I Have to Talk About This... 

So extremely well said! I feel like Alex really summed up the whole thing very well with his comment about how there are tons of people with talent who can't get into the industry and are forced to bring these hack writers their coffee. That's a depressing truth. Too many people overreact and act like you are a monster for saying someone should be fired.. even if they are terrible at their position. I hope Stuckman sees feedback like this as constructive criticism and not just an attack.

Did you watch the video? He spends 16 minutes calling out Sony. Was your conclusion that he recommends Madam Web?

100% well said Joe. Until Chris's balls drop again, I'll stick to yours and the drinker's reviews.

@@PIayer_01 Yeah Sony's the only problem with the movie. The writer and director would've made cinema masterpiece if not for Sony, obviously.

The Stuckmann of the past is dead. All we’re left with now is a guy who wants to live in a bubble of non criticism and constant blaming of studio interference as the main reason these movies suck

He is afraid of critics calling out his own shortcomings in film making.

Unless you're a fraud like Chris Struckmann.

Exactly. Well said​@@Artemise7799-cg8pg

And there are more thoughtful or actual detailed ways to go about it that are even semi contructive beyond “worst movie ever” to every new movie or “shit” “trash” , etc.

@@Artemise7799-cg8pg He sounds like a s**tty film maker then and he knows it

Common now, that requires integrity. Don't expect a Hollyweird shill to have some.

You're so wrong. First of all, it's not about not giving negative reviews. It's about not reviewing movies you don't like. How can you not get that? Jesus christ, dude. So what you're telling me is this: If I tell you my top 10 fav movies list, it's meaningless unless I also tell you my worst 10 movie list. Why would that be? It makes absolutely ZERO sense. My top 10 list is a damn good list of movies. You don't need to know that I hate Beyond Skyline (2017) to appreciate that I love Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings Trilogy. What the fuck are you talking about?

@@NebolI don’t know if you’re just too obtuse to get the point or if your histrionic anger is blinding you, but: we all understand what he’s saying. Do YOU understand that if we already know he only gives positive reviews then we already know what his verdict is and there’s not a lot of point in listening to his review - other than potentially some self-gratification to hear another fan praise a movie we want to like? 💁🏻‍♂️ Calm down - and think.

@@Nebol Well yes you do if you're a reviewer you trust on to tell you what's good or bad ffs, so if he doesn't review something i can assume it's shit? so he can review every release every day for every film? if you review films it's not always about the good you have to review the bad but since Chris has become a "writer/director" he thinks he's above reviewing films on RU-vid and again that's fine just close your account as a reviewer because you're clearly not what it says on the tin

​@@Nebolwhere was that energy when AVGN didn't want watch Ghostbusters 2016?

And he never said it was. I’m fact, the video is criticism towards the practices of major studios that result in garbage like Madame Web. But keep crying about it not just being another “Madame Web bad” video.

​@@nickward230lol, you missed the bigger picture buddy

Yeah he's a joke

@@paundrabima5362 you clearly missed the bigger point. Stuckman made critiques in this video. He just decided he isn’t going to tell you what not to see anymore, but he would rather suggest what you should see. It’s silly one guy decides not be among the small army of people bashing this film and suddenly he is a hack?

@@majorlazor5058 He is not a hack, but if you are just going to be toxic positive you are really not a critic anymore. If he does not want to ever criticize bad movies because he is now in the biz, he should end this channel, because it is dishonest.

Chris bashed movies and directors in the past. That will never be forgotten!

Ya but even when you do that they bash viewers anyways. So fk them.

Chris has been neutered ever since he announced he was making a movie. It's sad watching him talk about movies since then because he's absolutely terrified of saying anything bad because he wants no criticism coming his way. So thin skinned.

You can't be criticizing movies or any work if you are working in the same field

If Chris has a conflict of interest then either give up being a film maker or give up RU-vid with a channel around movies.

Dude.....he is telling the truth. You're telling me Madame web wasn't studio controlled? Of course it was. It's obvious. What he isn't going to do is turn into one of those bate channels that only bash movies. Whether good or bad. It's a sign of actual maturity that he isn't tearing it apart. even at the end he says "speak with your wallet ' which is more than a clear indicator that if we want these types of movies to stop we got to stop giving studios the money to make them.

@@rogueguardian Directors, writers and actors play a huge part in the success of a movie. If he blames only the studio for a failure then he needs to credit them and only them for successes. It would be hypocritical to not do that. PS: He isn't going to do that. He is going to praise director, writers and actors when they do good. Guaranteed.

@@karaokehammick5215 Thanks for calling out his hypocrisy

Thanks for calling out his hypocrisy

Kudos

I rather live in an insightful and nuanced world than an overly negative know-it-all one.

@@jcp1984again There is nothing insightful about lying and shilling for bad writers and directors.

That's an overly sensitive thing for you to say...

@@nikhilnewse3318 What was the lie?

Because he's not criticising the movie but the studio and the overall industry's behaviour of which the movie is a mere symptom.

@@dekai7992 So he's avoiding criticizing every aspect. He'll criticize the studios but not the creatives, which comes off as hypocritical considering he views himself as a creative. He neglects to mention that in some cases, (particularly in the case of Madame Web) it's the writers and directors who arethea problem not solely the studio.

@@65firered You new to the channel? He made a video years ago saying he'd be moving away from the overly negative reviews.

@@LaMereACanicheIf regular criticism is overly negative to him, no wonder he can't review bad movies. But no that was why I unsubscribed, to begin with, he traded in his ability to honestly and openly critique movies for Hollywood points.

@@dekai7992 Sony hands those people the money and let them do whatever they want, they don't really care and they don't interfere, not alike Chris suggested in this video with his metal gymnastics, the people behind the sonyverse movies are actually REALLY bad at making movies, just horrible, and they should be roasted for very consistently delivering bad content.

You didn't watch the video

@zod4365 Half of these dumb mfs didn't. Lol, mad cuz a man giving a perspective.

​@@zod4365I did. He only blames Sony as the big bad guy. But the writers have a horrible track record. That's not Sony's fault. The director is incompetent. This is their first feature length film. It's amateurish as hell. Not Sony's fault. The acting sucked. Everyone is phoning it in. Not Sony's fault. I can go on and on.

@@omarsabir1210Didn’t Sony approve it?

How is he trying to work in Hollywood when he's openly calling out the studios that would potencially be his bosses?

stoopid, it's not even the same comparison of course you can send it back, you can choose to rant about it on the internet or not

That’s a good analogy

No, you just shouldn`t scream "Did your cook try to kill me?! Is he even a cook?! You should fire him and never let him cook in a restaurant again!" Mistakes get made.

@@christopherm.1258 Yes. Everyone makes mistakes. Thats what critics are for. To point out the mistakes, and give suggestions about how to do better next time. You can’t just give excuses. Which is literally what Chris did this whole video. He just gave excuses for everything.

@@BudJr Yes, I agree with you about critics being a help for storytellers to get better, but I I disagree with Chris just giving excuses for bad storytelling. He makes clear in the beginning off the video, that you can watch other videos for criticism of the movie, because he doesn`t talk about film criticism. He talks about movie studios beeing apathetic to writers, witch leads to movies like Madam Web. Sony is realy an ideal example for this problem. We know for YEARS that Sony doesn`t allow creativity in there movies. You can tell, because of how similar all there movies look and feel. He never talks about "criticizing is rude towards writers". He says, "studios interfere to much in the filmmaking process." Look at Sony, Disney, Marvel, Lucasfilm,...

OH GOD I remember that! How on almost EVERY video he "grew up" with something and how it was "constantly on repeat" on his house. This guy is such a fraud... he's a former Jehova's Witness who as a JW spent much of his time going door to door about it but he also apparently had enough time to grow up with every TV and film franchise around at the time. I am really starting to doubt this guy, he seems really shady!

Chris grew up being a film maker.

Tell that to Zods snapped neck

Please leave hater nobody likes you​@@ToxicTurquoise454

​@user-jw1of4it6j No he stopped being a reviewer and became a bootlicker

He's criticizing Sony that's alot better then going after one movie he Hates the movie but he Hates Sony more for making it I think that's pretty Badass to go Sony like this

@@rustyshackleford6035I swear this is the only reasonable and sane comment I’ve found so far

By you and many others, not buying a ticket to see it

@@rustyshackleford6035 How is it badass when everyone has been complaining about sony for years?

Tbf this movie isn't just badly written

He’s grifting on the back of his prior work.

We’re making low effort short form videos on the internet that can be most generously described as “cinema journalism”!

this is not a madame web review, are you purposely dense? Everyone seems purposely dense in this comment section. There are a billion videos that are criticizing this movie already, there are a quintillion memes that even homeless bums who don't have a smartphone know about already, who will benefit if Chris just regurgitates what everyone is already saying? He said way more in this video than Jeremy Jahns has ever said in his entire pathetic youtube career with his cringe tequila glass and a bath-robe saying "uhh this scene happened and it was bad, but this scene happened and that was cool, but then that scene happened and that was uhhh... bad, please liek and subscribe" I think it's way more productive and interesting that he adresses the whole sony/hollywood conveyer belt garbage instead of regurgitating what everyone on planet earth already knows. The abundance of bad reviews for these types of movies are exactly why these types of movies are still being made. Bad reception is still reception, the reason this movie exists is solely because people kept talking about Morbius, if everyone had just kept their mouths shut, madame web wouldn't exist.

@@user-ly2ll5od1r finally some semblance of sense down here. the way entire "communities" are trying to nudge him back in a direction he's already done to death and no longer feels like doing is insane. it's literally cancel culture.

My apologies I thought this was a review channel not a blow Hollywood channel

Underrated comment here

He's worth 3 million and needed his viewers to fund it... Shouldn't you be willing to put skin in the game if this is your "dream career"?

I thought he was joking… Dude doesn’t come across as a creative person - then again, very very very few critics are.

a film that struggled to find a festival for its premiere and a distributor... I think he is scared to be critical because he knows he can't make anything but steaming shit himself

lol yea. Big "AS A BISEXUAL WOMAN OF COLOR..." energy

Not really. Jaws 4 had every advantage an 80s summer movie could have. An Oscar nominated actor, an experienced director who’d made at least one classic (the original Taking of Pelham 123), and the lead actress was the studio president’s wife, meaning a comparably bigger budget than most franchise films. For 1987 context, Jaws 4 had a bigger budget than Lethal Weapon, Dream Warriors, and Jason Lives combined. People bag on it because it’s phenomenally sloppy filmmaking by people that know how to do better, but you can tell don’t care and were in it for 2 months in the Bahamas on Universal’s dime.

@@bobcobb3654 Michael Caine built a terrific house from it too

​@@bobcobb3654"Why are you bashing filmmakers? You don't know how hard it was to make Jaws 4 or whatever, the studio interference probably ruined the creatives vision" - Cowardly Chris Stuckman

@@josephkerrigan733 It was clearly the evil executives hungry for money that made the movie bad. There was no fault from the hecking wholesome writers.

@@josephkerrigan733 cope clown

Say that the movie made you call betterhelp.

I mean i have deep respect for Chris taking this side. It's super easy to trash and make fun of this stuff. Nor should I or anybody else resent you on doing so. You spent the money and the time to see it But i respect Chris for looking at the bigger picture and understanding that this was a good example of the studio not giving a shit and screwing over the filmmakers, actors, and others behind this film

Chris fell off as a movie reviewer, he does the most barebones reviews now and he doesn’t even point out negatives… when Penguin0, someone who isn’t a movie reviewer, makes much better and more professional movies review than Chris, you know he’s fell off.

@@skippythealien9627well he’s doing it mainly because he made a movie so he doesn’t want to be too harsh on anything, its a bit cowardice imo and i don’t think you can do both things at the same time

@@CriticalTairiquefor real. Just because you’re a filmmaker doesn’t mean there aren’t terrible films that deserve to be criticized

You trying to kill us??

See here's the thing. He's not a film maker. He's not brought out an actual film with a budget over 100k.

Or if you’re trying to quit drinking; take a shot every time you’ve met a person that knows who he is or has ever heard of or seen his “film.”

@@user-ez9bw4im4i That's both condescending and inaccurate. Congratulations.

I am writing this comment as I draw my last breath from playing this drinking game

Lmao

He’s scared someone is going to bash his ‘film’ (read pet project) when (if) it comes out.

so true. Ive only heard minor rumblings and whispers from people that somehow magically immediately disappear that sometimes studios interfere with movies in destructive ways. Somehow I think you find it a lot easier to believe this when it comes to movies with certain kinds of directors

It’s funny because he once did a Fant4stic review it was hilarious and he was all ranty about it, obviously now he has to be more cautious with what he says since he’s in the business. I don’t mind it though he took a more passive aggressive approach which is more like trolling and that’s great too

Chris grew up with Madame Web 🕸️

@@Nicholas_Chen_a few years ago, once he officially became a filmmaker himself, he announced that he’s no longer going to bash movies or grade them.

It's the first time I've ever seen him say anything bad about anything

It really sucks that he refuses to say anything negative about a movie anymore. BUT this is his unnecessarily polite way of saying Madame Web sucks

At least they're doing right by the animated Spiderverse version (the best one imo).

Chris grew up with Madame Web 🕸️

​@@colbystearns5066 Credit Lord and Miller for that!

I didn't know that's who wrote it 😂

Maybe they should stop working with Avi Arad

That fear your talking about comes from his JW past.

Scared money don’t make money tho lol he needs to know that

Never heard about it.

No, he thinks it’s just a better use his time to discuss how the movie industry contribute to the suck. I mean there are hundreds if not thousand of rage bashing reviews of this move. A video trying to analyze how the crappy studio movie industry keeps creating these kind of movies is something worth more of everyone’s time

​@dominiccourtois4415 Except he spends most of the video talking about how he made his own movie instead of actually talking about how the studios interfere and ruin creators. Of course, none of this actually matters. The creators are terrible and this movie would've been bad regardless. There's tons of movies that were butchered by studio interference, but he decides to white knight for the one movie with terrible creators, unenthusiastic actors, and an awful scripts. What a brave hero lol

​@@dominiccourtois4415I agree with what you're saying but we all know the real reason why he's doing it. He doesn't say anything about any movie now that's bad the only reviews of movie if he likes it so he doesn't have to say anything negative but in the case of this when it was such a huge movie he had to review it so he chose to just give a non review which is even worse.

​@@dominiccourtois4415Video literally starts saying ,"I don't know how hard it is to make a movie under studio system" and you are saying you liked it coz he is trying to discuss or analyze how the studio contributes on making worst movies. Since u liked what he is talking about can u explain how studio contributes to making the movie worse.

Difference is Tarantino is a good filmmaker, while Chris is dogshit when it comes to making movies

@@irwinsolano6635 good filmakers aren't born. It's a skill you learn. Do you really think that Tarantino's very first m0vie ever that he shot in his backyward was box office hit worthy?

So unless you bash bad movies you can't be a director, is that what you're saying? Grow up.

@@Nebolare you actually braindead or something?

That's because he's a man and Chris isnt

It was a movie that was directed, had actors and actresses in it. Also there was a script. There were some scenes and it also had dialogue in it.

LOL

​@@TibiConstantinethered a script? They not improvised the whole thing while on mushrooms?

What were the good parts of Madam Web Chris? Chris - Well the movie had a budget and was shown in theaters. I loved the idea of the film existing . I appreciate it so much as a "filmmaker". How many films have you made so far? Chris - Just one. No one has seen it. But I appreciate so much. I am a film maker now.

You, and everyone else who upvoted your comment, haven't even watched the video you're criticizing. 🤦‍♂️ How pathetic.

Exactly. It would be like introducing a friend group with “here is big dick Derrick, tall Tom and Jim.” By the fact you said nothing about Jim just say is you don’t really care for him.

It's called the Anthony Fantano gambit. Also known as being a complete coward.

and theres a difference between bashing a movie and giving constructive criticism, u can give constructive criticism, without it seeming like ur hating on it. idk how chris doesnt see that either, i missed the early days of this channel.

@@spikesya Anthony Fantano reviews are the worst ever. I can't stand that guy.

​@@spikesya A coward? How? The quality of the movie becomes irrelevant beyond highlighting that this studio treats their creatives and their source material with no respect whatsoever. Directly criticising the studio responsible instead of the people who had practically no control over it is the opposite of cowardice.

I agree and to add my problem with Madame Web, it feels like much of production didnt work hard on it. It's not something like The Room/Niel Breen where they tried but lack of skill/talent makes it bad and wrong while still comically watchable. Madame Web is clearly a cash grab to keep the license, but, it feels like the once all the spiderman actors didn't want to appear everyone just did one take, one edit, one draft, ADRd some lines and called it a day. These are supposed to be professionals with the intent of solely to entertain the audience and nothing else. Even Morbius tried to be something despite Sonys intent and that's why it's laughed at, because it's awful, Leto is trying here, the writers tried to make something interesting and it isn't, the CGI artists tried to make their work watchable. Madame Web just didn't try in almost all levels and that's why it should be bashed. I definitely agree with you but Madame web, it felt like no one tried.

Look at the Island of Dr. Moreau

criticism is the only way people get better

@@Deagnetic Yes, I think Chris is wrong that everyone in the industry *always* works hard and therefore you shouldn't crap on a movie just because it turns out shitty. A movie like this deserves to be shit on unless you want them to keep putting out the same effortless cash grabs. He mentions that the writers of this and Morbius were probably dealing with tons of studio interference, but who knows if that's actually true? What if the writers also put in zero effort themselves? Then they would deserve criticism just as much as the studio. But even if it's true that the writers' hands were tied by the studio, then you should be criticizing the studio itself for making such a shitty movie (I realize that's essentially what he did here, but it's obviously not just the studio itself that caused this). Just because *some* of the people involved *might* have been making an effort doesn't mean that everyone was, and the only thing we get to see is the final product, which was bad - thus, the product itself deserves criticism. Hell, you don't even need to point fingers at the actual writers or actors; you can just say that the writing itself was poor, the dialogue was poor, the CG was poor, etc., and it doesn't matter whose fault it actually was. That way, you're just criticizing the movie itself and not just shitting on some random individuals who were involved with it - which is really how Chris should be doing it. To be fair to Chris, he's right that plenty of other reviewers will shit on the movie - but that shouldn't preclude him from just telling the truth about how he feels. It almost seems like he's "lying by omission" by trying to avoid certain topics of discussion. It's just kinda weird and seems a bit disingenuous - I know he genuinely doesn't want to bash anyone, but it still comes across as a bit disingenuous to the viewer. This sort of video is something you'd expect to see from one of the actors in the movie, not a third-party, unbiased reviewer. It's just weird to see Chris doing this. He's admitted that it's partly because he's afraid that if he shits on certain movies/people, he might not get to work with them in the future, so this is basically just being done out of fear. If that's the case, he should just stop being a movie reviewer, honestly. I stopped watching a little while ago because it just got kinda boring. This is the first video of his that I've seen in like 5 months, and now I remember why I decided to stop watching. It's unfortunate, because he was one of my faves for a long time. This video was essentially just trying to explain why he stopped being "negative," and the reason is basically "everyone's hands are tied by the studio, and therefore..." Therefore what? Therefore you're going to avoid criticizing movies altogether? I get that he's trying to be different, and I sometimes enjoy hearing people gush about great movies, but that gets pretty boring pretty quick. Also, I just want to hear about what you thought of the movie - it can be negative or positive, but just fuckin tell me about what you, Chris Stuckmann, thought of the movie. I think that's generally what most people who watch movie reviewers want to hear, for better or worse. That's what movie reviewing IS.

@@byronhotchkiss3254 You're right. But I think most people don't want constructive criticism, which is the one that does what you mentioned. People want critics who bash bad films, who are "brutally honest" and it's not because this is a way to snap them out to make better films, it's because a rant or an insulting type of review is more cathartic and entertaining for them.

Underrated comment, so we'll stated

That was the old Stuckmann. When he was honest and a real person. Nothing of the great movie critic is left. The real Chris Stuckmann is gone.

I think he just doesn't have the ego to review bad movies harshly while also working in the industry since he's a newbie in the film industry. Compare to someone like Tarantino or Scorsese who have criticized tons of movies (particularly Marvel of course) but still managed to survive working in the industry because they have made tons of great movies before so it doesn't matter whether they criticized other movies or not as studio still want to work with them because of their massive experience in which Chris doesn't have that yet. At least that's how I see it 🤷

He explained why at the beginning. If he starts ripping on movies, especially by new writers and directors, how will he look if his movie sucks when it comes out? People will have ammo to come at him and call him a hypocrite etc.

An honest, fair, negative review of a movie is not ammo to call him a hypocrite if his own movie is bad. @@unropednope4644

Chris is like a journalist who can't report on a story because they have a vested interest in squashing it. He sold his integrity for a chance to be a Hollywood director by being a suck up.

@@unropednope4644 That does not mean he made the right decision, that just means hes not a confident filmmaker. Not being a confident filmmaker does not excuse you from being a bad critic.

I never knew this tbh. I’m now not excited for venom 3 even though I loved venom 1 and I thought venom 2 was alright

No it’s not Avi, it’s the guy from Transformers who can’t understand what’s canon or a reboot.

@@MrTragedious986 I know that

All films you mentioned are garbage.... actually worse than garbage.... they're content.

Watch Venom 2 without the rose tinted glasses. The movie is horrible and a genuine embarrassment for Sony. People didn't speak up about how bad it was enough and still bought tickets, that's why Madam Webb and Morbius exist. Please call out bad movies even if you find something in it you can like​@@solarflame-he6cw

He’s only doing it because he thinks he has a chance in the film industry

​@@toxicchatman8975not just him , could be anyone

@@toxicchatman8975 Which is understandable but he should start a new channel then as it certainly clashes with his current pursuit.

High on his own supply. It's cringe.

"Im totally in "the biz" now guys so, heh, I GET IT" Give me a break

This is Chris' new "I grew up with..."

Let's be honest, his upcoming movie is gonna be shit anyway.

This is only something you'd understand as a fellow filmmaker...

LMAO

This guy had a series on this channel called hilaracity where all he did was point and laugh at bad movies

Well said!

The Transformers: Last Knight of youtube comments.

@@rfgator22 The Last Airbender movie of roast attempts.

I would say, no, not really. You'd have to literally give it all up, give up your audience, everyone who helped you get this far in the first place, your life, your friends, family, wife, etc. all so you could sign your soul away to Satan(and no, i don't mean Mr. Satan from DBZ, I meant the actual devil), himself, just to make a movie that may or may not work out in the end, Chris? Is all THAT worth it so you can say you've made a movie, and are attempting to make more? Not a bad thing, but the things you have to look back on to have gotten there in the first place, can you really be proud of being that person? The guy who sold his soul for an opportunity? I know he's not the first one to do so, but can you really be happy with yourself doing that Chris? Just asking, as a long time fan of this channel...I know, that Chris has said numerous times that he sees himself as a "filmmaker first, RU-vidr second", and sees doing videos as more of a "hobby", but I'm sure there was a better way than this, right? Right?

Common Modern Stuckmannized L

Maybe he was saying he has to talk about the thing he talked about.

Commenter misses the point entirely of what a video is about.

its getting ridiculous watching some of his vids. All so he can be treated nicely when his film eventually releases.

SHUT UP

Can y'all stop being incel virgins for five minutes

Wow.. it’s almost as if that was the whole point of the video if y’all actually paid attention.

He never said the movie isn't bad because it's difficult to make a film.

So this movie would've been excellent if it was under a different studio? Lol

Y'all still ain't over Ghostbusters 2016

If you want a critique of Madame Web, there are dozens of videos on RU-vid right now that does exactly that. I appreciate Chris's insight into the industry that keeps turning out such low effort movies like this one.

It's not how he wants to spend his time. No reason to be insecure about his outlook.

@@Lmkm456 “I really want to see him review Madam Web because…”

Yes but if youre trying to break into an industry, it’s best not to loudly and publicly criticize anyone, no matter how much grace and love is given, especially before you even make something worthwhile yourself… This is a smart move by Chris. Tina Fey said something similar on a podcast recently because of the Ayo Edebiri situation.

Coward behavior, dude is incapable of giving an honest opinion.

“Film maker” Notes from melody or whatever it was called was absolutely garbage.

I always found that Stuckmanized thing creepy. Like ew dude!

@@youfillmylifewithjello6661 it was ok. Auditorium 6 was decent so he’s definitely not a bad director

shut up

He is also a critic who is terrified of criticism. He did that rewrite for BvS and hated the response he got.

He grew up and that boy became a man, a bad man, the kind of man we were warned about as kids, the one who offers sweets and a fun ride with the no consequences if we keep secrets and look away at things we are not meant to see or talk about with anyone. You either die a hero, or your live long enough to see yourself become the creepy guy in blacked out van type of villain.

Actually that would be better than bashing a bad movie which he doesnt want..... So i'm not sure why he doesnt go that way to stay as a critic cause right now his channel confuses me.

@@timmyb7734 your slow

@@Vamatt99218 The thing is .... He's no longer a ((critic)) a critic would be critical of bad movies and even critique parts of good movies. He has basically said he only wants to be positive now. To me that just makes you a glorified paid shill movie reviewer. His reasoning is pathetic. Because he now knows the troubles and difficulties of making a movie. So he doesn't want say anything negative about other people's projects.🤦 Plenty of award winning directors have praised other people's work and have shat on other's work. Tarantino is one of them. Pretty sure he knows all the troubles and difficulties of making a movie.

Production studios and companies would like nothing more than everyone to adopt his mentality. Say nothing bad about our crappy products, only praise what you like. @WaltRight

That's a dumb comparison though, the Sonic movies still have a lot of issues. Fans were literally so shallow they thought the movies were good because they changed Sonic's design

⁠​⁠​⁠@@ChangedMyNameFinally69they’re not masterpieces, but they’re fun. You’re not going to make a movie based on a super fast Hedgehog incredibly engaging and intense. They changed the design when there was an outcry for a change, and it was for the better in the long run. For the studio, and people who like the films.

@@sharktoof1 I'm expecting halfway accurate movies that don't have awful, cringey humor. Detective Pikachu was everything that movie wasn't yet it's not the one that got all the attention. Yes, because Sonic fans are apparently really easy to please, fans in general will see Mario in a realistic field and want the guy that made it to be hired by Nintendo. So of course they think the bare minimum is "listening to fans" when even as a casual non-fan I can see glaring inaccuracies with the source material. Like Pachacamac is alive in the Knuckles show for fuck's sake, but y'all nutride them because they made Sonic less ugly. It's some faux-anticorporate bullshit.

Your comment deserves more like bro

@@JohnAdamFTEC No he doesn't

"Hey guys, that dish you are making is a dish I grew up with, so I have a lot of personal nostalgia with it. I too want to become a chef, and I don't want to burn any bridges, so instead of criticizing your dish I'm just gonna suck you off. Courtesy of NordVPN"

​@@schlubopbeebop886 that was perfect 😂

This comment deserves way more likes lol

I saw Kitchen Nightmares and I one episode Gordon kick out one of the owners of the restaurant. The people who was putting the money to make the food was the problem, his interference in the kitchen was ruining everything. So Ramsey call out the guy and kick out his ass. The same Chris is doing here. Call out the people who put the money and is ruining this movies by don't letting the people in production "cooking" with freedom.

@@schlubopbeebop886 LOL

He is a coward and a sellout

Might as well stick to other reviewers like Jahns at this point. Stuckman has lost the plot.

Sellout

@@ethanbank1 because if they want me to pay money to go see it, they better make a good movie. It doesn’t matter how difficult the process was, only the end product. I’m not paying to see a movie simply to pay their salary, I’m there to be entertained. If it’s not entertaining, I’m not paying. Pretty simple, dude

@@ethanbank1 I’d also add that it’s not the job of critics to make excuses for why a movie is bad. Nobody who sits through 90 minutes to 2 hours of idiotic drivel cares that that idiotic drivel was difficult to make. Criticism is ultimately a good thing

@@ethanbank1 Please reconstruct your argument in something more coherent. What are you even saying? You do know that "aware" and "informed" are synonyms right? You are arguing a hypothetical situation without any evidence if it even applies to the movie here. What is the evidence in what capacity the studio affected the outcome of the movie? No one said the people who made the bad movie suck, just that the movie is bad. The main purpose of a movie is to entertain. If it fails to do that why should one's judgement be more lenient because of how hard it was to make? No one is yelling "Say the thing! Say the thing" - "Movie bad!" -"Yaaaay!", but for a coherent and argumentative opinion.

​@@ethanbank1​The current discussion is on the topic whether it matters or not if it was hard to make a movie. And my categorical answer same as the guy you first replied to is no. There are so many arguments to that. Just scroll down and skim through this video comment section and you'll find plenty examples. Now about studio meddling that you brought in unrelated to the first topic. I do not deny it. I want evidence in this particular case that it it the sole reason for "movie bad". And on that I'm not so sure. I don't know how you can call a video of someone painting a hypothetical situation proof?! Again without evidence. My evidence on the other hand is just as you said: I googled, read articles, watched interviews form the red carpet premiere even. There are interviews of the director being proud of their work on the movie. There is an interview of the writers on the red carpet explaining how they wrote the script. Also being factually wrong about the source material. I watched their previous work. There are interviews with the cast talking about the process. And none of this matters if the movie was good or bad. So I wouldn't put the blame solely on the studio. It was a team effort to produce this drivel. As a wise man said "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." or incompetence may I add. "My bad observation" - yes I know there are a lot of simpletons getting a lot of joy and satisfaction from blank statements as "movie bad". And a lot of viewer hungry reviewers ready to give it to them. Again that's not the main topic but something that you brought in the conversation. That's why I disregarded it.

​@@ethanbank1 I would argue that you are the one struggling to stay on topic constantly steering the conversation and bringing points unrelated to it. The comment for the red carpet was to point out incompetence, mainly on the part of the writers. And the seeming pride of the end product - something I wouldn't expect from someone whose creative process was disrupted from the studio in a big way. If it was so egregious I would expect the creatives to express it in some way. Remember the whole Zac Snyder complaining and campaigning for the Justice League - Snyder cut? There are other instances of directors leaving projects like Scott Derrickson from Doctor Strange, Patty Jenkins form Thor, Edgar Wright from Ant-Man for example. Or maybe it was egregious meddling, but the creatives didn't care and rolled with it. Why? Maybe they didn't care to making a good movie. Or they are too incompetent to know what a good movie is? I would argue that everyone has plenty of stuff to care about daily. A lot of it is very serious stuff. And when someone goes to the cinema pays ticket and buys overpriced popcorn (or does does so for their entire family) usually expects to receive a good movie in return and escape their lives for a couple of hours. Not to receive the burden of caring about some arbitrary movie maker and how hard their job was. I produce stuff in my work every day. If it is bad and the client buying it complains they sure don't care how much sweat I poured into it or if my boss told me to make it that way. As it should be. Same goes for movie makers. All that matters in the end is the quality of the end product. And when I turn to a critic hoping to find out if it's worth my time and money I expect to find opinion backed by arguments. Not a story of studios bad - creatives good. "But reviewing these days goes beyond what you see and start blaming the people who made it.'" So people who made bad stuff should be exempt form criticism? Why wouldn't they carry responsibility for what they made? Because the studio forced them? - which I don't believe in this case. Just look at their great work until now: Morbius, Gods of Egypt, Dracula Untold. Plenty of dots to draw a line for the quality of their work. Or the studio meddled each and every time?

well, there hasn't been a good "so bad its good" movie in recent history. most movies are just bad studio dreck

@@FelixM86 he actively avoids being negative to movies since he got in the industry

I know he feels the way he does, but taking one terrible movie to task for its own major faults isn’t going to take away your “above-it-all, I’m-an-artist-too” understanding we have on the channel’s direction as is moving forward.

@savy4266 when you subject yourself to that many bad movies with a negative mindset going into a movie and coming out, it affects you in the long term

He is scared to death of hurting feelings now...Basically a movie simp.

He criticised Sony in whole video. Fix your ear

@@saifalam2030”Sony bad” isn’t as deep of a criticism as many people here, you included, seem to think it is.

@@saifalam2030and ignored the writer and director. Cause I’m sure if there was no studio meddling it those idiots would have made a masterpiece.

@@biscuitboi9478 You are here to watch someone bashing movie not critism. You are just hater. He point out where Sony put a Pepsi logo on final fight scene. No writer will write that a fight in front of Pepsi logo. In remi spiderman movie sony included venom, George lucas, Cappola, Scorcase said many time studio tried to ruin their flims. It is what Chris just said. You maybe were here to watch someone else getting insulted.

@@edwardrichtofen8530 The comment is sponsored by Sony. So you were the guy who laughed at Dc after they casted Heath ledger for joker and Robert Pattinson as batman. You just want people down because you boss rips you down on regular basis on your shifty job, your friend treat your like trash. Now you want see other people getting ready shitty treatment . Normie 🍵

what this whole comment section demonstrates is that there's a very narrow (and clearly, fucking *dogmatic*) definition of film criticism in this community. like, dude already made dozens of old fashioned movie roasts. if he doesn't wanna take that approach anymore, a) he shouldn't have to keep doing it to keep others happy and b) there doesn't then need to then be a "Freudian takedown" of his entire MO as a creator. it's all insecurity at best and industrial hegemony at worst. and yes, "reviewing" is very much an industry, with ideological interests and money to be lost, should the culture shift in a direction where pop content doesn't have to largely be produced by jabronies.

“You can’t say all creatives are amazing” Trust me. I can. And I will

😂

You are absolutely brilliant bro. Excellent analogy 😂😂😂😂 In fact, the madam web movie producers did infact rob their movie goers of their money.....

Im feeling pretty inspired by all of his hard work 😂 *theme song plays*

Lol im dead

I hope that guys like Chris stuckmann realise that they come off as pretentious twits when they say " oh, I am a film reviewer who is above film reviews".

Speaking of Gus Van Sant, what has he been doing lately? Last time he made a movie was 2018 with Joaquin Phoenix and Rooney Mara that gain a critical success, I wonder where is he now

@@Bjork4s excellent question! He's currently co-directing and executive producing a television anthology for FX called Feud: Capote vs. The Swans, created by Ryan Murphy and starring Naomi Watts, Demi Moore and Chloe Sevigny. It's not by any means a theatrical movie, but it's work nonetheless. Hope he makes a return to making proper films one day, but when you've been in the game for more than 30 years, a bit of a break is always welcome. Have a nice day!

Yup, pretty much trying to justify their jobs. Unfortunately, happens everywhere with management.

LL

The only solution I see is: Studios should shut the fuck up and just give us creative people their money. Full stop.

😂😂😂

At what point does he praise this movie?

You sound like a hurt fan

@@gentlerathe praises film makers of the film for doing what they do rather than tearing them down. Film praiser

When does Chris praise this movie?

@@TimmyJay-uk6nrweak. 😆

@@TimmyJay-uk6nr That is a passive argument. You either control the narrative or it will control you.

is his film will turn out to be a disaster the people will be extra pissed because he "was" a movie reviewer. @@TimmyJay-uk6nr

0:25 literally one of the first thing he says it's that the video is NOT a movie review

@@TimmyJay-uk6nrWhat a thin-skinned individual then.

He has already lost more than 10k subscribers over this.

@@everythingisawesome2903 ooo wow damn yeah I just unsubscribed. He's literally doing what every woke person in Hollywood does. Sells himself to get recognition/fame/ money/ opportunity

Although the chef took a dump in my food, I can't blame him because he put up a lot of effort for that turd to come out.

Yeah it’s really the place that sold the restaurant rotten ingredients. It doesn’t matter that they knew the food was rotten when they made it and they served it to me. I don’t cook with rotten food BUT AS A CHEFF MYSELF I know what it’s like to have to make a meal….

I never loved Blazing Saddles as much as others but that’s awesome

It's good to be king ❤

Mel Brooks is a legend!

Which cannot 100% ever been replicated on these times of modern sensibilities.

Yeah, I'm sure that happened.

Years ago Chris posted a video saying he wanted to change the “vibe” or style of his channel. I remember he said something akin to negative reviews slowly affecting his love to movies or something like it and that he felt it would be better to focus on good and positive reviews. Not ignoring that bad movies exist, but acknowledging that it’s way more important to give proper attention and feedback to good ones rather than Millions of views in shit talking a movie and be negative about it, giving it more attention. I like this personality, imo we should be more like that. Like, Madame Web and Morbius shouldn’t have been NEARLY talked as much as they did. Not to mention the amount of RU-vidrs getting on the that view train is insane.

@@danielz-v4083 no one read all these weird cope. not even me

@@jacksonorlady1367 Noticed this guy is defending Chris on every video that criticizes him with that same copy paste.

@@Trazynn Cant read eh? So you just make it up. Must've been a lot of words to call like 5 comments "every video". Used to say positive things till I realized these werent actually movie critique. Glad Im less associated with his dullard base now.

@@Trazynn I wrote a few different comments on the same one video. Why you gotta lie to try to diminish someone? Weird thing to do

Ask your mother. I’m sure she wishes she could replace that mechanical “companion” your father envies so much.

​​@@jacksonscott690 Obnoxiously toxic over a fair and reasonable question. White knight identified.

@@jacksonscott690 well that stuck a nerve

@danielsliwa1045. Yeah the moment Chris started to change was when he decided to not do a Worst Movies Of The Year list, I forget what year that was, maybe 2018?. Then when Covid hit he just flat out stoped reviewing movies he felt was going to be bad.

It’s almost like one could get unsub-manized

I guess the reality is that this is not a film critic channel

@@diogoredes But it used to be. Chris was a movie reviewer from about 2011 up until 2018 ish, and was an entertaining one. It was around 2018 ish that Chris decided to not do anymore Worst Movie Of The Year lists because Chris started to think that bashing directors and writers wasn’t right, even though Chris should know that no one should ever be exempt from criticism. And about the time Covid hit Chris started to not review any movie he felt was going to be bad.

He can, but he already explained why he instead would focus on positive things. The internet has become a sess pool of exaggerated criticism and negativity, there are full channels almost fully dedicated to that, the critical drinker style, and they do that because they know drama and polemic draws a lot of attention, it generates clicks. Put a "it is trash", "killing our childhood heroes, "woke garbage" in cap and yellow in your thumb and get a tons of clicks. Instead of this, Chris decided to focus more on the possitive aspects and the things he really loves, and to help smaller or less well known movies and creators. And Chris know that, due to that, due to not appealing to our natural drive for drama and polemic, he would loose clicks and money, and yet decided to do it anyway because he rather do what he loves. He stills does criticism, this entire video is pointing problems in the industry, but he did so without curse and buzz words, without making a fuzz about it. If, after knowing all this, you still rather watch exaggerated content made to feed of polemic, rather than nuansed and calm discussion, go watch things like critical drinker and get out of here.

Sony: Why make billions if we could lose... MILLIONS!

Chris grew up with Madame Web 🕸️

Morbillion

Nah that's Hollywood in general

​@@ThePFD518underrated coment!

It can't be worse than your life, that's for sure.

​@@iceman00behaveCuckmann, is that you!?

He didn’t mind using the title and the imagery to make a dollar on RU-vid and his advertising

Too bad he didn't do that with George Lucas... Chris has no integrity

​@@FrostbiteDigitalStuckmann made his career out of bashing George Lucas, what did you expect!?

Correction: you can tell the review is bad when...

@@CoolioBeanswhat

😂😂😂😂😂

You got nothing to do. That why you pick on youtubers you don't like.

It's like he's leaving us hints throughout the video. His mouth doesn't say to not watch it, but his clues and eyes scream DON'T WATCH IT!

Please elaborate

"Tell that to Zod's snapped neck"

@@carncats07 what you're referencing is the reason he stopped criticizing anything lmao. he was so mind f**ked by the mockery of his batman v superman rewrite that his balls shrank i.e. his self confidence and "edge." i thought he sucked even when he would bash movies because he always tried to critique the logic of plots, but he was really bad at it. He was so arrogant and self deluded he thought he could write a better scene than whoever wrote bvs. he learned he wasn't one of the Coen's lost brother, threw a hissy fit in an attempt to save face, went soft and the rest is history.

Oh you visit from the Grizzy echo chamber?

CUCKmanized.

Channel quality has definitely taken a hit

Lmaoo

Hes scarred cause his own movie might suck

Kind of. He's saying because he has now made a very small budget movie. He now knows all the difficulties of making a movie. So he doesn't want to be critical of movie's anymore. 🤦 That's the whole thing about being a movie critic/reviewer. If you don't want to be critical of a movie even when it warrants criticism. Than maybe you shouldn't be reviewing them at all.

Going off of Chris's logic where you shouldn't be critical. Then how would let's say a highschool baseball coach , Coach and help any of his players improve. Coach couldn't tell any of the players the things they are doing wrong or how to improve upon what they are doing. All because he knows how hard it was to play baseball and because he wants to only be positive and not hurt any feelings.

😂

Ur missing the point jackass. It’s like if a talented semi famouschef got hired/signed a deal to make recipes and signature dishes, for say, a commercial chain restaurant, and the chef then proceeds to showcase all these well crafted signature dishes, and the CEOs, people who have no idea about food, and just money say, ya know what, we don’t like that. Please do something more like this, and use these ingredients instead, and this and that, etc.

What do you mean H2S04 is bad for your skin? You are not a chemist.

I'm not a mechanic or a pilot, I can't criticize the Asian woman that just bumped 5 cars and a light pole while parking in an empty car park.

I feel like eating food, and watching a movie aren't quite the same thing...

@@PetProjects2011 that is the same thing 😂 It's all about taste and opinion. You can have a critic eating some random disgusting trash and saying it's good because its unique and has a particular taste because some chef made it and they are just pretentious. There's chefs that don't critique others foods because it wouldn't be fair. There's critics that just judge things on what they like and enjoy, without looking at the dumb presentation and difficulty to make the food, giving a nice fried chicken a better score than some escargot with sauce from baby albino goat and hand picked berries from the mountaintops of Mt everest during a blood moon on the date 6/6/66. And then there's normal people that eat normal stuff and know what they enjoy and is what makes the 99.99% of the profits of restaurants. Then there's madame web, a piece of 2$ raw meat, served while the feminist banshees "sing" to you by screaming like crazy people, while plopping red paint from their vaginas (yes. The feminist banshees that scream like crazy people is real. Yes, the feminist "artists" that make "art" by putting paint in their vaginas and then letting it plop on the ground on top of a canvas, is real as well).

No, that's your fault. Even before this video, several signs were seen 3-4 years ago that this guy has already became an Hollywood shill, yet you chose to gave him your hard earned money.

And that's never been helpful, especially with how subjective people's opinions on media is. Plus making something better than an infamously bad story isn't really something to brag about. It's like being better at math than a kid with Down's Syndrome.

Tbh tbat sounds gold on paper but depressing the moment you realize its not "anyone" just a small group that can get away with being trash at their fields and even being recognized and or phraised for it cause you know..."connections"

@@diegosotomiranda4107 Not always connections though, plenty indie artists that can get away with mediocrity due to their fame

"One of the things that gave me the most confidence in trying to make a film was seeing all the lousy films that I saw. Because I sat there and thought, "Well, I don't know a goddamn thing about movies, but I know I can make a film better than that"." - Stanley Kubrick

@@Whoa802 Kubrick is a once in a generation talent

Yeah no shit bc it is lmao

obviously.

Exactly

Y'all done sucking each other off to listen to what he is saying?

That’s why i can’t take him seriously anymore, money is more important then saying the truth…

OMG u nailed it, great analogy

Literally

Soulless. You can always see it in the eyes.

What are you all gossiping about? This is a lame analogy. Get off this bandwagon before it's too late.

So what? He's wrong to want to move on with his life, do something else? He would be a hypocrite if he still reviewed movies as a critic. He wants to be a paid filmmaker, and he just spent 16 minutes spilling crap to the people he hopes will hire him one day.

The last hilarocity was 3 years ago.

@@darkfire7660 That explains why I haven't been watching Stuckman for the past few years. Holy hell, I've tried watching a few other videos. It's so sanitized and boring. He has gone way too deep into the "I'm a filmmaker too, I would be devastated if people made fun of my movie so I"m never, ever laughing at another persons garbage" hole.. hope he comes to his senses. The nepobabies in hollywood will be fine if we laugh at their horrible decisions.

Yeah I don't get it either, he reviewed The Phantom Menace, his 'worst' film ever, a movie with infinitely more original ideas, music and better visuals (even though it's still a dogshit movie) than Madame Web. But Madame Web he refuses to dissect, i just don't get it

He stopped a long time ago.

@@3choblast3r4 Stuckmann is a hack. He always was, but he's less subtle about it now. If you actually watch the movies he reviews, you'll realize pretty quickly that a chunk of his complaints in the reviews don't really hold water. He only half pays attention because he's busy scribbling down notes to put in his review, misses exposition, then complains about things that were cleared up in the exposition he missed. He pretty much always took the "safe" (popular) opinion on movies, especially blockbusters. The nonsense he came up with to explain why he liked Episode 1 as a kid but not as an adult was peak popularity-surfing. "It was 'cause, y'know, it was a new Star Wars movie and we just loved Star Wars. It took years for us to finally realize it was, y'know, bad! I call it being Phantom Menaced!" And a few weeks later he's riding Disney's D with Episode 7 even though it's half as good as 1. He claims to be a fan of films and series he demonstrably hasn't seen. He got the murderer for Friday the 13th wrong, even though it was a classic twist to a classic horror film. The fact he thinks he can make quality movies when he can't even make quality reviews is just who Stuckmann is.

Next up: an airline pilot afraid of flying talks to a formula 1 driver who won’t go above 60mph 🤦🏽‍♂️

I would say he's a movie commentator. You can't call someone a movie critic if they're refusing to be critical.

​@@dirkardostevergreen4827More like, access journalist.

And your here now

@@ronniedeezy4831Exactly 😂

@@dreadelectric7745No, 'nuno' could have come over for a peek, like I did, after seeing Stuck get called out on 'Critical Drinker' (et al).

I unsubscribed after his god-awful review of "The Force Awakins" that genuinely pissed me off. As you can see, I've been unsubscribed for a while now. Lol.

This does it for me as well.