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

Recommended Videos

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Metalix Knightmare said:
Again, even TMZ would provide pictures.
Right. And even TMZ is beholden to provide such a thing.

I'm not.

You do understand that even if I was still a reporter, I'm not functioning in a journalistic role here, right? Comparisons between compliance standards, "even" for TMZ, and that of a private person are not even close. Hopefully that clears things up on your end, because as far as I'm concerned the topic is closed.
 

DudeistBelieve

TellEmSteveDave.com
Sep 9, 2010
4,771
1
0
Vigormortis said:
Fappy said:
Patton Oswalt's twitter comments remind me why I never use the site. Christ almighty, people are sick.
Twitter is the very essence of antagonism, arrogance, self-importance, and cynicism, essentially some of the worst aspects of humanity, condensed down into tiny, 140-character quotes.

No.

I'm going to stand up for Twitter. I haven't had a lot of real life friends in the past year, but I've met a good chunk of change of really nice cool people on Twitter.

Not only that, I just picked up a novel by my favorite author Brian Keene, and it's nothing short of awesome that I got to tell the man himself how much I dug his work and actually get acknowledgement that he saw my praise and appreciated it.

Twitter is one of the best damn social media tools ever made, but it's all in how you use it.
 

NiPah

New member
May 8, 2009
1,084
0
0
Something Amyss said:
Metalix Knightmare said:
Again, even TMZ would provide pictures.
Right. And even TMZ is beholden to provide such a thing.

I'm not.

You do understand that even if I was still a reporter, I'm not functioning in a journalistic role here, right? Comparisons between compliance standards, "even" for TMZ, and that of a private person are not even close. Hopefully that clears things up on your end, because as far as I'm concerned the topic is closed.
Still, having evidence to back up your claims helps, otherwise you're just making baseless claims easily ignored as BS. I don't think anyone here expects you to have ironclad evidence, but even if have some way to back up my points, otherwise I wouldn't state them.
 

DudeistBelieve

TellEmSteveDave.com
Sep 9, 2010
4,771
1
0
NiPah said:
Something Amyss said:
Metalix Knightmare said:
Again, even TMZ would provide pictures.
Right. And even TMZ is beholden to provide such a thing.

I'm not.

You do understand that even if I was still a reporter, I'm not functioning in a journalistic role here, right? Comparisons between compliance standards, "even" for TMZ, and that of a private person are not even close. Hopefully that clears things up on your end, because as far as I'm concerned the topic is closed.
Still, having evidence to back up your claims helps, otherwise you're just making baseless claims easily ignored as BS. I don't think anyone here expects you to have ironclad evidence, but even if have some way to back up my points, otherwise I wouldn't state them.
This isnt directed at you, but just in general, but I get really sick and annoyed at people that demand citations on the internet on messageboards.

Were casually shooting the breeze here, why the hell turn it into homework? Are we discussing to be right or discussing for recreation? And it's not like you show your opposition X link they'll actually listen. They'll probably just double down.
 

RaikuFA

New member
Jun 12, 2009
4,370
0
0
DudeistBelieve said:
Vigormortis said:
Fappy said:
Patton Oswalt's twitter comments remind me why I never use the site. Christ almighty, people are sick.
Twitter is the very essence of antagonism, arrogance, self-importance, and cynicism, essentially some of the worst aspects of humanity, condensed down into tiny, 140-character quotes.

No.

I'm going to stand up for Twitter. I haven't had a lot of real life friends in the past year, but I've met a good chunk of change of really nice cool people on Twitter.

Not only that, I just picked up a novel by my favorite author Brian Keene, and it's nothing short of awesome that I got to tell the man himself how much I dug his work and actually get acknowledgement that he saw my praise and appreciated it.

Twitter is one of the best damn social media tools ever made, but it's all in how you use it.
Eh. Sometimes its fun to use but its boring to me.
 

Areloch

It's that one guy
Dec 10, 2012
623
0
0
DudeistBelieve said:
NiPah said:
Something Amyss said:
Metalix Knightmare said:
Again, even TMZ would provide pictures.
Right. And even TMZ is beholden to provide such a thing.

I'm not.

You do understand that even if I was still a reporter, I'm not functioning in a journalistic role here, right? Comparisons between compliance standards, "even" for TMZ, and that of a private person are not even close. Hopefully that clears things up on your end, because as far as I'm concerned the topic is closed.
Still, having evidence to back up your claims helps, otherwise you're just making baseless claims easily ignored as BS. I don't think anyone here expects you to have ironclad evidence, but even if have some way to back up my points, otherwise I wouldn't state them.
This isnt directed at you, but just in general, but I get really sick and annoyed at people that demand citations on the internet on messageboards.

Were casually shooting the breeze here, why the hell turn it into homework? Are we discussing to be right or discussing for recreation? And it's not like you show your opposition X link they'll actually listen. They'll probably just double down.
Of course, at the same time if I was having a conversation with a friend in real life and they went "I don't like X because he just throws horrible tantrums in real life in the past and will continue to do so in the future", I'd probably go "Wait, he did? when?" there too.

Heck, my friends in real life would at least try and detail the situation rather than tuck-and-rolling out of the conversation entirely.

It's further compounded with the fact that this thread is covering the subject of James getting some fun-fun character assassination crap thrown at him and then there's yet another person commenting in here about how he's awful. So examples as proof is kinda relevant to the subject at hand.
 

DudeistBelieve

TellEmSteveDave.com
Sep 9, 2010
4,771
1
0
Areloch said:
DudeistBelieve said:
NiPah said:
Something Amyss said:
Metalix Knightmare said:
Again, even TMZ would provide pictures.
Right. And even TMZ is beholden to provide such a thing.

I'm not.

You do understand that even if I was still a reporter, I'm not functioning in a journalistic role here, right? Comparisons between compliance standards, "even" for TMZ, and that of a private person are not even close. Hopefully that clears things up on your end, because as far as I'm concerned the topic is closed.
Still, having evidence to back up your claims helps, otherwise you're just making baseless claims easily ignored as BS. I don't think anyone here expects you to have ironclad evidence, but even if have some way to back up my points, otherwise I wouldn't state them.
This isnt directed at you, but just in general, but I get really sick and annoyed at people that demand citations on the internet on messageboards.

Were casually shooting the breeze here, why the hell turn it into homework? Are we discussing to be right or discussing for recreation? And it's not like you show your opposition X link they'll actually listen. They'll probably just double down.
Of course, at the same time if I was having a conversation with a friend in real life and they went "I don't like X because he just throws horrible tantrums in real life in the past and will continue to do so in the future", I'd probably go "Wait, he did? when?" there too.

Heck, my friends in real life would at least try and detail the situation rather than tuck-and-rolling out of the conversation entirely.

It's further compounded with the fact that this thread is covering the subject of James getting some fun-fun character assassination crap thrown at him and then there's yet another person commenting in here about how he's awful. So examples as proof is kinda relevant to the subject at hand.
Just let 'em rant? Meh. I'm just bitching for bitching sake so that's probably not a good arguement. I've just been lurking a lot on that fabled reddit, and the attitude of some people demanding citations annoys me. It's like half the reason I don't bother replies.

Cause theres like a huge world of difference between being like "Holy shit, really? Drop some science on me ************" and that really snarky "I'm pretty sure your wrong, so I'm going to demand facts that I bet you can't produce because your wrong!".

Someone earlier was like "Ohhhh AVGN is no stranger to drama" but google his name, the worst thing I saw I was that he was kinda a dick to the Irate Gamer from IG's POV.
 

Areloch

It's that one guy
Dec 10, 2012
623
0
0
DudeistBelieve said:
Areloch said:
DudeistBelieve said:
NiPah said:
Something Amyss said:
Metalix Knightmare said:
Again, even TMZ would provide pictures.
Right. And even TMZ is beholden to provide such a thing.

I'm not.

You do understand that even if I was still a reporter, I'm not functioning in a journalistic role here, right? Comparisons between compliance standards, "even" for TMZ, and that of a private person are not even close. Hopefully that clears things up on your end, because as far as I'm concerned the topic is closed.
Still, having evidence to back up your claims helps, otherwise you're just making baseless claims easily ignored as BS. I don't think anyone here expects you to have ironclad evidence, but even if have some way to back up my points, otherwise I wouldn't state them.
This isnt directed at you, but just in general, but I get really sick and annoyed at people that demand citations on the internet on messageboards.

Were casually shooting the breeze here, why the hell turn it into homework? Are we discussing to be right or discussing for recreation? And it's not like you show your opposition X link they'll actually listen. They'll probably just double down.
Of course, at the same time if I was having a conversation with a friend in real life and they went "I don't like X because he just throws horrible tantrums in real life in the past and will continue to do so in the future", I'd probably go "Wait, he did? when?" there too.

Heck, my friends in real life would at least try and detail the situation rather than tuck-and-rolling out of the conversation entirely.

It's further compounded with the fact that this thread is covering the subject of James getting some fun-fun character assassination crap thrown at him and then there's yet another person commenting in here about how he's awful. So examples as proof is kinda relevant to the subject at hand.
I've just been lurking a lot on that fabled reddit, and the attitude of some people demanding citations annoys me. It's like half the reason I don't bother replies.

Cause theres like a huge world of difference between being like "Holy shit, really? Drop some science on me ************" and that really snarky "I'm pretty sure your wrong, so I'm going to demand facts that I bet you can't produce because your wrong!".
Yeah, I getcha. Like said, it feels a bit more actually relevant to the topic than the usual "Hurr I BET you have evidence, nurr" kinda thing that usually crops up, yeah.

Especially because, as you and others have noted, there really isn't all that much drama that comes from/around James outside his characters themselves, which is why this backlash he's gotten has been so crazy. He's always seemed like a pretty chill dude when not playing a part.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Naldan said:
Just ask yourself: Do critics have to pay for the ticket? Does Rolfe have to pay?
Whether you have to pay or not is not relevant to whether you are a critic or not. Being a critic doesn't automatically get you into movies.
 

TakerFoxx

Elite Member
Jan 27, 2011
1,125
0
41
...this is it? Jesus, after the Toboscus thing I thought it was going to be something similar.
 

NiPah

New member
May 8, 2009
1,084
0
0
DudeistBelieve said:
NiPah said:
Something Amyss said:
Metalix Knightmare said:
Again, even TMZ would provide pictures.
Right. And even TMZ is beholden to provide such a thing.

I'm not.

You do understand that even if I was still a reporter, I'm not functioning in a journalistic role here, right? Comparisons between compliance standards, "even" for TMZ, and that of a private person are not even close. Hopefully that clears things up on your end, because as far as I'm concerned the topic is closed.
Still, having evidence to back up your claims helps, otherwise you're just making baseless claims easily ignored as BS. I don't think anyone here expects you to have ironclad evidence, but even if have some way to back up my points, otherwise I wouldn't state them.
This isnt directed at you, but just in general, but I get really sick and annoyed at people that demand citations on the internet on messageboards.

Were casually shooting the breeze here, why the hell turn it into homework? Are we discussing to be right or discussing for recreation? And it's not like you show your opposition X link they'll actually listen. They'll probably just double down.
Throwing up some evidence to back up your claims can be quite helpful, otherwise stick to more subjective opinions that don't require as much backing.

If you're going to make a claim don't get bent out of shape when someone asks you to back it up, shit or get off the pot, or course it doesn't have to be proper citations but even referencing to a specific instance makes a world of difference.

I can understand getting pissed at people asking for full citations just to waste your time, but reading Amyss' posts and they threw up their hands at just the request of a previous instance of throwing a tantrum, I'm pretty sure they worked harder trying to back up their reasoning for being in the right then just recounting an example of their original claim, certainly would have been more helpful.
 

Naldan

You Are Interested. Certainly.
Feb 25, 2015
488
0
0
Something Amyss said:
Naldan said:
Just ask yourself: Do critics have to pay for the ticket? Does Rolfe have to pay?
Whether you have to pay or not is not relevant to whether you are a critic or not. Being a critic doesn't automatically get you into movies.
Yes. But it helps to ask if James Rolfe is a movie critic or not who should give this movie a fair shake despite the deal-breakers he knows of and that are definitely in the movie.

He has reviewed movies, that's why I think it's at least worth asking. But Pat the NES Punk reviewed movies, too. Everybody and their mother does it nowadays. On a similar fashion. Aside from Cinemassacre marathons and theme-months, but those are always of way old movies.

He isn't a critic. He doesn't get paid for this. He at least doesn't do this near as often as someone could call frequently. All he does is chatting with Mike Mattey about what they liked and what they didn't. And this, too, just every other month or even less.

If he was a critic and he wouldn't give it a fair shake (because now, he doesn't), then I would understand this debate. But like this, it would be the same as if for example Dodger or Vinesauce would say they wouldn't see the movie and it is spawning such a debate and articles on website. It's ridiculous.
 

Amir Kondori

New member
Apr 11, 2013
932
0
0
Ugh, the small online "backlash" against it was so pathetic. Coming from people who clearly didn't know James Rolfe or his work and likely didn't even watch the video. None of his comments had anything to do with the female cast. He even gave his preferred method for introducing a new cast like this, going the Star Wars route and having the surviving old cast members kind of do a hand off to the new members.

People just like to feel self righteous and pretend they are better than people. It is easy to do online where there are no consequences to your actions. The reason this got any traction at all was because Patton Oswalt and Dane Cook tweeted about it.

James is a good person and does good work and I support him and that video in particular 100%.
 

axlryder

victim of VR
Jul 29, 2011
1,862
0
0
Oswalt was a dick, the "non-news" that this is has generated quite a bit of controversy and criticism from both twitter and many sites across the internet, and Rolfe has basically said nothing offensive in this video.

Key:
MF=radical feminist/marketing department/grieving Patton Oswalt/etc.
F=feminist
M=misogynist
N=not related to gender politics/critical of GB reboot


I guess sometimes group F will refuse to admit that group MF, whose agenda (sort of) aligns with group F's, can be horrible to people in group N because they hold opinions that happen to align with the opinion's of some people they find disagreeable in group M.

Oh, but of course anyone in group N is really in group M and just refuses to admit it. Or maybe we should just flail about group M's existence in an attempt to cover for group MF (for some reason). Perhaps vaguely criticize person in group N's character or try to implicitly justify how they deserved the attacks from group MF because their vocalization of distaste/disinterest are suspect (even though everyone pretty much agrees that it's non-news and deserves nary a second glance). Maybe we should just downplay the scope of the general criticism of those clearly in group N. etc. etc.

Whatever we do, however, we shouldn't at any point admit that there is a CLEAR political angle in the film's marketing that happens to have great synergy with liberal (read: all) media's tendency to overreact to things, potentially but not definitively highlighting an exploit that exists in literally every political movement.

I'll add the disclaimer of saying that I realize hundreds of youtube videos are made for misogynist types every week that say incredibly mean things about youtube feminists just trying to make relatively inoffensive videos about feminism. Shit isn't cool either.

Let's be honest here:

Misogynists don't like this reboot because the film features women front and center in place of what used to be men.

Diehards don't like it because it's poorly timed and looks like it shits all over the franchise.

People who are tired of shitty reboots don't like it, and I'd argue that their general dissatisfication with the excessive number of reboots was starting to reach a fever pitch (I know it was for me).

Regular people don't like this reboot because the trailer looks shit.

People who don't like cynical and lazy writing don't like this reboot for obvious reasons.

Trolls LOVE this reboot for other obvious reasons.

People who wouldn't have otherwise cared don't like it because they noticed the dirt kicked up by everyone else, came to see what the fuss was all about, saw the trailer and said "yeah, that looks shit".

There's also the momentum factor, people notice the massive amount of dislikes, suddenly start to look at the thing critically or would just like to contribute to history in the making, and hit the dislike bar.

Is some of this blowback from bad PR and comments made by the director. Probably. Is there an unfortunate concentration of MRA types homing in on this trailer because they're so ineffectual that this is the best they can do? Also probably. Is there potentially a subtle degree of misogyny behind a lot of those dislike fueled by the current political climate pushing them out of their comfort zone? Potentially.

Point is, I'd like to think people on this site from both ends of the political spectrum can acknowledge that this situation is more complicated than "society hates women" or "this trailer looks shit".

Sorry, this sort of just became rambling.
 

Johnny Novgorod

Bebop Man
Legacy
Feb 9, 2012
19,347
4,013
118
Guy makes a conciliatory message in which he calmly & politely explains why he won't see a movie. Everybody loses their minds.

 

Dizchu

...brutal
Sep 23, 2014
1,277
0
0
Something Amyss said:
Naldan said:
Just ask yourself: Do critics have to pay for the ticket? Does Rolfe have to pay?
Whether you have to pay or not is not relevant to whether you are a critic or not. Being a critic doesn't automatically get you into movies.
As I said before, there's a difference between a professional critic that reviews films as a career and an entertainer who happens to do reviews.

The former has to watch major releases because it is their job. James Rolfe has no such obligation and because people were likely asking him to trash Ghostbusters 2016 when it eventually comes out, he decided not to get involved in the hate train.

Why are people so upset about this? If Mark Kermode refused to see a film for these reasons you'd have every right to get upset, but James Rolfe is not a professional critic like Kermode, Ebert or even people like Jim Sterling.
 

Redd the Sock

New member
Apr 14, 2010
1,088
0
0
Dizchu said:
Something Amyss said:
Naldan said:
Just ask yourself: Do critics have to pay for the ticket? Does Rolfe have to pay?
Whether you have to pay or not is not relevant to whether you are a critic or not. Being a critic doesn't automatically get you into movies.
As I said before, there's a difference between a professional critic that reviews films as a career and an entertainer who happens to do reviews.

The former has to watch major releases because it is their job. James Rolfe has no such obligation and because people were likely asking him to trash Ghostbusters 2016 when it eventually comes out, he decided not to get involved in the hate train.

Why are people so upset about this? If Mark Kermode refused to see a film for these reasons you'd have every right to get upset, but James Rolfe is not a professional critic like Kermode, Ebert or even people like Jim Sterling.
Hell, look back in the archives. Moviebob made a few "not gonna review it" bits attached to reviews of something else. No one gave him grief for not wanting to cover American Reunion or Smurfs 2.
 

BadNewDingus

New member
Sep 3, 2014
141
0
0
The fact that people say James is sexist or whatever can just leave the planet right now. He never said anything remotely sexist. People just see a man in a basement talking about a movie with women as lead characters and automatically go to that assumption.

The remake all started with the whole, "All female Ghostbusters!" from every media. I mean, that was the second thing they advertised after announcing the movie. Now that is in everyone's head, no one can say anything bad about the film without looking like a sexist pig these days. Which is pathetic.

I know damn well I would hate a male version of Leslie Jones character. Just the constant yelling is annoying.
 

Dreiko_v1legacy

New member
Aug 28, 2008
4,696
0
0
Now I have to wonder, what if he did watch it and then took a nut filled shit on the cover box, as he has done with other things, what would the reaction had been then. I kinda wish he reverses his positiin, purely out of morbid curiosity.
 

Chris Mosher

New member
Nov 28, 2011
144
0
0
I have no issue with people and their opinions but i really dont get why these trailers get more hate then say the BvS trailers. Maybe i just have more connection to dc then Ghostbusters but i saw nothing in the GB trailer as Batman asking if Superman bleeds or the Doomsday reveal.
And as to why GB3 never got made, it did as a video game. The movie never happened from what i understand because in a big part because Murray didn't care and I think a GB3 where Murray was half adding it would be worse then a movie with 4 McCarthy's.