Introduction
Welcome back to Your Opinion is NOT Law, where we counter argue videos from people with little to no common sense. Today's subject is Browntable (or Mauricio), a YouTuber I was actually subscribed to at one point. I honestly don't know why I was subscribed to him in the first place, as we later find out in this post, he is NOT a good critic. First thing's first, I'm not saying he had to give it a positive review. Opinions are opinions after all. Secondly, I will be referencing reviews from AniMat and CellSpex, who do a much better job explaining their problems with the film and I highly recommend you watch them both (AniMat's video: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cPE2bSobI58 CellSpex's video: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=b6dYkS1YIp8). With that out of the way, let's dive into Browntable's review of The Addams Family.
Blatant Clickbait
0:00 Yep, right before the video even starts there's a problem. The video is blatantly titled "The Death of Cinema" and what's worse? In the video he acknowledges that that is clickbait. This. Is. Pathetic! It's bad enough that the thumbnail already has "Trash" written next to Gomez's face (which is also petty), but using such an exaggerated hyperbole and acknowledging it's just to get clicks is disingenuous and shallow.
Enough With This Stupid Joke
0:24 Before the actual review starts, Mauricio makes this overused and overdone joke about talking about a movie he actually likes before an unheard voice tells him that's not the movie he's going to spend the next 11 minutes talking about. I really need to get this off my chest: can reviewers stop doing this joke please? It was funny the first few times, but at this point it has been beaten into the grown and it's just not funny anymore. If you want to talk about a movie you actually like, talk about it. Who cares if it doesn't get as many views as your more critical videos? It's much better for your mental health anyway.
Who The Fridge Do You Think You Are?
1:06 He says he's not going to refer to the actors and directors by name (except Oscar Issac as an example) because he feels they'd be embarrassed by him saying their names. Let's break this down: Step 1: The men and women behind this film spent over 2 years making this film after it was shelved by Illumination. They love the Addams Family and did their best to make this film the best that it can be. They have NOTHING to be embarrassed about. Step 2: Filmmakers care more about how the audience responds to the film rather than critics because the end goal is giving the general public some quality entertainment. Good or bad, in the eyes of Hollywood filmmakers a critic's feedback comes after the audience's reactions. Step 3: This guy's hubris is so big, it makes Tony Stark cringe. His channel doesn't even have 200k subscribers (as of the making of this post) and he acts like his opinion is going to "embarrass" talented and hardworking filmmakers. Again, pathetic!
How Setting Works
1:33-1:52 His first criticism is the fact that there are 5 different locations in the film. He lists a couple of them but he doesn't go into detail as to why having 5 locations in a film is a problem apart from the budget being small. Okay, this is a weak criticism because the budget is $24 million and the filmmakers found creative ways to work around the budget within the film. The town of Assimilation is a small town, the main characters are kept to 6 to have the plot more focused, and the stakes are kept minimal so that the climax is easier to render. It's also worth noting that 3 years prior, Sausage Party was made for less and hade more set locations than this film. It's not the amount of locations that should be a criticism, it's how they're utilized that should be your main attention.
Good writing =/= good humor
2:55 Browntable is now saying that the film wasn't funny because it wasn't well written. This is factually incorrect because good humor doesn't always stem from a well written script. In the case with The Addams Family, it's comedy often comes from the visual gags more so than the written ones. This is because The Addams Family brand is notorious for it's visual humor (it was originally conceived as a one page comic after all). Humor is of course subjective, but to say bad humor is the same as bad writing is just false. Foodfight is infamously bad, yet I found myself laughing quite a few times during that film.
Pay Attention!
3:11 He forgets the name of Morticia because he doesn't watch The Addams Family. This is a severe no-no when it comes to being a critic. Even if you aren't familiar with the IP, you should at least be paying attention to the film as it is. The characters say each other's names multiple times throughout the film. If you're going to criticize a character's actions, the least you can do is remember their name.
That's Not Even The Right Criticism
3:31 Browntable then says that all Morticia does is explain the joke whilst showing clips from the film. This isn't even what she's doing in the clips shown. The first clip was her making a reference to IT while the second was assumed a passerby wanted to have a drink out of a dog bowl full of water (while Pugsley is drinking it). In AniMat's video, he criticizes the humor for consisting of easy one-liners and the visual gags overstaying their welcome. AniMat actually explained his problem with the humor and he was fair, just and honest about it.
The Mazurka Subplot Explained
4:10 Browntable says characters flip on a dime due to Gomez accepting that Pugsley can do sword play. The problem here is this comes during the 3rd act and throughout the film we see Gomez worry about whether or not his son can do it. At the same time we also see Pugsley try his best to practice for the event. This arc comes to a close ehen Gomez realizes that he was wrong to force Pugsley to not be himself in order to uphold tradition. CellSpex perfectly explains why this subplot didn't work for her because Gomez and Pugsley didn't have a heart to heart about whether or not this was right for the young Addams beforehand. Mauricio fails once again to fully articulate his problem with the film.
This Was Made For Money...So What?
4:52 Mauricio uses the infamous term "cash grab" to describe the film while acknowledging that he knows how hard it is to make an animated movie. I made a post on my Tumblr page about this, but the tl;dr is the term "cash grab" is stupid and redundant, especially when it comes to movies. A movie being made to make money is no different than a cheeseburger made to be eaten. Yes, the filmmakers should still make it the best movie they can, but regardless of the final product, the studio still wants to make their money back.
Give The Character Designer More Credit
5:20-5:55 He then criticizes the character design for having fat and skinny characters and called the art style "disturbing." He then says the characters arms are so thin that the joints would eat away at the arm. Yep, he's applying real world logic to a film about a gothic family with a Frankenstein's monster butler, a disembodied hand, a girl whose head is shaped like a seed and a woman who put the ashes of her dead parents on her face as make-up. While character designs and different art styles are not immune to criticism, it's not constructive to say the style itself is a problem. AniMat himself gave credit to the film for staying true to the original character designs created by Charles Addams almost 60 years ago, yet critized the townsfolk for having an awkward design and for Parker having big lips a la Big Mouth. The characters were intentionally designed to be unsettling, yet Mauricio fails to give credit where credit is due.
Actually Recommend Something
6:32 He tries recommending people go watch Parasite or anything else besides The Addams Family. The problem is he doesn't do a very good job recommend anything. What's Parasite? I don't immediately think of the South Korean film that was nominated for 6 Academy Awards just by hearing that name. I think of tape worms. In addition to that, what specifically is worth watching more than The Addams Family. AniMat recommends the previous adaptations of The Addams (such as the Barry Sonefield films and the television series) while CellSpex points out that MGM uploaded the original 1960s series on their YouTube channel (https://m.youtube.com/user/MGM/videos). He then makes a joke about Martin Scorsese's crique on Marvel movies, yet earlier he joked on how Ant-Man and the Wasp was "The Death of Cinema." I honestly cannot take his recommendation seriously. I'd say this is a good place to wrap up, but we still got about 5 minutes left. Ugh!
Extra Effort WAS Put In This Film
7:27 He goes on to say that there was no extra effort put into this film, which is factually incorrect. In addition to recreating the iconic theme song, the filmmakers brought in Snoop Dog to voice Cousin It, they showcased Gomez and Morticia's wedding, made the mansion a living character and had opening credits, which has become a rarity in today's film landscape. Even if you didn't care for the film, they still tried their best with this film and then some.
Eye Roll Intensifies 😒
8:04 Mauricio then criticizes the running gag of Uncle Fester getting shot with an arrow multiple times in the film and how he was shocked that they put such a violent gag in a "kids film." Uuuuuuuugh! Step 1: The movie is rated PG, which means while it's technically suitable for kids, there are scenes that parents should be aware about before letting them watch it. Uncle Fester getting shot with an arrow (and no blood is drawn) is one of those scenes. And step 2: To paraphrase Don Bluth, kids can handle anything you throw at them as long as you give them a happy ending. CellSpex even pointed out how relatively tame this film is compared to older Disney films.
Margeaux's Comeuppance
9:28 He criticizes the fact that the antagonist of the film, Margeaux, ends up with Fester and the townsfolk get off scott free. Here's what actually happens. After the townsfolk realize the error of their ways, Margeaux is revealed to be spying on everyone and the network pulls her show off the air. This means that she has a bunch of houses for sale and Fester offers to help her out because he has such a large family. And apparently she and Fester have some chemistry with one another. This was such an minor thing to criticize because it happens at the tale end of the movie and makes for a cute little joke.
Conclusion
He goes on to say that this film is offensive to animators and writers and that this is as bad as his old art. To summarize, this was a terrible review and it makes me question why I bothered subscribing tk this guy in the first place. His arguments are weak, his delivery is bland, he's not focused and his ego is atrocious. What's worst is that he made the film out tk be worse than it is. While I personally enjoyed The Addams Family, CellSpex and AniMat did a much better job criticizing it because they were fair, just, honest and straightforward with their arguments. Browntable meanwhile goes all over the place and blatantly uses clickbait to get more people to watch his video. To Mauricio, if you made it this fair, you are exactly what you claim Ant-Man and the Wasp is: a disappointment. You are terrible at articulating yourself, you don't stay focused on the topic at hand and your use of clickbait isn't funny: it's pathetic. And one last thing: Stop rathering to the audience when stating your problems with the film. Just because you didn't like it that doesn't mean everyone watching shares the same thoughts and attitudes. Like I always say: Your Opinion Is NOT Law -.-
I haven't heard of this guy, but...wow, he sounds like a piece of work. I thought Addams Family was fine, but it wasn't the so-called "Death of Cinema" as he claims.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, I got a question, do you take requests for a Your Opinion is NOT Law blog?
I haven't gotten requests yet. You're welcome to be the first.
DeleteOk, they're two videos from a user named Justinfinity. One is the very maturely titled "Fuck Film Reviews" (I know the video is practically two years old, but he probably still stands by what he says) and the other is a video from what I remember called "Why I Got Into Star Wars and Why Modern Disney Sucks".
DeleteFunny thing was that I used to be subscribed to him back around like 2012, he did movie reviews similar to that of the Nostalgia Critic/Chris Stuckmann/Hewy Toonmore (where he also reviewed movies that came out in theaters and did a best/worst of the year), he also did YouTube commentaries though I guess he doesn’t look back on them too fondly because he deleted them (I remember he did a text commentary on Joshua8428’s commentary on the NC’s review of Inspector Gadget and the only commentaries you can find are his one on the beginning of FilmMasterAdam’s review of Guardians of the Galaxy defending Confused Matthew, and a co-op he did with someone called 4 Wheeler, but you’ll find it commentated by Davidwash3r3 and MasterTP10.). One particular review that idk if I’d consider it “infamous” because he’s kind of unknown, was his extremely negative review of A Goofy Movie, where he also takes lines from other reviewers, for example, Confused Matthew’s “lets see how this plays out with logic applied” from his Lion King review.
He also kept changing his username a lot such as the Cinemaster (which his old reviews can be found on Dailymotion), Justin the Soulbuster, Soulbuster Reviews, JS Buster, to eventually Justinfinity.
Not to mention he makes tweets and posts like this:
https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/852325315538747392
https://mobile.twitter.com/Justinfinity93/status/1093882281922457600
https://www.deviantart.com/users/outgoing?https://twitter.com/Justinfinity93/status/1099006335037825024
I'm surprised he hasn't been talked about honestly. Anyway, that's my request.