Nostalgia Critic/Headscratchers: Difference between revisions
m
→top: clean up, replaced: Big Lipped Alligator Moment → Non Sequitur Scene (2)
(update links) |
m (→top: clean up, replaced: Big Lipped Alligator Moment → Non Sequitur Scene (2)) |
||
Line 31:
** He was acting out how he thought the Sailor Moon enemies would react to the two minute or more transformation sequence before the fight.
* What's the difference between his "Pointless Moments" and "[[
**
* Luke and Phelous blew up with Canada in "Your An Old Dirty Bastard". Wouldn't their lives be then worse?! Also, doesn't President Vargas seem a little too trigger happy for America to be safe. I know thats the joke, but there literally has to be ''someone'' in the world who is worse off. Also theres a name that kept coming to my toungue during this: Rob!
** [[Fridge Brilliance|Isn't it obvious! Rob is Santa Christ and Santa Christ is telling the story!]] My brain actually went to Chester, as he was always calling the Critic nice and Critic seemed to be the only one in TGWTG to give him change, as well as offer a place to stay. I think you just have to take [[Rule of Funny]] on this one and ignore some logic issues.
*** I'm guessing that without the Critic to give him money, Chester was forced to pull his life together and became a millionaire businessman.
** For that matter, why would Spoony be a non-gamer who reviews ''only family films?'' I know, I know, [[Rule of Funny]]
*** That bugged me, but for a different
*** The world is without the Nostalgia Critic ''as we know and recognize him'', not necessarily without a person or entity that at any point for whatever reason chose to name him-or-herself 'the Nostalgia Critic'; after all, if we applied that logic to the original movie, there could never have been anyone ever called "George Bailey". We're also viewing them as in-universe characters; maybe in-universe Spoony secretly desires to be the Nostalgia Critic and happily review family films, and the fact that he can't is what fuels his angry reviews of video games instead? As for why Spoony's not doing video games, he has done movie reviews from time to time, so it's not unheard of.
Line 46:
* Why was Santa Christ [[Sound Effect Bleep|bleeped]] in the [[Care Bears]] 2 review when nothing else is bleeped?
** Because he's Santa
* In the [[Inspector Gadget (film)|Inspector Gadget]] review, he says that they leave Penny behind for the climax. When I saw the flick on Cartoon Network a few weeks ago I saw her take out a guard by making him think over his life as a goon after sneaking in the factory and joining her uncle in the finale. Why would he skim that detail?
Line 94:
*** About half of the Critic's suffering ''is'' his own fault, he expects too much and then gets let down. Doug said that himself either in an interview or at a convention.
*** And then treating the subject as if it were legitimately bad just because he disappointed himself? ... Yeah I guess that does actually fit with the description he's given the character. After all, reviews aren't really the gospel. I guess I just couldn't shake the feeling that a part of Doug actually thought that certain cartoons suffered for not following reality.
*** It might also be something along the lines of what's often called called "Ebert's Law" (basically, it's not what it's about, it's how it's about it); after all, it's possible for even cartoon logic to be pushed too far past breaking point or to be inconsistent with it's own internal logic or rules (if it sets up a more-or-less 'realistic' universe and then has something over-the-top and zany happen, then it's shattering the show's internal logic). It's also probably to do with him being the ''Nostalgia''
**** Just because something is a cartoon doesn't give the writers an excuse to be lazy. Half the time, the stuff he's pointing out isn't just cartoony type stuff, it's something central to the plot that is just completely ignored or not mentioned. Saying something is a cartoon, and so doesn't have to make sense, is a cop out, like saying something is "enchanted". Alright, fine. But A) You still have to be consistent. For a Tom and Jerry Movie, violating basic laws of physics and reality is fine, you expect it. But for Doug? I don't think so. It just doesn't fit with the tone of the show at all. And B) Bending the rules has to appear before the big climax, or it's just a Deus Ex Machina with a lazy explanation.
| |||