiment, but where does criticizing actions or events that we didn't read because we knew we wouldn't like it but still left an impact that affected future books or others within a line; or even a whole franchise or just a singular character?
Like, I didn't read X-Men Green nor knew anything about Nature Girl prior, but knowing what happened in the first issue through discussions and seeing the panels where she murdered a civilian for no good reason - I definitely won't read it and I now don't care for that character or how she's connected to the X-Men.
Similarly, a character I loved since my youth, Nightcrawler, was made into a murderer in one of the final Krakoa books; in a malicious fashion as well. I don't want to see one of my favorite characters randomly kill bad guys and seems to enjoy it, especially when most media I see him in would never stoop that low. I want to complain and criticize these types of things when they affected something I cared about (the X-Men franchise and Nightcrawler), but as I didn't actually read the book is there nothing I can say about it?
I would get it if I was giving my opinion about Game of Thrones, didn't watch nor care so I understand that my criticisms of a show like that doesn't matter; but I do care about Nightcrawler and how he's portrayed.
It really depends on your investment. I don't like the new X-Men, but I do have a general investment in the property. For years I purchased their books, movies, and games because I really like them. That is worth something.
If the bar is having to buy in then nothing would change. Not buying is a valid statement on the direction of a franchise.
Bruh,just give up on the x-men,that franchise is rotten to the core 😂.
The extent or depth of criticism does depend on how much you want to engage. By the time X-Men Green came out, I was already done with X-Men. So anything I might criticize about X-Men Green would not be specific about the quality of the writing about that specific comic. My criticism would be more about the overall morality of what is in the book, based on confirmed plot details. If I remember right, that book was written by Gerry Duggan. A LONG time ago I liked some of Duggan's work, but that time has passed. I gave the Krakoa stuff a try but I didn't like it. I don't feel the need to have kept buying it in order to have 100.0% confirmation that I wouldn't like it. Is there a chance that X-Men Green would actually have appealed to me? Yeah, maybe a 1% chance. But I have already confirmed the awful morals and bad storytelling of Krakoa-era Duggan. As long as I don't start speaking about X-Men Green as if I know that the dialogue or storytelling definitely "IS" bad, I think I'm in the clear for pointing to where the series went and stating that it's (generally) bad.
Wait until you get to the point you’re not wondering if the person read the book/watched the show and if they just had AI write the article. In dungeons and dragons world there was an article that appears to have taken a conversation on a stream, or a forum post, and in china published an ai written article. The site has many posts like that which kinda look like real articles, anyways this got picked up as a “report” and was recycled in news on youtube and such for a few days before people realized this report was entirely bogus.
This is going to happen more often as people grow with this new media literacy, people really need “trusted sources” for criticism and all that. Sadly we kinda ruined that business.
I have biases. I know and admit this openly. (In tech, I'm kind of stuck in 70s-80s.) I refuse to pay for any streaming service (I prefer to own physical media). All that confessed, there is so little contemporary culture - irl and entertainment - that I have interest in consuming b/c of what I perceive to be dramatic negative shifts in both. But if, after Sunday dinner, the gang would rather get out the smartphones they live on and play a Jackbox death-centered trivia competition then revel in the amazing work on the silent 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, first film to employ the newly developed ability to film UNDERWATER, I reckon, "If it makes you happy." With movies and TV, if enough vloggers whose views I respect, such as Perch, Dave Cullen, et al, say something is good or bad, I'll lean to accepting that b/c of the trust they've earned (like if your best friend commented about a production or comic). But I always remember that, yes, I HAVE my own biases shaping my own Why.
If I review a trailer, I make sure to note it's the trailer and what it's trying to sell me that I'm commenting on. A lot of problems people have when they see (X) is that every other time they've seen (X) it's been terrible because it was done for the wrong reasons, so they prepare for what they know is coming...and are often proven right.
Question is how do you review something when you don’t want to give money to something bad or waste your time watching something bad?
At this point, I’m not bothering with anything until someone I trust has said it was worth my time.
•just don't review it, maybe not even mention it, unless it's relevant to something that is reviewed
•maybe ignore all the contradictory opinions, read/watch it, and judge for themselves
•if they're building a career as reviewer, then it is THEIR JOB to review things that end up being bad, they should have professional integrity notwithstanding and their money is going to go there.
"I haven't watched/read it, but based on everything I've seen from this creator I don't think it will be very good. I might review it in the future if I hear goods things about it"
Time is precious, don’t waste it on something you have no interest in.
My biggest issue with Zack is all of the anti-white comments.
I hear less of that on The View.
He's trying hard to convince himself that he isn't a victim. He has Stockholm Syndrome because of how Daddy Government treated him and used him in a pointless war.
I don't know. It would be cool to hear what are the things you are excited about from solicitations, but at the same time, if I was in your position, I wouldn't really want to sway people one way or another into books. (Then again, as you've acknowledged, doing the bit of making fun of everything might've swayed some people away. Who knows?)
But yes: acknowledging the bias is important. I was more of a "pick up past runs at a swap meet" reader in the 90's. I picked up Spectacular Spider-Man because it actually looked like the 90's animated series.
But when it came time to start a pull, I was shopping around stores. First store I went to told me: "Oh, you want to pick up Ultimate Iron Man? Don't do that. It's awful." I was baffled. I almost wanted to say: "So. . . You don't want my money?? Okay."
I went on to another comic store. They just rang me up, said I'd get 20% off if I started a pull list, and I've been a customer for almost 20 years now.
Goes the same for any store. I recently went to a record store less than a mile from me. It's seriously walking distance. But the clerk always judges things he hasn't heard of. I bought one Built to Spill record, but the amount of insults the clerk gave me for not picking up whatever 70's prog was enough for me to never shop there again. I will literally drive 10-15 miles to other record stores now. I did crack once this year where I called the local record store to check for the release, and he (no joke) answered with: "Yeah? What do you want?" in the rudest tone.
And I think people just go into businesses thinking it's easy. Like, owning a business is just a money printer. And it's usually these kind of people who have no tact or sense of being cordial. They got a business degree with no idea that customer service is one of those soft skills they're going to need.
Was the board meeting in [Angel], during which Harmony kills a vampire on the table, a more accurate depiction?
Closer.
Don’t get into a measuring contest with Perchmandingo.
I think Zack has realized that the anger-culture fan base surrounding a lot of TH-cam reviewers is something that he helped cultivate for years… and I don’t think he likes that.
I generally trust Zack’s reviews of action based comics (as they are often in line with my own opinions). I generally don’t share his tastes for movies/tv stuff and almost never agree with his takes on humor in entertainment, so I don’t really watch many of his reviews anymore unless it is for an action-based, non-humorous comic book.
It’s kind of like Alan Moore blaming himself for the trend of grim and gritty comics following Watchmen. I don’t agree with many of his opinions, but I can understand the point he started from.
So his solution to that is to produce more anger culture?
Uh, yeah the point stands about how anti-w0ke reviewers fall into groupthink, but the specific criticisms made by "Zack" don't hold water. He ironically has very poor "media literacy" himself, so he's often misunderstanding the movies and then flipping out when critics don't see them the same way he does. His crusade (it's not too strong a word) against Critical Drinker is full-on schiz0. He calls out Drinker for saying that the female lead of the Crow remake was an unappealing lover because she was an addict in a s3x cult; and Zack's correction is that the character was "only" an addict in a s3x cult because she was being controlled by a criminal underworld figure. He thinks that caveat somehow makes the character appealing to a would-be lover, and that therefore Critical Drinker didn't see the movie. He's a fool. I'm not a Critical Drinker fan, btw. I don't care about him or watch his content. So, yes, again, there is definitely a groupthink that catches hold of reviewers, but "Zack" is pretty much the worst person possible to carry that message to the masses. He's legitimately mentally ill and irrational. And as of January 1st, 2025, he now has three late books.
I also think the current Iron Man run is terrible. The board meeting scenes actually made me angry with how stupid they are.
I dropped some subs for the exact reason you’re describing Perch
Thanks for bringing it up
A side question: over the years Stark's business has been taken multiple times. (SHIELD, Midas, Stane, Morgan Stark, Arno Stark, Orchis) Perch, do you find any of these stories realistic enough/acceptable? I think, as readers, our standards have gone way up.
I mostly liked Squid Game 2 but the first 2 episodes were draggy and the whole subplot with the cop and the mercs on the boat was just a distraction.
I just realized, the bias is on a 45° angle to the selvage! (Bad sewing joke, sorry)
100% agree on Iron Man
Retailers, once they order a comic magazine and receive it - regardless of how many copies and titles - his/her business responsibility is to sell and sell all the copies, whether they like the comic magazine or not. For the reasons that you have stated, people have different opinions and if I like a comic doesn't mean you or anyone else will like it. Let them decide but a Retailer's job is to SELL and sell every copy ordered! Likewise, a comics publisher's is to produce comic magazines that will have a general audience appeal, hopefully and to stay away from political agendas. Reason I don't buy any comics, NEW comics, from the mainstream comics publishers. They have changed the characters so much from when I read them as a kid and as an adult. AGL
I'll be honest, when I watched Squid Game s2, there were parts I didn't like. The part with a certain character, almost had me pre-emptively shut off the program. Surprisingly enough, I found that it wasn't a huge issue, and the character grew on me. Netflix has just conditioned me to assume the worst when it comes to diversity/identity and bad stories.
Another fantastic video Perch, very conciscly put about watching/reading something before forming an opinion. I think im one of the few people who thought High Gaurdian Spice was pretty good. Not the greatest thing ever, but I really enjoyed it. I went in with an open mind and discovered its not a woke show whatsoever and was more focused on telling a story. Not sure what everyone else saw. And it actually mimicked a certain anime aesthetic quite well, 2000s magical girl shows like Doremei.
I reviewed Justice League Unlimited on my channel. I didn't like Mark Waid saying his work would get worse after the election. However, I was able to separate that and say that the first issue was still good to me. People need to separate the BS from the work itself. That goes both ways.
When ringing customers up in a shop I would avoid pooping on what they bought and say I didnt read it. BUT if its something someone else had mentioned in a positive way I'd mention I heard good things from others.
That only works when all parties agree to it. Right now you're willing to cut people a break who would absolutely destroy you on a whim.
You will only ever get as much mercy as you give. Don't get it twisted, history matters and these people are unrepentant. They never stopped. It's like leaving a bad ex. My attitude is informed by a long history of provable experiences, so excuse my curt attitude but it is warranted.
@joncross9264 not sure what you are referencing when saying "willing to cut people a break". If a comic is well written and good, then it's well written and good.
To lie and crap on ot because I don't like how he said his work could go downhill after the election is problematic IMO as it would be disingenuous.
A tribal one way or the other doesn't help anything.
To be fair, Waid probably wrote that book six months ago, or more. That said, it's certainly commendable to separate the art from the artist. I wouldn't want to buy anything else new that Neil Gaiman was producing, for example, but I have no trouble rereading his older stuff and enjoying it just fine. There are different levels to consumption and support. I'm quite militantly against supporting the Big Two... but if it's a recent back issue that a shop has put out on deep discount, I have no problem dropping a dollar to check out a random Mard Waid comic, just to see what he's up to now. And half the time it's decent.
@SuperFaxx If it's on the shelf at your LCS, not buying a comic will only hurt the LCS at that point. DC/Marvel already got the money for it. 😜
Now, going back to JLU, if it takes a nosedive in quality, I'm out.
One rule for criticism should be a.) tell me whether you think it’s good and b.) if you mention any politics, you fail. I think this test would be difficult for more people you think.
That's hard when the contents of the film want to be political.
Perch, hope all is well. I have to agree. Read the first 3 issues of the new Iron Man run, I have to agree with you., This series is lack luster and heading for a reboot.
So what are your opinions on people who comment before they watch the video?
After 15 years of creators trashing the paying customers--treating them unfairly, THEY HAVE MADE THIS BED FOR THEMSELVES. If there is any remaining hostility out there from fandom, it's the creation of the industry itself. The creators tried to profit (clout) by demonizing the fans, so now let the fans profit by demonizing their comics. To hell with them. Giving a book a 'fair chance' should only be done on a creator-by-creator basis. Jeremy Adams? Give him a chance. Mark Waid? Kelly Sue Deconnick? BURY THEIR ASSES in bad reviews. That's what they deserve. I loved this hobby up till about 2010. Now it's dog crap, imo. And it's all their fault.
That’s not what this video was about.
@@spaceknight793 When we become bitter and petty as them we become them, nfw. Anyway I buy 98% preowned so the resellers get most of my coin. Every Mark Waid book is preowned even if I give a good review.
@@ComicsPerch Ironic considering what the video was about
True
I recently bought a nice looking mid-grade copy of Hero for Hire 1! Granted, that’s not what this video was about…
Zack interview when?
hopefully never
Yea they should talk about Furiosa.
Only if Perch doesn't shadowban people like Richard does.
Zack's too scared and insular to ever take questions. He's super sensitive. He wouldn't even go on big channels that were friendly to him. Which, honestly, if he's shy or whatever, then I don't blame him. But then he created all these rationalizations about how livestreams were bad and livestream "culture" was bad. I'm not a huge fan of livestreams, but the cope was immense with him on that point.
If you don't buy the book, your review doesn't matter
@@UelCarter I used to do reviews off of free publisher copies. Nyul nyuk.
In fairness, I read everything I reviewed.
Yes have a monetary investment does add more credence than a freebie/gift or people sailing the high seas. I'd rather read a review from a verified purchase.
If you don't buy a Monet, your opinion does not matter. Oh wait, that's not how culture works...
I don’t support piracy… ever. But I really don’t care if someone paid or not when reviewing a show/movie as long as they are upfront about it.
I decide on 95% of what I will see/read before I ever see a review. When I watch a review, the reviewer is basically applying to a job to me… I watch their reviews, then watch the shows, and if I don’t agree with the reviews about 90% of the time, then I stop watching the reviews from that person.
Very ignorant comment. So students can't write book reports on anything that they take out of a library?
Great video. This has been bothering me for a while. I won't name names but there's a popular youtube channel that, for example, the youtuber hates Tom King, which is fine but he's constantly criticizing things that the characters did which never happened in the book. It's obvious that he just flipped through it or something and just came up with his own assumptions without reading it.
Same with the krakoan era, he would talk about the Sinister storyline in immortal x-men when it was obvious he hadnt been reading and keeping up with the story. And then all the comments will be criticizing the book and thanking him for pointing those things out. It's so inauthentic it drives me mad.
Is it factually wrong, or is it a matter of interpretation? A lot of people including yourself give very nebulous comments without proof.
I've not seen any of Rob's or Benny's videos contradict what others have said. In other cases it is essentially a read along where we can see the whole of the comic. I've seen opinions differ, leading to somewhat different takes, but neither would be considered dishonest.
@@joncross9264 I'm not sure who Rob or Benny are so I can't comment on that, but the youtuber I was thinking about was factually wrong.
An example was that when reviewing Human Target, he stated that King had given Martian Manhunter a sexual fetish for flames. This was never in the comic, and even if it was, the entire issue was a psychic battle with Manhunter against Human Targets psychic defenses, so everything in the comic was manipulation and illusion anyways.
Long after the series ended, he also said that one of the reasons that the series was bad was because Ice killed Guy Gardner. If he had actually read the series he would know that Gardner and Ice faked that scene.
He's also made exaggerated or false claims about what happens in Kings Wonder Woman and Batman. I can definitely understand why people don't like King, but you still need to be honest otherwise you lose your credibility.
Good ole Perch with the 💩 sandwich technique. Look how awful those TH-camrs are... that Iron Man book sucks.... those TH-camrs are really terrible people.
Gulp! I admit I've been liking this current Iron Man run. The introduction of magic and some surprise character appearances have been enjoyable to me. Will have to read it again to see if my opinion changes or if I just like lame dialogue.😄 I do not have corporate board experience. I wonder if our huge difference might be what specific knowledge you bring to the table. I remember a point during Batman Failsafe when Batman makes it from the moon/JLA satellite to the fortress of solitude on earth without aid of a ship, neither freezing, suffocating or burning up. Though impossible, I was so engrossed in the story and this over-the -top Batman defies all odds event that I threw disbelief out the window and enjoyed this epic Batman comic book moment. I later found that it was too much of a leap for too many out there, and probably all of the astrophysicists. I totally understand their point of view, but still think it was an awesome Batman story! With differences in taste and opinion, though, you are smart as a retailer to live by Mr. Krabs' motto: The Money is always right!
Kudoes to Perch for admitting there is this problem with pop-culture TH-camrs... and that he is part of the problem.