Deadpool, Wolverine, and the Objectivity Conundrum

[@blurhavokofficial]

PSA: I have not watched the EFAP Breakdown of Deadpool and Wolverine so I don't know what Mauler's evidence for his points are. This is just what I saw in terms of flaws. Fun fact: The audio of this video was recorded on Linux Mint and the video was edited on Windows 11.

[@JokeofAllButts]

Great EFAP

[@666willis666]

shout out debian ! i run manjaro for all my needs i dont use windows. davinci resolve is for linux also kdens free and has 100s of free plugins and stuff. rags is my boy the only reason i know of efap xD

[@jeggsonvohees2201]

It's a pretty good episode, MauLer brought up many flaws that I hadn't realized existed even after days of thinking about it.

[@EarlHildebrandt]

@@jeggsonvohees2201 His rant at the end is one for the ages, with how he builds up how meaningful "Logan" was and then peels Marvel's skin off for what they did to it with this movie.

[@jeggsonvohees2201]

@EarlHildebrandt I'm so blindsided with how bad it is that I can't figure out how much is Disney's fault and how much is Ryan and Hugh's. They both clearly care about their character so I don't know how this happens.

[@wind_traveler]

Nobody is gonna think you're dumb if you like a flawed piece of media, but they will think you're dumb if you deny the flaws exist or lash out at the people pointing them out.

[@tylerjames805]

I was called a dumb clapping seal for saying I didn’t think this movie was AS bad as other films in Phase 4. I’m not denying flaws or lashing out I’m just sharing a polite disagreement. I never called Mauler any names for an opinion I never even said his critiques are even wrong. But I was still called an idiot and a clapping seal who’s entertained by keys jangling.

[@wind_traveler]

@@tylerjames805 I've got no problem conceding that the use of "Nobody" was hyperbolic, but what do you mean when you say you were called this. Did the EFAP crew single you out in particular, is this a conversation you had with some anonymous KZbin commenter? What's the context here?

[@zacheonodom7364]

This🥃

[@vesi7993]

The same thing happened with the Fallout show, that got alot of positive reception and Mauler got called a hater for saying the show was poorly written on Open Bar. Long-Man simply just says what he noticed, no more no less.

[@samwallaceart288]

Also MauLer: "I love 80% of HotD, enough to enjoy the show overall, but the Rhaenyra scenes REALLY drag it down to a 5/10 which is a shame because there's a lot to like otherwise" Everyone: "WTF, MauLer is a marxist now?! I should've known he lost his way when he liked The Last of Us"

[@opinionpaladin6007]

And fallout has already been forgotten

[@JoeElJalapeno1810]

To be Fair Fallout has been terrible for the last 13 years???

[@vesi7993]

@@samwallaceart288Most of the anyiwoke crowd Mauler’s attracted run the shows and movies through the “is it woke filter.” It’s why something like Fallout passed the smell test, and why Last of Us season 1 didn’t pass. The quality of the media is secondary to how much they politically find it distasteful.

[@samwallaceart288]

@@vesi7993 Yeah sometimes you just end up with dumb associates. Honestly it's interesting that MauLer is simultaneously cool with Gary and Jay Exci, two people who would probably annoy each other if left unmitigated in a room. I respect MauLer's range. The worst are those like Geeks and Gamers or Camelot, who are usually someone else's +1 whom MauLer doesn't have much to say to

[@LatterDayPup]

Everyone loves Mauler until he turns on their sacred cow.

[@a_rat_named_mouse]

I found MauLer because he tore apart Dark Souls 2, which I loved playing all the time. Love MauLer, he's absolutely right about everything in those videos except for TWO points, and one is technicality and the other is so obscure even I didn't know until over 1,ooo hours in PvP. People just get too emotionally attached to sibgular things and freak out when that thing gets criticized..

[@jaemotoo]

Sibgular

[@zzodysseuszz]

@@a_rat_named_mouse he’s not right about anything in those videos. It’s one of those videos where he is constantly wrong and doesn’t bother to question his conclusions and then tries to justify that they’re right. Look up domo3000 response to mauler. When dark souls 1 is challenging and forced you to take a different approach and rethink your strategy it’s a masterpiece, it’s genius game design. But when ds2 slightly punishes you for running around thoughtlessly it’s a horrible game with garbage game design. He will keep doing the same thing over and over again and when it’s not working he won’t accept that he’s doing something wrong he’ll just blame the game for not letting him do it. Look at his argument for why that room in lost bastille is bad. He just keeps running in and dying and then saying “see? This game relies on crowding the player to be difficult” no it’s bc youre running into a group and being crowded and then using no strategy or crowd control and then doing it ad infintum until you win somehow which is exactly what he did for every encounter. He couldn’t even tell the difference between an ai and a real player.

[@zzodysseuszz]

@@a_rat_named_mouse no it’s bc mauler genuinely can’t tell the difference between his opinion and the facts.

[@billyboleson2830]

@@a_rat_named_mouse nope domo3000 destroyed him

[@crimsonpotemkin]

Mauler's biggest sin in the eyes of the internet seems to be paying attention to detail and having a functional long term memory. And usually those same shows and movies sour in the eyes of the public months later when the honeymoon phase wears out. Not always, but it's happened enough times to set a pattern/ It's a constant cycle on EFAP with every TV show and every movie. People are happy when things they don't care about are criticized, but when it's their sacred cow then suddenly Mauler is wrong. And there's also an element of wounded pride because they didn't notice the flaws when watching themselves, so when the flaws are pointed out it hurts their feelings. And if it was just 2-3 flaws, they could take it, but Mauler machine guns them out with references over 7 hours, so if it's your sacred cow being turned into mincemeat with rapid gunfire in front of your eyes, then it's no wonder why people get mad. But I think it's a temporary effect. A few months later people usually calm down and start agreeing with the criticisms.

[@blurhavokofficial]

This reminds me of the clip from Open Bar where Drinker and the guests were romanticizing the past Aliens films and Mauler begins to correct the issue by reminding everyone of how bad most of those movies were. The Crowning Moment was when Mauler reacts in shock and asks "Am I the only one paying attention to what's happening in this franchise?!" or something along those lines. Lmao

[@crimsonpotemkin]

@@blurhavokofficial To add to your point, the most shocking realisation a lot of star wars fans got recently was realising that even though everyone have seen the OT, it doesn't mean they watched it the same way. To some people it really was just "whoosh whoosh red vs blue" and some monk mumbo jumbo about balance or whatever. I don't wanna be that guy and pull the media literacy card, but damn, that sucks. So yeah, apparently most people don't pay attention to what's happening in the movie. I've had problems discussing things with my own friends, because they can't even recall the plot of a show they just watched. It drives me mad, the whole "turn your brain off and look at pretty colours" culture.

[@yohanbaumann3012]

​@@blurhavokofficial this is exactly why i see some people (me include) stopped watching mauler, not because he noticed this ting but because he is the one who build his "persona" let say of being objective and noticing things like that. The problem came because in the recent years he have some big cracks of this persona when the media is something he enjoys, he excuse faults of it using the same excuses that he mock in the past, some of the media that he likes and he use excuses are GOW:Ragnarock, The last of us(show). Some examples is the cheap emotional manipulation using fenrir on ragnarock that he mocks on the last of us 2. The dog in the series of the last of us have a plothole that he excuse using headcanon (same thing he mocked in the past with the last jedi fans). A total descostruction of kratos character (that the author himself said that kratos would never act like that) kinda like what happen with luke on the disney trilogy and the excuse is character grow and changed (again luke was never suposed to be like that, in the words of the actor and tecnily of the author too considering his pitch towards the trilogy that disney ignored and the luke storyline on legends) Some things in the past have catch up too, for example Wolf like Atla(Avatar the last airbender) and mauler says its bad, chat disagree, rags admits that he never watched but is bad because mauler says so, later on the line i think in other stream rags says again that atla is bad and chat disagree, rags says trust me bro is bad and you should trust me because mauler and i have credit (again, rags have admitted that he never watched), Wolf have a redditt post where he complains about that and that what rags did was not objetive, rags later message him on discord and says delete this or no more friendship (wolf earlier on the year have almost end himself on minecraft) so he take down the post and put a new one where he repets what rags says on the show (that everyone disagreeing with him is just a fanboy). Mauler now this and do nothing, actualy later on he have a 'conversation' with Wolf and convince him that atla is truly bad and end the story there (again Wolf loook to be a very fragile individual and considering everything this looks like cheap manipulatiion on a person with poor mental health).

[@randomusername3873]

​@@yohanbaumann3012fenrir in gow ragnarok is not cheap manipulation at all That scene sets up plenty of stuff, like the literal defeat of the final boss How is it cheap manipulation?

[@yohanbaumann3012]

@@randomusername3873 because he dies after basically just metting the dog and the game wants you to fell bad, its not a good story.

[@bongwaterbojack]

Objectivity vs subjectivity: Motorcycles are objectively worse than cars. Less safe, less comfortable, less reliable, and other than the Isle of man, there is no lap record on 2 wheels that isn't beaten by a vehicle on 4. Subjectively, riding a bike is god damn fun.

[@aa6731]

Counterpoint: Wheelies are objectively cool

[@bongwaterbojack]

@aa6731 100%, but cars can wheelie too.

[@aa6731]

@@bongwaterbojack fair, cars wheelieing is more impressive

[@randomusername3873]

Mauler: "I hate that in the new movie they don't mention the team that was created at the end of the last one, and the characters don't even happear" People: 😡😡😡

[@tylerjames805]

I mean cause most of that team died in the last one. The only one left alive was Peter lol.

[@Snipfragueur]

@@tylerjames805 Well Domino, Russel and Cable too

[@0Sutekinaryuu0]

@@tylerjames805 shatterstar was alive in dp&w at the party, so it can’t have been just Peter

[@Pink.andahalf]

I'd love to see the venn diagram of people who celebrated Mauler for ripping into The Last Jedi 5 years ago and are also now upset that he's dumping on Deadpool 3, not realizing that he's taking the exact same approach to each. Mauler isn't a perfect computer, but he almost never lets his emotions cloud his plot analysis.

[@JustinVillemure]

MAuler doesn't understand the film being meta on Disney and a love letter to the 90s and early 2000 superhero films. ITs also he knows nothing of Deadpool outside the films. I've read every Deadpool comic, this movie is the most Deadpool. And it does exactly a great job of meta commentary on Disney, franchises and brands and how its characters (anchor beings) are what keep those film franchises running... Yes, it has flaws, but its just being a fun and entertaining superhero film, not too deep but deep on a meta level - like Deadpool lol

[@Jesus-yp9xx]

@@JustinVillemure being meta is not a get out of jail free card for bad plot, also "he knows nothing of deadpool outside the films", he doesnt need to, if your movie needs out of universe material to make sense then its badly written, being comic accurate is not equal to good, if something accurate to the comics gets added to the mcu and it contradicts a thing stablished in the mcu then its bad

[@JustinVillemure]

@@Jesus-yp9xx no you can’t comprehend the profound meta unfortunately. Your loss not mine lol Its also a recall to old comic book films lol Prior to Disney. The reason those specific characters are in this film… all discarded properties. Also, how else do you even get these films if not for the comics?? Deadpool has an iconic gimmick that makes him unique. This film literally embraces that iconic gimmick further. Timelines are franchises and anchor beings are the icons who make the franchise continue to exist ;)

[@otterfire4712]

@@Lucaintheninjatank the difference between TLJ and DP&W is that TLJ is in a universe that keeps itself pretty grounded, there is no fourth wall for the characters in the SW universe to interact with, characters shouldn't comment on the narrative at large. DP&W is a movie inspired by comics and its widespread use of multiverse not to mention DP's use and abuse of the fourth wall and understanding of story tropes. DP is an entertainer who can still participate in the story at large, he's not Snoke who shouldn't be making meta commentary on Kylo losing to Rey.

[@JustinVillemure]

@@Lucaintheninjatank well my argument is its mishandled in Last Jedi’s case. Also. Deadpool is designed to be meta and a love letter to past comic book films. That doesn’t work with Last Jedi. I can understand Johnson wanting to be more meta but again it doesn’t work and its not done too well. Also my point about understanding the source material is what makes a viewer understand and appreciate what this third Deadpool movie is doing/ going for. As for needing to read the books for Harry Potter and LOTR it might increase appreciation but its not necessary to understand the movie’s portrayal as they are adaptations and don’t have that rare quirky nature Deadpool has narratively and character wise. Again in Deadpool’s case it adds to the appreciation and understanding of what this film is going for or presenting via its meta narrative and Deadpool’s comic book character. I haven’t read LOTR novels but totally love those movies - maybe I’d appreciate it more if I read the books but its not like comic books. Right seeing Wolverine in his comic book costume is another point of why the comics matter and what is pulled from them for the films. Another point is Wolverine’s many alternatives in this film would not be understood fully or appreciated without knowing they are from many storylines in the comics and covers.

[@dead-dude-3729]

0:31 "Why is the gopher man on Mae's side?" Is a strangely foreboding sentence that speaks volumes of the Acolyte's writing

[@crimsonpotemkin]

Can we talk about how very often when there's a sequel, it starts with a time gap and after the time gap the male character is a total loser, who's alone, miserable, legacy destroyed, dumped by his SO? What's up with that? It's like the only story Hollywood knows. Perhaps these scripts are written by such losers who can only write from personal experience. They did it with Luke, Indy, Deadpool, even Logan if you think about it. Heck, they even did it to mf-fkn FURY and Kingpin in Echo. I don't even want to bring up what's happening to Peter Parker, Batman and Superman in the comics. Peter may as well just be a voodoo doll.

[@uuddlrlrbas9904]

I think it ties into the concept of the hero's journey, and how after the hero gains the secret knowledge he cannot return to his home and go back to "the way things were" he is changed, significantly. Those changes can have a deleterious effect. The other side would be once you fight/beat the bbeg there's nothing greater/more exciting to do, barring a revolving door of super villains a la dc and marvel. Anyway, tl:dr you're not wrong, but it is a viable post ending for people who might have things like ptsd. There's definitely hollywood writers cackling about making straight "hwite" men end up miserable and alone.

[@zachrohler1047]

​@@uuddlrlrbas9904which that can be done for some characters but deadpool of all people wouldnt get PTSD, he gives the PTSD lmao. Many times its counter productive and they spend a section of the movie or show redoing what was already done in the previous movie or season. Not every character needs to lose everything

[@Im2lazy4thisCrit]

@@zachrohler1047You remember when Wade and Vanessa met in the first movie and they were one-upping each other on who had the sh*!tier life? Deadpool without a doubt has PTSD, at least in the movies.

[@randomperson-up5vt]

I hate the new concept of a nexus being. If you don't have one your universe just collapses. The universe existed billions of years before these mortal nexus beings come to existence for example.

[@crimsonpotemkin]

it's a very stupid short sighted idea. But they will forget it and retcon it in the next movie. Like they always do.

[@Pink.andahalf]

Everyone who likes the movie claims it's a meta thing. Even they won't defend it as a concept in the fictional universe it's in.

[@VPT2]

@@Pink.andahalf Its absolutely a meta thing. Its basically saying "Wolverine died, so the X-men movies are slowly going down". While it makes sense in a meta sense. In universe it is UTTER dogshit, because it causes 2 questions. 1. How did the universe survive without the nexus being being born for what could be trillions of years. 2. Why does this persons death effect the whole universe for the next trillions of years if not a single trace of them will ever even leave the planet.

[@JustinVillemure]

@@VPT2 you lack the concept of meta don't you? ITS A META OF DISNEY. Without Wolverine, this will be another universe/film franchise that goes into the "void". Anyone remember or think about the X-men movies? Fantastic Four? Daredevil? Blade? These films aren't discussed or held on to like the Avengers/Disney films prior to Endgame or simply Hugh Jackman as Wolverine. This movie is a love letter to those aforementioned films, 90s and early 2000 comic book/superhero film. The whole notion is Deadpool going into Disney but he has to leave his own brand and franchise behind (s'why Vanessa and others from Deadpool are heavily sidelined). As for Wolverine, its a meta on HE is the most important thing from 20th Century Fox - so the rest will vanish. The whole area where Nova and other old heroes live is the realm of discarded franchises and concepts - Gambit, Channing Tatum, was a legit film in talks that got discarded - starring Channing... so he ends up here. As for X23, she too is a discarded character now that Logan has ended and 20th Century has gone under... to bring her in is important and potential for Disney also wanting her, as, in the end X23, Wolverine and Deadpool getting back to Deadpool's universe is an opening that Disney may or may not use them... Those of you hating on this film must have hated all the early comic book super hero films that were thinly veiled stories but fun and entertaining. That's what this film did. Its also a very Deadpool film - go read the original comics. Deadpool dealt with self loathing to the point of being a sad man just like we see in this film... He pushes many away because his own self perception... AS I listen to the review, This Wolverine is a meta on Hugh Jackman stepping away from X-men - so he's one who "Retired" and it cost the X-men their lives - so he feels the weight of it all because without him, X-men failed (its a meta on the newer films lol). Anchor Beings - is a meta on the key character for the franchise - there's a reason this has more weight now that Disney is bringing Robert Downey Jr back to be Doom ;) I wonder if Reynolds knew about this when they came up with this concept - just makes the meta on Disney all the more impactful haha

[@shawnlord3419]

@@randomperson-up5vt nah it’s if it dies that’s when the universe gets cooked. Dosen’t really matter because said nexus will be born eventually and die. I think you have to view it as an outside time thing. Kinda like when the present catches up to the eventual death of said nexus being

[@darkroninmarvel]

The whole thing with Vanessa and Deadpool's weird character moments doesn't surprise me because one of the co-writers of this film was Zeb Wells, a.k.a the douchebag behind Paul

[@ExeErdna]

He just needs to get over his divorice and stop being an ass in EVERYTHING he writes.

[@Batmans_Pet_Goldfish]

Oh fuck, don't remind me.

[@Driger1792]

I absolutely loved this movie, but there are things about it that could've been done differently to make it better. However, I hope people understand that ryan and levy both faced several pushbacks from bob Iger, kevin feige, Tatiana and Brie. I bet people don't know what this movie originally looked like before ryan said "fuck no" to them.

[@hope-cat4894]

Didn't they try to add She-Hulk since she can break the fourth wall too, but they ended up not going with that idea because of the reception to the show? We were probably spared a massive trainwreck if it wasn't for the actors trying to save the film.

[@jeggsonvohees2201]

Considering how bad the final product is I can only imagine how much worse the initial versions were.😅

[@fd502]

12:43 topic anchor beings: “if Logan’s death facilities the demise of his universe does Tony’s sacrifice not warrant the death of his universe?” Um… Hehe… I think you missed this because it was a meta reference. Tony’s death DID kill his universe the MCU. It’s been unraveling! Every time they add new content it unravels more!

[@Batmans_Pet_Goldfish]

Mauler has suffered the death of so many franchises that he loved that he's immune to key-jangling. So when he doesn't get baited, people just call him a hater.

[@Ducq33]

Yet he likes Tom Holland’s Spider-Man

[@dire213]

if a universe dies because the anchor being is dead, how is the universe alive before the anchor being is born?

[@ironoakstudios2026]

I like to think that the anchor can be passed on to another when the time is right, kinda like passing the torch. I guess it also depends who the anchor is.

[@matteomastrodomenico1231]

I mean, we do see that Wolverine and Deadpool easily replace the dead Logan, so the anchor can probably be passed.

[@calebpribyl5152]

Hey you did a great job either way the video! And you are right “like” does not equal “GOOD” and “hate” does not equal “BAD” Remember when I said that the last movie I saw before this was weird? I didn’t hate kinds of kindness (in fact it gave me this idea to make this weird episode) But I just thought it was creepy and unsettling? (Almost feels like a horror film)

[@sol-hunter2332]

Mauler's standards seem to be fairly universal, while most people seem to adjust their standards. I think that is a big reason why some people dislike Mauler's opinions on stuff they give a pass on. But while Mauler is very sharp, and observant, some things do fall down to preference, and he is still human and can miss things, misinterpret, or merely be incorrect. For instance, I don't think it's inherently wrong to lower your standards to enjoy a show, unless you then argue with people who point out the flaws that they are wrong. And while it is rusty, I remember having a lot of criticism for Mauler's critiques of A:tla. But things aren't all or nothing. Mauler can dislike it, hate it, and have issues with it, and others can not find an issue with it, and like it. Whether it's a legit flaw in the writing or not

[@Ducq33]

Mauler was wrong and straight up lied during majority of his “Black Panther” review

[@negisuna6133]

@@Ducq33 proof? give examples when you make a claim.

[@Ducq33]

@@negisuna6133 just watch the video, honestly a lot of creators in the FNT sphere lied or reviewed “Black Panther” in bad faith. Off the top of my head he literally said Killmonger’s flashback took place during the 70s instead of the 90s. All you have to do is watch “Black Panther” and then watch any of their reviews to see how bad they were.

[@negisuna6133]

@@Ducq33 i watched both. Black Panther was garbage as shit lmao, with objectively terrible writing, and 99% of what mauler critiqued is true. Killmonger is a shit villain, tchala's "balls" are op as fuck and make 0 logical sense, not giving the flower juice to the entire country makes 0 sense, Tchalla being black panther before becoming king, stripping the previous panther of their powers, the existence of the "anti-panther" medicine making no logical sense, rhino farming etc im not going to fault a guy for getting the year wrong because the point of his critique of his backstory still stands.

[@negisuna6133]

@@Ducq33 and i love how you say that they "lied". getting something wrong is not lying, its having misinformation. i asked for proof of them lying. and i'd need you to prove how they did it in bad faith. saying "this is why the movie isnt good and doesnt hold up" and listing tons of reasons isnt the same as saying "this movie is ass" and not reviewing it proper.

[@mr.bearry6575]

I enjoyed Deadpool and Wolverine. The plot was largely nonsensical, and Mauler's critiques were on point. I wasn’t expecting a masterpiece. In fact, I was expecting a travesty. It wasn’t great by objective standards, but it blew the modern Disney Marvel films/shows out of the water. The movie was a good tool to start steering the MCU back in the proper direction.

[@Mrtorquebowguy]

I'd bet every dollar this movie makes that it won't be representative of where the franchise goes at all. We are still guaranteed, at least: Agatha, Blade iteration 385 and New World iteration 428 and they're not going to drop the only character that can critique them into those, as if that's the special sauce to fix these.

[@Vesporeon]

@mr.bearry6575 This is exactly how I feel. I enjoyed it and thought it did several things good but I think many of Mauler's critiques were not only completely correct but actually really insightful and things I admit I overlooked. Even if I thought everything he said was wrong (which I don't), I'm not gonna just throw him away wholesale because 1 misstep in years would still be a phenomenal record, plus he's funny and articulate even when I disagree. People need to stop dying on every single hill

[@ExeErdna]

People be like lower your expectations and shit. They did and the movie did it's best with what he had. YES I wish this movie came out like 15 years ago when a lot of these guys were younger. Yet we gotta work with what we got

[@lestatcanada]

@@Vesporeoni thought the film was. Avery enjoyable film and I hope we get a fourth deadpool film in the future

[@rontheauraknight9606]

I found the film very fun. I very much hate all the cameos for cameos sake (mostly the villains who’s purpose was to show up and die in the void like mooks, and Juggy who was there so they could realistically beat Cassandra Personally I’d prob rate it below Deadpool 1, but tied with 2 (for now)

[@tyrannozilla]

The only problem with objectivity vs. subjectivity is that there are reviewers who will use their subjective opinion and use it as an objective fact. There are also cases where reviewers will miss specific plot points in a story and say the film is objectively bad, even though they missed the plot points based on their own biases. YMS is a good example of this.

[@wingsoffreedom3589]

Mauler is immune to audience capture and will never cuck out to anyone. No movie is sacred and all shall face his penant stare of objectivity.

[@rise-my-angel]

Honestly whether or not I agree with his points sometimes the flat and monotone way Mauler will rip something apart is just funny to listen too. What other people will scream at in anger, he just monotones about it's quality to his view.

[@VPT2]

Great video. I do think how some people can go about reviews can piss people off as well. An example i have is Little Platoon. Normally i like his reviews, but his Kong X Godzilla one he hated the movie so bad he was actively ignoring or not fact checking details because of this bias, on top of about every 4 min him insulting anyone who enjoyed it. Even if making good points, if you keep shitting on them while doing it, it tends to cause people to listen less. Also we have EXTREMELY different takes on DOTMs fights, saw them as the worst fights in the series until TLK. It mostly started the trend of the decepticons being overly weak to everyone until ROTB.

[@blurhavokofficial]

Fair point with DOTM, but I'd argue ROTF started that trend of making the Decepticons disposable.

[@VPT2]

@@blurhavokofficial ROTF did have them weaker, especially if we use the opening fight in particular as Demolisher went down waaaay too fast. The forest fight was a little one sided, but the desert battle, despite there being a limited amount of Decepticons they did pretty good, it felt like there was some level of a back and forth. It was also the one to simalantiously listen to and ignore the sabot rounds rule they established in TF1, where everyone in TF2 was armed with rifles, but at the same time in 90% of the shots they were doing fuck all when you did see a decepticon get hit it was from a missle, tank, or autobot round based on the size, its the strangest form of consistancy I've ever seen because these soldiers are arming themselves with useless weapons in this movie. Devastator I think they killed quick because he was literally killing the computers in real life though. Where in Chicago.....jesus christ....the entire management of the Deceptcions got pathetically killed in one-sideded ways and for some reason regular human machine gun rounds work on the decepticons but somehow the wreckers 50 cals barely did anything. The decepticons just....violently exploding from a single slash from Optimus was wild, hell even in the new Skybound comics and older IDW comics, guys don't just....detonate like that unless something specific happens. I love Optimus, I love they included the Jet-Prime from Armada into the series, but Jet-Prime is not THAT broken. In both cases, the tie in comics were better than the film product even for some of the fights. I am very much looking forward to your AOE video, especially because you even took the time to notice the weaponary differences from TF1 and TF2 to TF3, should be very interesting because you notice those types of details as well for these movies.

[@ab-gail]

100% You don’t get to attack your audience then get mad they’ve stopped listening to you.

[@RavenKnightYT]

Very well done! I think you hit the nail on the head with this, and I was nodding along through the whole discussion. I think you were spot on at the very end too. I think the reason so many adored this film, and why they're turning on Mauler, is because it's like you said: This is a film everyone WANTED. We wanted Deadpool and Wolverine in a movie together, and so the general audience wants to enjoy it and be entertained by it. When someone comes along to say "There are flaws with this film," a lot of folks don't want to be told that because, to them, criticism is equitable to 'movie bad, and you can't like it.' I personally wasn't super hyped for the film. I'm not a huge Deadpool fan so I didn't really care all that much about his third movie. I did find some parts entertaining, and yes some of the cameos were nice. But I think my lack of personal investment and hype for this movie helped me to better see the flaws in it and, unfortunately, I just couldn't really get into it. I don't mind if people enjoyed it; it had enjoyable scenes and comedy. But story wise? Mauler and you are both 100% correct: it's horribly written. But we all have movies or games we enjoy, even if not of high quality, so I see no problem with what Mauler said (especially since I agree with it).

[@ab-gail]

Id say it also rains on everyone’s parade. I know if I just recently enjoyed something and someone came along and said “[thing] is objectively bad actually” it would suck. People in this sphere tend to forget that emotions are a part of the human experience and even if someone thinks you’re right they’ll still be annoyed.

[@robinthrush9672]

Getting my like and comment in before watching just because I have faith in your content.

[@NimbusTM]

I wish Mauler was this consistent with No Way Home.

[@blurhavokofficial]

He definitely has the same opinion of No Way Home as I do of Deadpool and Wolverine; he enjoyed it despite the numerous flaws in the film.

[@NimbusTM]

@@blurhavokofficial it's been ages since I watched the stream where they all talked about the film after its release, but I remember being annoyed by how much they seemingly ignored or skipped over while talking about liking the film, besides JLongBone and one other person in the group disliking it.

[@chuckleshelicopterwigwamjo6305]

@@NimbusTM While their positive coverage may have had more of a spotlight than the negative for that movie, they don't bring it up as an example of a great movie and whenever it is mentioned on efap(even as recently as the Deadpool and Wolverine episode just last week) it is always with the caveat that it has severe issues, and they quite often reference how Dr. Strange was a moron in it. They do like it, but their opinion has not softened or become rose-tinted over time, which I appreciate. And there are a handful of genuinely good things in that movie.

[@NimbusTM]

@@chuckleshelicopterwigwamjo6305 They didn't highlight the positive more than the negative for NWH, they blatantly ignore the long list of negatives in it, and seemingly only concede for the most basic of complaints, like Strange acting completely wrong. The scenes that are bent to exist to deliver heavy fan-service, regardless of how much it hurts general logic, the overall story in the multiple universes the film pulls from and the MCU original universe itself. Like Aunt May's death, the idea that we didn't see Uncle Ben's death and hear the iconic speech previously in the MCU was because it had already been done across two different versions in the 00's and 10's, so it was assumed Peter had experienced that moment with Ben and heard the same words that Maguire and Garfield did, but NWH has us believe that it's the first time he hears the responsibility speech, which ruins the entire reason he becomes Spider-Man, and why Peter is so insistent on being the hero despite it harming his personal life, like running out of the dance in Homecoming to stop Vulture. EFAP failed to recognise how NWH ruined Ben and Peter in a single scene. I'm fairly certain that the other person in their review or breakdown of NWH that was opposed to it was Fringy, so him having mentioned the film while talking about D&W isn't an indication to EFAP thinking the same, just that Fringy has remained consistent. I haven't seen D&W and I don't plan to, but from the clips I have seen on KZbin, and what I've been told, the same things that people are calling meaningless fan-service seem to be of a similar quality to as NWH, except people don't have a bias to the material as much as they do for Spider-Man. Electro, Doc Ock, Lizard and Sandman are all horribly damaged by that film, yet they failed to dive into it, because they were fine with some of the destruction, even talking about it being an improvement in the case of Electro, despite it betraying the entire reason he appears in the film, as he's no longer the character, but Jamie Foxx himself, and ruins the idea that a previous villain is appearing. They didn't focus on how Octavious leaves Peter to fight Goblin alone, betraying his morality from Spider-Man 2 and the emotions he expressed after regaining control, and how badly the film wastes such an iconic figure, to just bring him back at the end to stop Fake Electro in a few seconds and deliver a few nostalgia bait lines. They talked about how D&W sets a precedent for the MCU bringing back characters that have already died and potentially ruining them, but they didn't mention how NWH did this very thing, because they don't view the poor writing for the characters in that film as bad, due to their bias towards it. Sorry for the rant, I'll stop here. It's just really annoying to see people treat these two films differently, despite them both being guilty of similar things.

[@ab-gail]

I know if I just recently enjoyed something and someone came along and said “[thing] is objectively bad actually” it would suck. People in this sphere tend to forget that emotions are a feature (not a bug) in existence. Even if someone thinks you’re right they’ll still be annoyed. That’s life. Mauler will live. Chat will live.

[@victisomega4248]

This is not the kind of film that EFAP was ever going to be able to handle well. This is the kind of film that can break the fourth wall, look a critic in the eye, and respond “Yeah… and?”

[@blurhavokofficial]

Then why did they like Deadpool 1 and 2?

[@victisomega4248]

@@blurhavokofficial I’m not sure, you’d have to ask them. But that’s wasn’t my point. The point is it’s hard for critics to avoid backlash when the film they’re critiquing, and its lead and producers are all telling you to turn your brain off and just enjoy it, that it’s not that deep.

[@Burmy1992]

Idk if ive noticed it before, but that outro slaps. Love the video man, cant for the next one.

[@sab3redg333]

I finally saw Deadpool and wolverine and i liked it overall. But oh dear is it far from perfect. But considering its the mcu. Its probably a freaking masterpiece compared to every thing else sadly

[@sir_aizen]

Online activity like witnessing the turn on MauLer solely because he has standards makes me lose a little faith in humanity

[@14megasxlr]

Fair, but wouldn't it be funny if Tony Stark WAS the MCU's anchor being, since the moment he died and Phase 4 Started, and even the movie leading up to his death, all went to shit.

[@ab-gail]

New headcanon

[@frostfang7670]

Mauler: The Last Jedi is a travesty! Internet: Good Mauler. Mauler: Mandalorian is mediocre at best everything else is shite! Internet: Bad Mauler. Mauler: She-Hulk is horrendous! Internet: Good Mauler. Mauler: Last of Us show is great. Internet: Bad Mauler. Mauler: Doctor Strange MoM is a disaster! Internet: Good Mauler. Mauler: Fallout is a idiotic upheaval! Internet: Bad Mauler. Mauler: Acolyte is perhaps the worst star wars Internet: Good Mauler. Mauler: Deadpool & Wolverine is a character assasination! Internet: Bad Mailer.

[@lucascoval828]

And God of War: Ragnarök?

[@frostfang7670]

@@lucascoval828 bruh i tried covering alot, for real 😆

[@dimmest88]

Overall i liked the movie, but there was a lot of key jangling through the movie (cough blade cough), and it does what every marvel movie does now where it fucks with what happens/we are told in the last movies and shows

[@arklaw8306]

Sabertooth desered better. Or worse.

[@JustinVillemure]

This film is a meta commentary of Disney and how they handle the superhero brand. Anchor beings, is the meta concept of the characters that create a longevity to the franchise (timeline). Wolverine was the very thing most cared about from the X-men movies. This Wolverine is a meta on Hugh Jackman not continuing his role, and these X-men movies didn't have the same traction of old. So in a meta sense, Wolverine not being there is why the X-men didn't survive. Deadpool's characters are not the interest of Disney, its just Deadpool they want. The void realm is where we see all the discarded comic book film characters: Gambit, Channing Tatum, was a legit movie in talks that got discarded. X23 is a character that was only in Logan and with 20th Century being gone, unlikely to ever return - so she's in the void. Deadpool having self loathing is VERY DEADPOOL - read the comics. He pushes ppl away until he finds his own value, which, in this film, he had the chance to join Disney but it means leaving his own brand and characters behind, he chooses to do what he thinks will save them: and that choice is bring in Wolverine - which is a meta on what will make Disney want this film/ what brings audiences to come see this movie (a wider audience) Which is absolutely truth. It has flaws but the film is the most Deadpool one of all. Yes, 2 and 1 are better stories, but Deadpool 3 has the better moments. Its a love letter to superhero comic book movies prior to Disney. Its fun and entertaining, not there to set up a saga. Deadpool, Wolverine and now X23 being in Deadpool's universe at the end is still a means that Disney can do more with them. Disney bringing back Robert Downey Jr showcases the meta of the "anchor being" - Ironman, well the actor in this case; is the anchor being Disney feels they need to keep their timeline from dying ;) -- timeline dying is meta for franchise or brand losing traction with audiences and being forgotten or canned. They haven't had mush successes post Endgame have they? Numbers are dwindling, their brand is fading out little by little - which, Deadpool's own universe wasn't going to die out immediately, it was hundreds of years - but again its about a franchise being in people's mind/attention. Meta... very meta.

[@crosshair9907]

Yeah Mauler ain't wrong really, I did like the film but I can't say the script was perfectly written

[@SmithsAndSons]

Very good stuff. Personally, I love The Mummy (Fraser, not Cruise) despite any and all flaws.

[@vinegar4556]

I'll say this: While I've soured on MauLer's content a bit lately (nothing against the guy, I just tend to prefer his earlier video game/critic reviews), I have to respect his consistency. He's not afraid to turn on a sacred cow and I've never got the impression he does it for ragebait, since his points are usually very well laid out.

[@joshua11734]

So I watched the EFAP for DP&W and it seemed pretty par for the course as far as MauLer and co explaining the flaws of the movie. They gave credit to where you’d expect (acting, some jokes, some choreography/music), but kept most of the main criticisms aimed at the characters/plot/world-building (several of which you brought up here). And as expected, there were a few people in chat who absolutely despised the breakdown (claiming things like MauLer was only intending to hate the movie or that his criticisms weren’t objective at all). I’m glad you made this video, but I wanted to add two very important things that I think would’ve suited those chatters and/or the Open Bar commenters: 1. Objectivity does NOT MEAN CORRECT. Like you said, all it means is it’s a provable statement. Just as much, it’s a disprovable statement if new arguments/evidence can counter it. If MauLer made incorrect statements about the movie, then by all means provide counter arguments. As I was watching the stream, one of those aforementioned chatters (while the whole time complaining about the stream) barely made any attempts to counter the arguments made; just kept yelling at other chatters while claiming MauLer was being unfair to the movie (I didn’t see everything obviously, but what I did see wasn’t much). Which brings me to my next point… 2. Even if you don’t subscribe to the idea that film criticism has objective quality metrics (which the second aforementioned chatter felt), tbh I don’t even think that matters in the context of most breakdowns. If the ONLY thing that matters to you is how you feel about the movie, then simply take in the arguments and see how they affect you. Either the arguments will have no impact on how you felt (either because they were poorly constructed or because they don’t bother you), or the arguments will subconsciously convince you and you no longer get the same enjoyment out of the movie. The point I’m trying to make in both cases is that all that matters in this type of situation is the arguments. Are the arguments well supported? Do they have sufficient evidence? Even if they do, that might still not impact your enjoyment of the movie, but that’s FINE.

[@papouligaming9594]

Finally MauLer's starting to lose his Nerdrotic-type adjacent grifter tourist fans.

[@Birdhouseart]

I'm guessing with the mass amount of movies that try to beat you over the head with "the message," people wanted a movie that wanted to entertain first. So when Mauler just rips into this film when everyone on the stream liked it, an unintentional signal most likely cropped up from most people wondering, "what does Mauler want for these movies," when in reality we shouldn't take his criticism to heart like this and actually think for yourself. If you like it, hold on to it. Don't let anyone take that away from you.

[@ExeErdna]

Yeah that's basically it. D&W had a mountain of BS to climb it's better then most Fox/Marvel outtings yet for some it still isn't enough. Since what people REALLY want is D&W but as a show which would have been like 4 movies broken up as a season. Which we could have seen more crossovers. To establish how the MCU is gonna look now.

[@alphaeagle9615]

lol When you slowly faded in Patrick Star I only saw his eyes first and though a very busty woman was sneaking up behind Drinker. lol

[@Halfrican-Jones]

I haven't even seen it yet strictly to wait for Disney to release this physically, don't want to support how samey cinema has become now.

[@theincrediblefella7984]

I do find it very interesting that MauLer gets so much hate for this stuff but he's been very consistent over the years. He judges things on the basis of fact, amd if hes wrong, he admits it. Simple as.

[@Lombax2]

[Spoilers Ahead] I personally believe, that this movie is objectively... Pretty alright, it's not good nor bad. And I can argue my points, however, One point I wish to dispute is how Vanessa broke up with Wade. In the flashback we briefly get where Ms.Long Fingers jams into Wade's head, and we see them breaking up. Wade keeps saying "Just say you hate me", and Vanessa says nothing, she doesn't know how to respond, she holds onto his hand and Ms.Long Fingers imposes the memory of Vanessa saying "You will amount to nothing", where Wade remarks, "She never said that." It was clear that the two broke up because of Wade's depression, she tried to help and be there, with the detail of her hand on his, though it was clear she couldn't help someone who didn't want to help himself. Which we also see in him rejecting both the X-Men and also aiming for the middle. He simply is unable to bring himself to that point, and keeps self destructing. The film in a way, shows his arc about finding himself and learning to respect the person her is, not as a joke, not as Deadpool, but as Wade Wilson. In the beginning, he doesn't know what he is without the suit, but in the end, he's able to hold hands with Vanessa, with her instantly reciprocating. Showing she is a ride or die gal, Wade broke up with her because of his own depression which he works through. This is one of the strong elements of the film, and to be "Objective" while missing context to each scene, is a rather subjective take. TL;DR, I think your video is good for discussion, but I disagree that the movie is objectively bad, this is one of the several points I disagree on, though still well said. Thanks for reading!

[@jolean_cujoh]

Wait a few months until those people in the comments start turning on the movie.

[@ShiningSpecks]

Happens every time.

[@SilvrSavior]

I legit think an easy way to have Vanessa and Wade break up in the third film is that Wade just stopped acting like himself after being rejected from the Avengers was because Deadpool knew he was not going to be in any movies. He knew that everything owned by his own studio was being left to rot and fall apart. So what point would it have been for him to do anything other than just walk through life. Then Wade just stops all his antics. Just stops being Wade, and it's the TVA that helps re-energize the spirit of Deadpool. His heroic realization is that just because he's not in a movie, doesn't mean that those 4 or 5 moments stop appearing.

[@JohnJacobSchmidtt]

I think Tony is the anchor being, but they're not ready to kill off the universe...... Paradox says that the universe slowly dies and he was only making it go faster in this case. So the marvel movies not doing as well after he died might be him being the anchor being in that universe slowly dying

[@RevengeOfTheTimbs]

If only people had a consistent standard, but that may take a bit of effort.

[@TheAutistWhisperer]

I tend to not listen to anyone from EFAP and just make my own decision if I like something or not.

[@the_real_inquisitor]

The best way of get a good look of the quality of a movie is by poking holes in it. If the plot stays afloat, its at least on a logical level good. If not, the movie has serious problems. This get used on every movie, no matter if I subjectively love that movie or not.

[@skarlock5257]

Avengers : Endgame sold in the neighborhood of around 280 million tickets. There are about 8 billion people on earth. The movie was distributed globally. So about 3.5% of the potential global audience saw the movie. If you removed people too young to watch the movie and very remote populations, you're down to maybe 4 billion people and 7% of the potential population. This is the most popular movie in decades. This is why I am a strong believer in the idea that all media is niche. Nothing captures enough of the potential audience to really truly be "universally appealing". This is both a goal, and a myth of Hollywood. Don't be surprised when others love what you hate, and hate when you love. That's the norm of things between different people.

[@vlover15OO]

i think there's a lot of bad in the film like you pointed out Al but i do think there's also plenty of good as well. from the big things such as the choreography of the Honda odyssey scene which you can go into detail about what each character does like when wade tosses his swords away because he gets hit with his own swords in such a small fighting space, to the small things like paradox actually berating wade for desecrating logans corpse after showing that he really respected the man. so while i can respect Maulers decision to not jump on the bandwagon i think hes not giving the film as much credit as it deserves either.

[@blurhavokofficial]

Mauler and I don't focus on choreography because that has very little to do with writing. Personally, I do not have the eye for choreography such as someone like Shad, so I don't talk about it unless it is painfully obvious how bad it is á la Echo. There can be neat writing details about the characters in said fights, but when it comes to the core plot of the film; the "excuse" for the fights not being sound, the film is a mess that usurps any positive objective elements of the writing. I still enjoyed the Honda fight, the fight scene where Wade uses Logan's bones to fight was hilarious, and the cameos still gave me a smile despite their somewhat key jangling nature. But the structure of this movie is broken.

[@zbob90]

I think the whole concept of an "Anchor Being" is supposed to be a representation of a main character in a franchise. The universe fizzling out represents the loss of interest in a franchise after the main character dies. The TVA ripping out the universe is a representation of Disney liquidating all of the FOX assets because of said loss of interest. Overall, I thought the whole plot was supposed to be a playful commentary.

[@Mrtorquebowguy]

At what points does the meta/representation/reference supercede the utility in the film? I get the "joke" but the in universe questions begged by an anchor being not only ruin this movie but all the rest. Who is? When? Why? What metric determines their importance? What happened before they were born? Is it humans? (Boring) The importance placed on the joke was such that it breaks so many other things and for what? Haha...these franchises hinge upon one great actor. I clapped.

[@zbob90]

​@@Mrtorquebowguy I see your point. Maybe if Deadpool ended up destroying the TVA and the whole multiverse it would have helped the plot. Deadpool could be like, "Eh the whole multiverse thing was muddying the waters anyway. Let's move on to more creative things." That way the movie could establish itself as a non-canon absurdist comedy.

[@VPT2]

@@zbob90 It actually would have been amusing if the multiverse died from this movie.

[@Mrtorquebowguy]

@VPT2 yeah, I'd have been down for that. Comes across a little toothless if you can joke about the thing but still hinge your movie upon the thing. Deadpool probably would be your "get out of the multiverse" free card but I can only assume they're not done with it quite yet.

[@ExeErdna]

@@Mrtorquebowguy It's because it's a commentary just not at movies yet comics and media overall. A lot of comics die the moment a good writer leaves. Especially when one comes on and starts undoing things because they themselves disliked them. Or wanted to push something else. How many IPs pretty much have to wrap up once a major character passes on? It's a stupid concept many abused by DC comics... Who will destroy universes as a plot hook

[@BasedLiz]

I think what would be a great video to make (but also really hard to do, I'm sure) would be a long-form critique, going over everything wrong with the film objectively but also explaining what they did right in terms to make so many people love it subjectively (character, content, flashy fights, etc.). The subjective part would be hard, because it would have to be contrasted with other films that people hated but that attempted to do similar things.

[@blurhavokofficial]

I'm listening to the EFAP Breakdown now and they're doing exactly what you're asking for

[@BasedLiz]

@@blurhavokofficial Cool! That's on my watch later list.

[@shamrockdragon7634]

Deadpool and Wolverine looks more like paying lip service to fans, a "hey we're giving you what you want, get all the way off our backs now" and a desperate bid to finally have a movie make money without the studio actually learning from their mistakes. In the wake of Robert Downey Jr.'s return to the MCU, as a completely different character, its a hey, "you like these actors, you like these characters, we're giving them to you". I know Chris Gore said something about Marvel firing everyone who is woke, but the future will show if this movie or RDJ's return will make the difference some people are hoping for.

[@frostfang7670]

Idk if we are getting off their backs anytime soon since we still have Agatha All Along, Iron Heart and a heavily heavily reshot Captain Falcon which will never recover its money and Thunderbolts (a suicide squad rip-off with none of the original thunderbolts no one asked for).

[@jesterscircus.3490]

I don’t know, I like how funny you can be when you go angry and stuff

[@trevin277]

Just thought of another big gap in the plot so the thing they need to beat Cassandra is juggernaut helmet and juggernaut works for Cassandra so in the entire void there's one object that can nullify her abilities and she just allows Juggernaut to have it? Why would she do that? A lot of flaws in this film have been brushed off by people saying it's just a nonsensical comedy but the main antagonist is one of the few things in the movie that's played straight so why would she be so dumb as to allow her underling to have her only weakness. If it's something about her band of villains all being super loyal and juggernaut has it to keep it out of enemy hands why not give it to Azazle who can teleport it away if trouble comes

[@10md.]

I watched his fallout review, he changed my mind on it, i kept saying "hes right, how did i not see that"... whats weird is i seen what he seen when it comes to deadpool 3

[@smd1876]

I saw the complete breakdown on EFAP yesterday and i had fun with it. I still like Mauler

[@lennynull-funf-zehn5416]

"MauLer is going out of his way to hate things" He liked Andor... most of the Open Bar/FNT/Chat thought it was boring. (they are wrong) he liked the TLOU show, most of them thought it was garbage (they are wrong again) he liked season 2 of HotD, when most of chat thought it was boring/garbage (they are wrong... YET AGAIN) but MauLer goes out of his way to hate things... alright.

[@Fauwkes]

TLOU was literal dogshit, chat was correct. Mauler and rags made excuses for it left or right that he wouldn’t let go for any other franchise

[@lennynull-funf-zehn5416]

@@Fauwkes alright then, explain to us why it's so awful

[@a_rat_named_mouse]

The main problem with TLOU show is that the game exists and, as a story, is, I would argue, purely better. If you've played the game, you already got the better experience. If you haven't played the game and don't like the gameplay, watch the show and you'll get more or less the same package. Regardless, it is still great, even if only by virtue of being an 85% copy of an already existing great thing.

[@lennynull-funf-zehn5416]

@@a_rat_named_mouse Isn't that exactly what an adaptation should do though? My mother would have never played the game but I watched the show with her and she loved it. gaming might be the most capable form of media in terms of storytelling, but it sure isn't the most accessible one. I would also argue that the show does some things better than the game story wise (and some worse) the Last of Us 1 is one of the most overrated video games of all time, considering people praise it for having one of the best stories in gaming ever... wich is simply not the case. the story of TLOU is really REALLY simple... it's just told really well and hits everyone in the right place emotionally. when it comes to writing I would argue the show does a good job at removing certain plot holes/inconsistencies that were present in the game

[@samwallaceart288]

MauLer Chad Yes'es his position on a lot of things when it actively hurts his reputation. Anyone who thinks him an "audience-captured grifter" hasn't seen the vitriol he got even from his own friends for defending Bella Ramsey's Ellie performance. Audience-capture my ass

[@arklaw8306]

Mauler loves Thor Ragnarok IIRC.

[@fd502]

No… I don’t think that’s right. I use EFAP reruns to fall asleep. I think the whole panel took the piss out of it repeatedly.

[@estoria3933]

@@fd502 They hated Love and Thunder, not Ragnarok. On the other hand, both MauLer and Rags said they really liked Ragnarok (don't remember Fringy's stance on it).

[@samwallaceart288]

They enjoyed Ragnorak as dumb fun, but retroactively soured on it knowing what Waititi would become. I never got their soft spot for it. To me Ragnorak and Love+Thunder are the same cringe. MauLer taking so long to sour on Ragnorak is the actual L here; I wonder if he started off hard on Deadpool and Wolverine because he learned his lesson; a couple good jokes and character beats won't age well if the movie around it is bullshit. Their initial review of The Suicide Squad is like a middle ground of this arc; they said right from jump "this movie is bullshit nonsense, but we enjoy the character moments" It all makes a lot of sense to me that MauLer started off giving Ragnorak a pass. Some things get on his good side even now, and he's aware of that more and more as time goes on, to a fault some seem to think

[@fd502]

@@estoria3933 Oh yeah! Actually you are correct they did go easy on Ragnorok my mistake. I’ve never seen either film so I got the names confused.

[@fd502]

@@samwallaceart288 Yeah I fall asleep to the old podcasts and I was wrong you guys are right. He did give the old Ragnorak a pass. I never saw either movie and actually never saw much of the MCU in general so I got the names confused. I think that good will goes a long way and I think there were some stinkers that got overlooked even pretty early Iron Man 3 is what comes to mind for me I heard that was pretty dumb from my brother. The 3 MCU movies I saw were the great ones that my bro vetted plus Hulk 2008 which was fine trust me if you saw Hulk 2003 you’d think 2008 was fine. But yeah good will, and I think that’s probably some of what has happened with Deadpool Wolverine, it’s good will not for MCU, for Ryan Reynolds and Hugh Jackman.

[@sergeantsapient]

*man has opinion on internet* Everyone else: *screeches*

[@wingsoffreedom3589]

Subbed

[@dennisbeaman958]

Alternate logan backstory reminds me with a actual comic and it was the fans who said that that was the worst Logan and batman as in Bruce wayn did use guns and kill and was prime batman till they changed him to earth 2 even though he was the first comics batman and Also great video you make valid points

[@Brandon-ph8dv]

Thank you Alastor. It was weird seeing the criticism being lobbed at Mauler. I have always disliked the "turn off your brain and enjoy it" defense. As you said, liking things is not the same as that thing being objectively good. I believe this movie will be forgotten in a couple weeks.

[@bongwaterbojack]

I don't think the "turn off you brain" defense is said as a way to promote the films quality. Just an acknowledgement that you can have fun with it in spite of the quality.

[@spinosaurusstriker]

​@@bongwaterbojackyeah bit then they use that argument to silence criticism

[@bongwaterbojack]

@spinosaurusstriker That sounds more like an inference of motive than anything that would be backed up with substance.

[@ThisisKyle]

@@bongwaterbojack it is absolutely used as an argument the silence criticism because whenever you bring up criticism of this movie people just tell you to stop taking it so seriously. Which is just another way of saying turn your brain off

[@bongwaterbojack]

@ThisisKyle that's not "silencing criticism." It's not even a counter to it. If anything, it's agreeing with your point, and just adding that it doesn't matter to them. You're using "silencing criticism" as loosely as Disnoids use "racism."

[@jeggsonvohees2201]

Even on my first watch i felt somwthing was off when i realized early on that I was laughing at somw jokes because i was supposed to, not because they were funny or well written.

[@christaberit]

It’s really annoying to hear everyone pretending that Deadpool 1 isn’t well written and dramatic and heart felt because they have to protect Deadpool 3. It’s the same tired argument that the Star Wars sequel fans use. We used to have these things called guilty pleasures. Movies we knew were bad but we liked anyway. We should bring that back. It would save everyone a lot of braincells.

[@reysolo3672]

SHOOWWWN NOT PROVEN. YOU CAN"T SHOOOOWWW IIITTT

[@MajorSmurf]

Technically speaking to review something you need you own gauge or tick box of standards you're looking for so that you can review all things equally within that sphere. Generally speaking most reviewers would break it down to characters, world building and so on. There are obvious exceptions where certain parts can come down to subjective feelings on a reviewers end. Ya know if you recently lost a parent and watch a film about losing a parent it might hit certain emotional beats that hit you hard but the actual story could be awfully written. Personal bias is always going to be a part of a human review as well it's impossible to not be human. Now no one's saying you can't love any film as well that's completely down to you and how you feel. You can love a film for it's jokes or a single character or whatever but the story could still be a illogical mess with characters making decisions that go against what you know of them. It is possible for someone to want both in a comedy and maybe that's what Mauler expected. A comedy still works within a realm of it's own logic just like any story, being a comedy or because it's a gag film doesn't mean you can't go in expecting a good or logically consistent story. It really comes down to personal allowance of certain things. For instance I love shows like Nichijou and Konosuba, both are utterly hilarious to me and both have character arcs and stories going on the background that you might not even notice at first because of the gags taking front and centre. Yet you can go and watch both and feel you've watched an amazing story as well as laughing your guts out. Or you could watch it for the jokes and have fun that way, totally up to what you want from the show you're reading, watching, listening or playing.

[@strydyrhellzrydyr1345]

Bro... I love maulers stuff.. its all i been listening to.. for over a MONTH... BUT GUESS WHAT... I HATE HIS TAKE ON Deadpool and Wolv. BUT STILL... HE IS ONE OF MY FAVORITE KZbinRS. hasnt changed one BIT

[@kari2570]

There's nothing wrong with having high standards for movies. What's better, a parody movie with bad writing, or a parody movie with good writing? There's also the risk that Hollywood will learn the wrong lesson from this success as they sometimes do, for example: as long as it's funny, the script doesn't matter.

[@Green-HairedAnti-Liberal]

I love this movie. I agree with your analysis of its flaws, but I don't think it's fair to call it a "turn your brain off" kind of film. Some of those flaws I think are on purpose as a diss on Disney and other BS Hollywood contrivances and continuity errors (like the anchor beings and being found by X23). You can call it head canon if you want, but thats how I see it. I dislike Mauler's take on this one, but those comments you showed were way over blown. Good lord. I understand how he probably feels about the love for this film since it's likely how I feel about Twisters. Sometimes, people disagree. It's okay. Calm down and breathe, guys. Also, my main problem is what happened to Vanessa's character. It was BS.

[@reader5562]

I laughed my way through Deadpool and Wolverine and had a great time in the theater. That said, my history with regard to Mauler's takes is that he's probably right about the flaws he sees in the movie. I was very much in my older (pre TLJ) mode of enjoying the stuff I was seeing while not being overly critical.

[@tylerjames805]

Is it a perfect movie? Fuck no. But for Mauler to say it’s just as bad as everything else in Phase 4? Nah man I disagree with that. I can at least say a lot more positives about the movie as a whole than Quantamania, She Hulk, Dr Strange MOM, etc. where I can’t find anything positive about them.

[@mahoutsuguy863]

By Mauler's standard, he's right. The ramifications of this movie fucks with too much. As explained in this video, we have another concept that contradicts Loki, ignores Multiverse of Madness and further fucks with time and space in a worse way. Deadpool is turned into a single brain cell joke machine instead of a guy with a good heart that's sarcastic and aware like he was in part 1 and 2. It's being marketed as a "farewell" to Fox and it craps on a lot of that stuff. Johnny snd Sabertooth might as well not have been in the movie. The "void" being escapable with a sling ring(??????) The WORST Logan being this man presented in this movie and not someone way worse in an INFINITE universe. Nah the movie is awful. (Or if it helps, the writing is) But as always if you like it, I'm glad. I can name things I liked about this movie but people want to act like not liking this movie is impossible. (Let's not forget the literal desecration of Logan's grave in the first 5 minutes)

[@tylerjames805]

@@mahoutsuguy863And that’s fine if it’s his standard I’ve disagreed with Mauler on many things before. But Mauler’s fans just take whatever he says as gospel and if you disagree you’re some idiot sheep who’s merely entertained by key jangling or shallow forms of art. It just comes off as really snobbish.

[@mahoutsuguy863]

@@tylerjames805 ​ @tylerjames805 Well that's kind of the point. If he's saying it's as bad as everything in Phase 4 and his issues line up with the same types of issues he's had with everything else in Phase 4, then what are you complaining about? Like I said, if you liked Deadpool, that's fine, just say that. If you think Mauler is wrong, dispute what he says is actually BAD about the movie. If you can't, then default to "Well, *I* liked it." and it's fine. As for Mauler's fans, that's on you to even let that come into the conversation. All that matters is Mauler's points and your ability to argue against them. Letting a community's attitude distract you from the points being made is an issue. What's worse than people who think what he says is gospel are people that'll go "YUP! He's right!" when he's talking about MoM or The Marvels, but then "do you even like anything??" when it comes to something they/you like, but doesn't hold up when he's using the same standard he uses to actually critique everything. TL;DR: Nothing's changed. Dispute Mauler's points or move on. If they don't matter to you because you like the movie regardless of the massive flaws with it, congrats. That doesn't remove the flaws, but no one is asking you to dislike the movie.

[@Wandermidget]

Deadpool and Wolverine, while I enjoyed it, and while it also does have people who worked on it that actually care about the source material, is far from a perfect film and has plenty of flaws. I'm glad there are people out there like Maular who aren't afraid of critizing it. The MCU is far from "being back" and once people get over the honeymoon phase, I'm sure people will get around to looking at it more "objectively", instead of using it as a set piece for "Take THAT other MCU films!"

[@Sarcastic_Sophist]

I appreciate you acknowledging you can like bad movies for subjective reasons. The amount of times I had a former friend try to argue why I should like the last of us 2 got so high it annoyed the hell out of me. They never had a good defense and all their reasons for liking it were subjective. Refusing to acknowledge my objective criticisms about retconning. I wanted to let it drop but she kept bringing it up. Getting mad at how she felt like I was trying to "take away her enjoyment of the game". I pointed out I love the movie dark shadows, it is terribly written and camp as hell but I find it hilarious. I've seen people break down the horrible dialogue and agree with the criticisms. However, the actors did a surprisingly good job and it makes the script funny. You can enjoy bad media just admit it is objectively bad. No one can take your joy away from you.

[@sab3redg333]

Also in what world do we need to agree 💯 percent with everything a person says?

[@fennicfox4600]

Hey I watched your monster verse video, I was listening to it while replaying Portal... But yeah my favorite anime, Girls Und Panzer, is objectively bad but subjectively amazing. Tanks are accurate and inaccurate when the script needs it and physics be damned but it has my attention everytime I watch it.

[@wingsoffreedom3589]

Mauler's ability to say this was good or bad for these reasons regardless of personal taste or the screeching of the crowd is why he is one of my favorite youtubers. He has one of the highest amounts of integrity in the youtube entertainment space and I say this as a guy mauler ripped (gently) into for my opinion on God of War ragnarok which many I still hold. But he will always be wrong factually on his take of avatar the last air bender. Sinceas he got many of his references wrong for the flaws he pointed out.

[@cdubsb3831]

Your characterization of Wolverine from another timeline being inconsistent doesn't hold water with objective critique. We already have and understand versions of Batman who kill and versions of Spider-Man who aren't responsible even ignoring the caveat that this is an individual with their own story. It is not an internal logical inconsistency for Wolverine regarding the actions of a separate Wolverine. Spider-Verse shows a Peter B. Parker who needs to relearn some of his stoic qualities, and we don't pretend like he's some unrecognizable non-Spider-Man

[@MagerBlutooth]

I've found that when people encounter criticism of a poorly written movie that they enjoy, there's a natural tendency to ask the critic "What's your favorite movie?" so that they can poke holes in it and show how it feels for something they love to be scrutinized. It's easy to see this as a tacit admission that the movie can't be defended objectively, but I think what is really going on is an attempt to establish a common standard. A standard that is too high or too low isn't useful, and I think the core criticism when these conversations come up is how good a movie needs to be to be considered "good." Does it only need to get a D- to get that passing grade, or does it need to be at least a B- to deserve the thumbs up? As long as we apply our standard consistently, any standard we use can be considered objective. I think what people need to ask is whether the character and story issues Mauler points out would beneath their standards if part of a typical MCU film. If so, perhaps they would concede that they have placed this film in a different narrative "weight class", where they are measuring it against other movies they have deemed to be unserious.

[@GBDupree]

I think the main issue here is that most people treat Deadpool movies as pure parodies that take place in the same universe as another set of movies. Because of it being parody, people are more lenient to the story and writing. But Mauler treats it as he would any other movie, and sees it as taking PART in the same universe as other movies, meaning everything that happens in that movie has stakes for the other movies. We've only seen the references go one way, Deadpool has the X-men, but the X-men don't have Deadpool, but Mauler treats it no differently than if it was directly connected. This is the main reason I think people are disagreeing with Mauler here. To make a direct example, the idea of an anchor being is a purely meta one. The idea is that Wolverine is the main reason people cared about the Fox X-men movies, and without him the movies are doomed to die slowly as people lose interest. The issue is that people may catch the meta qualities of this story beat and appreciate it for the parody. BUT, Mauler sees this being said by a TVA guy, and therefore its now a new law added to the multiverse that has direct consequences for all the movies, and therefore has serious repercussions. Because of this, its bad writing pure and simple, and he can't simply write it off as parody like everyone else. Perhaps had the movie made it Deadpool who came up with the concept, then the meta-ness of the idea could be saved, as Deadpool can break the fourth wall, and him thinking that's how it works doesn't mean that's true. So this would be a solution for Mauler, but its completely unnecessary for everyone else, as it serves the same purpose either way for them. I also find that Mauler tends to treat comedy more harshly overall, especially if the movie has any seriousness to it. He simply cannot abide a mixing of the two, comedy and tragedy must be kept seperate. Like with Signs, he felt that all the attempts at lighthearted comedic moments ruins the movie, while for most people its fine and even adds moments of memorability. He likely wouldn't accept a movie using comedy during a tragic moment, even if it uses it to enhance the tragedy in some way, because he dislikes comedy in serious moments on principle. For Deadpool they tend to keep them seperate, so its fine, but his negative bias towards this movie for other reasons, makes him cynical towards the comedy of this movie more than the first 2. I hope this makes sense?

[@MagerBlutooth]

@@GBDupree Yes, I think this description sounds sensible enough. Mauler generally attempts to judge every movie by the same standards, while other people are more willing to accept different standards for different movies depending on how seriously they take the movie. I recall Mauler was somewhat in the middle of the road regarding the Mario movie and had high praise for Puss in Boots 2, both of which attempted to mix drama and comedy into one package. I think the primary difference is that those movies did not sacrifice the characters to make its jokes in Mauler's eyes, while he listed several examples of Deadpool and Wolverine doing that.

[@AKATenn]

It was not a good movie, but it is still worth watching, and fun, I will watch it again when it goes on streaming... deadpool 1 and 2 were better. I tried to explain what I thought of it to a co-worker and was just like... "it's not....it's not... well it's just a fun comedy"

[@HolyApplebutter]

Exactly how I feel about the movie. I thought it was fun and overall enjoyed it. But I would never call it a good movie.

[@damcmadlad2975]

I mean mauler has always struck me as a very picky and detail oriented person to the point where I was actually kinda surprised that he liked the first two Deadpool movies to begin with

[@Justanidea5976]

I think the main reason why Mauler is getting hate for this is because he's being extremely hyperbolic like how the people who defend the Star Wars Sequels with their dying breath are. He says Deadpool and Wolverine are character assassinated. They're not. If that were the case barely anyone would like the movie even if DP and Wolverine were doing the most fan-service stuff ever. You say that the wolverine shown in the movie isn't wolverine because he didnt help Charles when the humans attacked them. That's not how characters work and thinking like that closes down creativity and imagination. There are evil versions of Peter Parker, is he now not Spiderman? Of course he still is, just a different version. Professor X can still be the guy fighting for peace and safety for mutants while also being the guy who tried to kill his twin sister with the umbilical cord. I would've loved to see how the humans killed the X-Men, but it's also shown in Days of Future Past that the humans would've won if Wolverine didn't decide to help when he did. It's not character assassination when it's an entirely different Logan in a different universe. In Invincible Season 2 it's shown that most other Marks are evil, just because our Mark is good doesn't mean it assassinated the other Mark's character. The problem with being objective criticism is that you have to be right. It's fine for Mauler to not like the movie, but he's just wrong in his overall analysis of it. But I also think the violent change in the audience's thoughts of him without challenging what he says or thinks is also a problem.

[@blurhavokofficial]

The problem here is that you're saying Mauler is wrong when I never included his reasoning for why he said that. I included *my* criticisms of the film. You can't say Mauler is definitely wrong when your basis is on someone else's arguments. And no, an evil Peter Parker is not Spiderman. Even recent multiverse gibberish establishes that there are defining traits that are constant with all Spiderpeople. "With great power comes great responsibility" has to be in there according to Marvel themselves.

[@Justanidea5976]

@@blurhavokofficial I've seen the criticisms he has of the movie but I mainly went for the ones he said in that video of the DP and Wolv being character assassinated. An evil Peter Parker can still be Spiderman, it all depends on how they take that statement and what environment they're in. They would just be evil Spiderman, much like how the Wolverine in this movie is regarded as the worst Wolverine. Even more so since Wolverine doesn't have as much of a moral code connected to his character.

[@TheWildRobotHypeFan2024]

@@blurhavokofficial I think you need to look into the entire fandom initiative also organized chaos as a part of the fandom initiative

[@taylorlinyard3533]

Oh yeah, Mauler is 100% right about Deadpool and Wolverine, I just think I and everyone else are just desperate to finally have a good marvel movie again and just “have fun” again that we’re willing to take whatever we get, even if it could’ve been better, just because we know it could’ve been much worse. Not as bad as expected means great in modern times. Poor Mauler man it must suck having shmucks like me going along pretending that this movie is good even though it’s just nostalgia and thoughtless humor. But at this point we just don’t have any talented creatives in Hollywood, we should just put comic movies away for a decade so people that care can learn filmmaking and writing and come back with the stories comic fans deserve.

[@JohnJacobSchmidtt]

And I think people kind of overthink some of these movies..... I like to watch movies so I don't have to think too hard I can actually turn my brain off a little bit.😂😂😂

[@jonathanhaynes9914]

I think Mauler is correct, but I enjoyed myself at the movie anyway.

[@666willis666]

the weapons thing is because the lack of enggon they are not energy based they use ammunition. bro i love the spawn movie even though how bad it is

[@dirceusantos7308]

I would've like to see MFM Mercs for Money But many members are missing

[@jeggsonvohees2201]

From my experience Monsterverse fans are nearly impossible to reason with when it comes to film critique. Even as a lifeling Zilla fan inhad no idea the communitie's standards were so low.

[@mediadetective6104]

I don’t agree with Mauler (mostly) when it comes to Deadpool 3 but I at least understand his criticisms and get why he hated it. I’m not going to turn on him when he shits on something I like, I agree with him more than not on most occasions. Edit: Btw we can all agree the Vanessa stuff sucks. Also we can also agree Anchor beings are awful (and the idea of Paradox just making it up would’ve been way better) but I wonder if the reason that doesn’t piss me off as much as some is I’m so not invested in the MCU at this point and I’m not watching every movie so I don’t have to worry about the implications of Anchor Beings while Mauler and co know they’re going to watch mostly every MCU movie so they’re like “fuck we’re going to see this again probably”

[@texteel]

16:10 "... how hard is it, to keep [incursion rules] consistent?" Considering they themselves dont understand the rules they have created, very.

[@bertimusprime7900]

Mauler has basically not changed since his first video. I dont know why people get so uppity about it. People invest too much emotion in these stories that dont deserve their investment.

[@Fauwkes]

He has though. He praised TLOU despite it being horriffic Dogshit.

[@bertimusprime7900]

@@Fauwkes I didn't care for it as a whole, but I wouldn't go far as to call it dogshit. It had plenty to praise, but I thought it was mid at best.

[@Fauwkes]

@@bertimusprime7900 like what? The cheap production design? The community theater acting? The character assassination of Joel, Ellie, bill and everyone else?

[@bertimusprime7900]

@Fauwkes some of the acting was a little weak, but not most of it. The production was generic, but not bad, and lastly, the characters may have been assassinated if you consider them the same characters as from the game, but seeing as they are completely different because of the complete retelling and change of medium, only a passive aggressive idiot would consider them assassinated as though it was the same continuity. Honestly, I haven't watched it since it game out, and I wasn't a big fan, so it's ironic that I'm defending it here. I don't really care.

[@Fauwkes]

@@bertimusprime7900 really? You’re using the “just pretend you liked it” defense?

[@ShamankingXYZ]

Media consumption is kind of like food. Food can be well made and have nothing that stands out about it that is necessarily wrong, and you can still come away from it not liking the taste. Personally I don't like cotton candy, but that's not the same thing as saying that cotton candy is bad and I know that there are plenty of people who do like it. Same thing applies to any media, not just movies. A movie plot might have nothing that stands out as being poorly made and people can still just not like it for any number of reasons, or a movie plot could have more holes than a block of swiss cheese and get all kinds of praise. Like and dislike are a matter of taste, while good and bad are the ability to uphold a standard. The shut your brain off defense is a tacit admission that the media you're consuming does not meet a particular standard and you are choosing to ignore that fact in order to enjoy it. You're free to do that, but I think that we should collectively hold media to a higher standard than that.

[@doom-detox]

Anchor beings make sense in that it's a joke, like the universe without Hugh Jackman would just die a slow death, but in the sense of continuity, it doesn't really, because of stuff established in other movies. Kinda pointless though, because I don't see them following up on this concept at all.

[@furyberserk]

Let me stop you right there. Tony's sacrifice was one in which Thanos lost, and as we know, only 2 truly survived thanos. His use of the guantlet making him an anchor being eould mean the use of the gauntlet default destroys the universe. 2. Tony only used it to kill thanos and his army, before they did anything. Previous thanos was killed by thor. 3. Gamora and Natalia would be anchor beings, as well as hulk if risking your life was always the cost. The use of the gauntlet should have anchored everyone who survived, thus just Hulk. Thanos changed the rules when he killed half all life. New thanos never made the trade. Only Hulk should be if we are gonna use the gauntlet. 4. Thanos wins in all other universes. Only he should default be anchor if not some gods.

[@otterfire4712]

Mutants are few in number compared to humans, pair this with humanity's drive for innovation. Think of mutants as vampires, they're powerful, but they're few in comparison to non-metas. Wolverine (who is supposed to be one of the hero mutants) going on a massacre broke any ties between non-meta and meta humans.

[@azraelbokor247]

"The Meg" and "The Meg 2." Are either of them great movies, no. Full of inconsistencies. However, the first is a better movie. But I enjoy watching both of them. I'm not expecting an epic of Lord of the Rings. I'm watching The Megs. Would they be improved if they were better written? Maybe. But then we wouldn't get a scene where a man steps out into the Mariana trench with no suit and survives. Or a scene where a man is kicked into a sharks mouth. Or a scene where Jason Statham kills a Meg with a helicopter blade. Or that megs are alive at all. So yeah, it would be nice if all media was written without any inconsistencies. But then we wouldn't have "The Room," "Mega Shark vs Crocosaurus," "Land Shark," "The Crow: Wicked Prayer," or any of the countless bad horror movies that are hilarious on prime. And there are movies written purposefully bad, like Sylvester Stallone's "Staying Alive." Which from interviews was written basically just so Travolta, Stallone, and everyone making the movie could just have fun, and so Stallone could tell his real story in a fun way. It was basically a shitpost movie. If it was made today, mauler would be one of the same critics who originally panned the movie, and his criticism would be valid, but it wouldn't matter to Stallone. He didn't make it for Mauler. He made it for himself. And back in the day, "Saturday Night Fever" was a cultural phenomenon. People were excited to see the sequel. And Stallone also didn't really care about that either. Which Mauler would also, critisize, that would also be correct. Doesn't change anything though. It also wasn't made for the audience. Then theres the hilarity of Stallone being tricked into being in "Stop or My Mom Will Shoot." A terrible movie, made hilarious by the simple fact that Arnold Schwarzenegger spread rumors he was going to try out for the movie, in order to bait Stallone into taking the job. Meaning every single scene Arnold is out there laughing like a super villain because his master plan worked. Which makes the movie amazing. Both of those things would be impossible if we wrote everything to the standard Mauler, EFAP, and the gang desire. They are the exact same as critics back in the day. And filmmakers and actors take their criticism the same way they used to. Mixed.