Forums / Media / Websites

I'm looking for people's opinions on Doug Walker, I used to be subscribed to him but I heard some people consider him a lolcow[and I read his encyclopedia dramatica article, well, skim-read], and since I don't wanna be associated with lolcows I unsubscribed.

though I'm wondering, what's the general concensous on him? is he an actually good critic, a merely funny youtuber, a merely unfunny youtuber or a straight-up lolcow and or horrid person? I think it might not be best to ask on KYM, But I'd like opinions.

I mean, do you think his criticisms are fair? That's what really matters. Even if you don't agree with him, a different point of view is a good thing. I don't think "I heard he was a lolcow" is a particularly good reason.

I watch him sometimes, but not religiously.

was good for a while when he was still doing it because he thought it was fun, it went to shit when he decided to make it into a buisness/troupe.

I've always liked his work, before and after he got a bigger budget. I like those AVGN-type review shows, so this guy is fine with me. He also talks in a more serious way about a lot of interesting subjects, like when comedy goes too far and that kind of stuff.

The eSults are trash, though. You don't simply intentionally make a set of forum weapons to use. They feel… unreal, in a way.

He's fine. Some of the sketches are kinda lame, but his editorials are very good.

His comedy nowadays is really hit and miss. There are times where he hits the joke right on the head, but other times he makes the joke go on way too long (Rogue One's Darth Vader scene was not only lame, but it goes on for what feels like forever).

His hate boner he has for M. Night Shyamalan is pretty tiresome also.

His best stuff imo are his editorials and Disneycember.

I have mixed feelings regarding his "skits" Given that he really wanted to do Demo Reels, I kinda understand why he went this direction, but on the other hand, they suck so much and can ruin otherwise good reviews. The old style might have been simple, but it was a simple that worked and he seems much better at making one-off comments and minor skits like the "signs door" one, but the high budget story line skits just fall flat and makes me want to skip to the review.

It doesn't help that they add virtually nothing to the actual review, which given the fact fact that most of his audience subscribed to him for his informed criticism delivered in an amusing way, not his sketch comedy, is a problem. It's telling when his editorials, short reviews, disneycember, i.e. the things devoid of skits are more often than not the things people praise as his best work.

Given fact that he constantly defends the skits by strawmanning the complaints against them and ignoring why people actually don't like them, there also seems to be a disconnect between him and his fans. What he wants to produce and what the fans want to see seem to be two different things.

It seems to me that he simply just wants to do Demo Reel and desperately wants it to work, given that he originally quit NC to do DR only to come back once that failed, and essentially merged the two to try and salvage some of DR. However, it seems to be that a lot of his fans just want him to stick with what works and stop deviating into paths that are clearly not working.

For me personally, I still watch his editorials and short stuff, but hesitate to watch the main Nostalgia Critics anymore, especially since the one with the strawfan skit (forget which one that was though) The fact that he responded to legit criticism in such an immature way really puts a bad taste in my mouth personally. Again, I can understand why a creator might want to follow their passion project and change things up, but you got to know when something's not working and not respond to its failure as if it were the fans fault.

/rant end.

His editorials are good. I don't agree with everything he has to say, but he does a fine job presenting his opinions. However, the Nostalgia Critic ain't what he used to be. The show was best when it was just Doug Walker sitting in front of a white background, talking about whatever he watched. I think he grew bored of this, which is why he added storylines and characters. Unfortunately, these things just inflate his videos to an uncomfortable length (eheheh). Also, dipping into more contemporary stuff undercuts the whole nostalgic feel. Then again, he may have just run out of old movies and TV to cover. I don't watch often, but when I do, it seems like half the video is funny and relevant to the topic, and the rest consists of boring character moments.

I still enjoy watching him. Skits are usually hit or miss, but I do enjoy the reviews more than the skits, which is why I don't really watch the clipless reviews like Jurassic World, Mad Max Fury Road, even Star Wars Rogue One (which had Chris Stuckmann in it). I don't mind reviews on more modern movies honestly, as long as I find the review enjoyable. I also don't mind the guest cameos he has on the show, like Dante Basco or Don Bluth, as long as the guests are used properly and humorously. If anything, the guests remind me of how far he's gone over the past 8-9 years.

His editorials are very good, too. While I do disagree with some of them, I enjoy how he presents his point of view. Same can go for his TV show blogs and his normal reviews on big movies that come out. While he can get nitpicky, I do like to hear his thoughts on that kind of stuff.

The only times I'm not really fond of him are when he takes some jabs at fans. I don't mind fan-jabs, but I feel that he hammers them in way too much (especially towards the Pokemon fans--we get it, you're not into Pokemon).

In short, I still enjoy watching Doug Walker. I do hope to meet him in person someday.

normally I'd complain about le ebin angry and sarcastic reviewer character that you see just about everywhere, but Doug refreshes the character with sketches, so I'd say that's enough to earn some respect

I don't think the skits are that bad, but sometimes they can go on for way too long.

I still like the NC and I don't mind the skits with Malcolm, Tamara, et. al. However, I disagree a few times with his "special criticism" or what was considered to be the worst part of the film such as a minor scene or a cringeworthy line from the movie.

I don't even watch his main review anymore, the main reason for that is because I don't like his sketches part as I find them to be annoying and takes longer than necessary, and I find Nostalgia Critic to be more annoying than before. Okay, maybe I'm a bit too harsh here.

I personally don't like his review style. While I know the "summary-review" style is popular on YouTube, I feel like NC is the biggest reason for its spread. As someone who has actually studied film criticism, one of the big points that is always asked in critical write-ups is that they aren't plot summaries. While there is some value to these summary-reviews, there's a big difference between retelling a movie's plot while making jokes about its flaws and actually discussing what works and doesn't work in a movie. Because of his popularity, however, this style is copied so much and I think in this way the show has been a bad influence on other amateur reviewers. Skits can work in a series that uses a framing device, but Doug doesn't implement them as well as they could be and the few I have seen have been a bit heavy-handed and not actually that funny. On the other hand I don't mind his editorials, I think he makes decent points. But I don't like the Nostalgia Critic show, and I would rather watch something like Half In The Bag if I had to choose a review style.

I've watched his stuff religiously ever since 2012, but I am aware of his shortcomings. Some of his sketches feel really forced and unfunny, but there are some okay ones now and again. A lot of the slapstick looks like it came out of a cartoon, but what works in a cartoon doesn't translate as well to live action, which is a problem because it's one of his main styles of comedy. He also has a tendency of writing antagonist characters as strawmen, which is really distracting and groanworthy when he gives the inevitable "I'm right and you're wrong" speech. Despite that, ever since he rebooted, he's gotten a lot better at criticism, seeing how his pre-To Boldly Flee work relied more on snarky remarks than constructive criticism (which isn't a bad thing, but his reviews did need a little more "review" in them, which is something the reboot era delivers). The two sidekick characters that appear in his reviews aren't too bad either, although their personalities and character traits tend to differ from episode to episode. It's also a treat to see some celebrity show up every now and again.

Overall, his reboot-era reviews aren't bad, and there are some really good reviews that came out of this era, but I still prefer his older videos.

Some of his older stuff I loved back in the day. While my tastes have changed a little bit, I still really enjoy most of the older stuff.

My problem is that sometimes he does a lot for research on his subject matter, and will give credit where credit is due (such as mentioning the history behind The Thief and the Cobbler and even mentioning the recobbled version.) These reviews I love, and I almost feel smarter for watching them. Then there are' the ones where he basically completely dismisses any existing information about the subject matter. Compare Doug's review of Pokemon: The First Movie to Linkara, JewWario (rip), and Suede's Animenia review of the same movie. While some of NC's complaints about the film are merited, it gets bogged down with "Why don't they just call them Pocket Monsters?" and other things that are really distracting if you actually know about Pokemon. The Animenia review goes into actual problems the movie has within the Pokemon universe. Even if you like the film, you can appreciate the criticisms because they aren't derailed by things that would be obvious with some research. I'm not saying that you have to be an expert to review them, but when there is a significant amount of riff fodder even if you should be "predisposed to liking it because it'a bout your favorite thing" then just a general review that complains about how a thing well relatively well established in the series the movie is based around isn't that much fun to watch for me.

Thomas and the Magic Railroad was another example. I'm not going to defend it as something great, or even any good, but he pretty much ignores (or outright criticizes since he is unaware) when they give callbacks to the Shining Time Station show, and somehow completely cuts out semi-major comic relief characters Splatter and Dodge as if they didn't exist. There are many things wrong with the film in the context of the universe, which are never addressed: Why are characters who are from the "human world" Mr. Conductor, and his brother literally the only non-vehicle characters on Sodor when the series always had actual people around in it? Where the hell are all the conductors and drives the whole film? How and why is Diesel 10 on Sodor? He' was never mentioned prior to the movie, and it's said he "visiting" Sodor. He's fucking train, he can't just hop onto a plane and get there. Why the fuck would a train with omnicidal tendencies be allowed anywhere? WTF is wrong with his controller, or do they even exist in the movie? I'm not saying NC did a terrible job of reviewing it, but there is just so much more material to work with than simply "oh it's bad, they failed at trying to animate the train faces, and the acting is bad." Oh and him basically saying "this shit is too dark for Thomas the Tank Engine, which I know because I've never watched it" was just icing on the cake.
alright, my Thomas power level is showing so I'll stop.

Also, sketches over reviews yada yada yada. While I did like the occasional cameo back in the day, when you have to have seen quite a few of the past reviews to get a large number of jokes within a review when you just want to see that one review, it's hard to want to continue watching. I think this was a reason his top 11 lists were generally my favorite. They were short and too the point, and if there were injokes, they were usually quick and it didn't distract too much from the overall video.

One of my absolute favourite youtubers.

I like the Nostalgia Critic. I always actually watch some of his newer videos and I noticed that they have evolved from the older reviews. One thing I do not like and actually hate about his videos is the videos that he does a collaboration with another reviewer such as Linkara, Spoony, and the unfunny and bland Nostalgia Chick, reviews that also that have a overarching critic story is just not my cup of tea.

I used to adore the guys and he's definitely the biggest influence on the modern movie reviewing scheme. While I feel that he kept things going strong post-revival, his Jurassic World review was where I fell out of love. I became a much less frequent watcher until I stopped entirely with the Mad Max and Something Wicked reviews. I don't doubt him as a human being but I feel the man has lost his touch. Also I greatly dislike the Menists gag as it's just beating the dead horse that is the neckbeard stereotype.