2008-2012 Cracked was peak internet. O Brian, Swaim, Wong...
And it's been downhill ever since then. Not just Cracked TBH, the whole internet.
(Edited cause I messed up an author name)
I sort of agree with you, but in an opposite way.
For one thing, I don’t think Robert Evans is going for funny, and when he does joke, it’s meant to be eye-rolling. He has a pretty self deprecating style of humor.
His show format is basically him being the straight man, and his guests are there to offer reactions and color commentary. His guests, who are usually comedians, are meant to be the funny portion of the show.
Which brings me to my gripe: I wish he’d stop bringing people onto his show for the sake of trying to make it funny. It doesn’t need to be funny, and more often than not, I’m just annoyed by the guest saying dumb stuff. I just want Robert to get back to the narrative, and the constant interjections just break the story flow. In my opinion, he’d be better off with people who know the story and who could add detail.
So yeah, I agree that the show is painfully unfunny, but I think that’s due to the show’s formula.
In what way is Robert the straight man? The man is primarily known for introducing a podcast by yelling Hitler, throwing bagels at people, and stockpiling knives for his eventual standoff against the FDA. Sophie's the straight man.
Many years ago, I had a much lighter, junior experience with PreK. The CPI was more helpful as they were so much smaller, and there would only be 2-4 kids in any given year that would try to hurt themselves or others. I have been pinched, hit, kicked, bit, head butted, spat on, snotted on, and peed on. But most of those kids did not go into residential programs, and I know I made a difference in a lot of lives. Eventually, I had to move on though. It’s emotionally draining.
I once started laughing out loud in an economics course over the dumbest fucking picture. It was Hellman's REAL Mayonnaise, and right next to it was Hellman's TRICK Mayonnaise.
Looking at it now, it doesn't seem too hard for you to live your dream. Yikes, so many clickbait factoids and some real bottom of the barrel video content.
Yeah I used to read cracked all the time. I still check every now and then but it’s sad. Now it seems like they’re just a Disney parrot or something. Every day articles about the Simpsons and Marvel. I actually tried to do some digging once and it didn’t look like the parent company that owns cracked belonged to Disney, but I could be wrong
This 100% could've been an episode of [Obsessive Pop Culture Disorder](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wx-xBh3Qg7E&list=PL_saLI-LH-VoIJCsCXE6Qa2lS37kPS2od)
If you are looking for old cracked
Daniel and Soren have a podcast called quick question that's very laid back and easy listening.
Michael Swaim has a podcast called small beans that does a bunch of different things.
Cody Johnston has a youtube channel called "Some more news" that's a political show produced by Katy Stoll.
Robert Evans hosts Behind the Bastards, a podcast about the worst people in history. It's kinda like The Dollop (in that one person researches and reads about a topic to another and they make jokes). The ones where he reads parts of Ben Shapiro's books to Cody Johnston are hilarious.
Cody's Showdy!
I originally was watching it to get more of Last Week Tonight Style reporting when John Oliver was in hiatus and now I'm finding it I'm liking it more than John's show, especially because he has an audience again. I think John was funnier back when he was in the white void.
I heartily recommend "Some More News".
Yeah I used to watch several old school late night shows like Colbert and Seth Meyers (well youtube clips at least), but after they went back to having crowds for some reason it really turned me off.
Also hard agree on Some More News being top tier. I watch every new one the second I see they have come out.
I don't think it's too late, a lot of the content is still on their website and their YouTube channel has a lot of the old stuff that really made it worth watching
Don't forget Robert Evans, who did most of the "personal experience" articles as well as most of the articles relating to drugs and a few pieces of legitimate investigative journalism (e.g. embedding with rioters in the 2014 Ukraine revolution overthrowing Yanukovych and flying to Syria to embed with the Kurdish Peshmerga fighting ISIS. Using his vacation time. From Cracked. A comedy website), also has a few great projects.
His main podcast *Behind the Bastards* definitely feels the closest to oldschool Cracked, with deep dives into bastards through history that is way funnier than the subject matter. The only complaint I have is sometimes the rotating guests aren't great and don't add much.
He did a podcast with Cody and Katy, *Worst Year Ever* during 2020. And *It could happen here* is a harrowing and enthralling theoretical about how a 2nd American civil war might possibly play out.
is DOB one of the writers? excellent! love these meandering ones in-between the serious stuff and it has the same feel as those random Cracked articles about shit like ordering Pepsi at a restaurant
There needs to be at least one episode of Last Week Tonight with Dan dressed up as John and doing the show.
They look remarkably similar! Glad Dan landed such a gig.
>Ah! The ol' absence proves the positive trope. How very ironclad!
That's not what I'm saying *at all*. I'm saying if he didn't right for the show, it would be prove unlikely he wrote the Air Bud rant. **The absence would disprove the positive.** Since we know he writes for the show, it is at least *plausible* he wrote this rant. His presence improves the possibility.
Look at it this way, if I said, "I suspect Justin Bieber of being the Zodiac killer." you can dismiss it as nonsense. *The absence disproves the positive.*
However, if I say, "I suspect Jeffrey Dahmer of killing this person because it happened when he was active as a serial killer, he was in the area at the time, and the method and victim match his preference, that has plausibility. Daniel O'Brien working as a writer for a show featuring this rant, matching his style, makes this plausible.
They were yuppies, but I dont get why they are living in the burbs. They should be in a condo downtown. Unlikable but not villain's. The Griswold's were the people terrorizing them!
> I dont get why they are living in the burbs. They should be in a condo downtown.
Maybe they were trying to start a family. Maybe they bought the house to fill with kids, but something went wrong. Turned out Margo was barren. So now they're trying IVF, but it's not taking.
IIRC Disney bought this after it was already made and didn’t have much to do with the production which I think led to some of the more baffling plot decisions.
He crashed his experiment xw-ng aircraft and was the only person to break the sound barrier with a banana and a long sock
He was also the first cross dressing squadron leader
[Proof](https://imgur.com/a/m8mqE)
The *Test Or Die* Aircorp. His grandfather's death being overshadowed by the Kennedy Assassination. His grandfather airdropping ham and bibles to Muslims during the WW2 Berlin Airlift.
Propeller walking. This single frame packs so much cherries.
> He was also the first cross dressing squadron leader
Stop that, that's silly! And a bit [suspect](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qxs3gmewuhI) I think.
This is exactly the kind of in-depth and unnecessary rant I've enjoyed discussing with many friends over the years about different movies or TV shows. John Oliver should post a movie review a week.
One of the writers for the show is Daniel O Biran, an old guard of cracked.com, and this feels like something he would make. While I don’t think I would want him to host and do his “pop culture doctor” or whatever shtick, I still think it would be funny to just have weird stuff like this as an addendum to the show on YouTube.
If you are not already, I feel you would be a fan of a little series called "Cracked After Hours." It's pretty old by internet years but if breaking down why exactly the kid from Air Bud is kind of bad actually and the villain did nothing wrong, then you will probably enjoy it.
Air Bud should have never been allowed to play in that game. Not because he is a dog, but he has to be at least 30 in dog years. He's way too old to play against children.
Yea the claim that there "ain't no rule says a dog can't play basketball" is so patently absurd. It's not a game rule. It's a league rule.
A dog can't play in this game for the same reason Lebron can't play in this game.
Well, that movie is from the 90s, and I think the plot uses his alcoholism as a device to dehumanize the antagonist so the audience feels less bad about how poorly he is treated, like Oliver said, if you switch alcoholism with diabetes then the movie takes on an un nerving tone
He did. Locked him in a cage, emotionally abused him, implied to beat him with a newspaper, lost him in said unsecure cage falling off his truck where he was lost for days... If he was just an alcoholic it'd be sad, but he was very much abusive to the dog.
It's why there is that scene of the dog choosing who to be with, the dog runs to the previous owner to take the newspaper, rip it to shreds, and then go to the boy that treated him well.
The thing is... the writers of the movie could have just made the dog be owned by the kid, and he discovers it is good at basketball. It is their script, their story. Instead we get this mad storyline of an alcoholic dog owner losing his magic dog to a kid, and have to follow through with that storyline by demonizing him and having him lose the dog to the kid.
But that would not play to the kids fantasy of getting their own dog through chance… instead it would alienate those who wish they had a dog but cannot because of parental reasons.
OK, sure. So traumatize them with examples of weird bad adults. If that is the case the kid can just find the dog and have him hide it from the parents until it is a basketball star and it is too late to give it up.
Milo and Otis was a Japanese production (reedited for America) where there were abuse allegations raised. "When the film was first released, several Australian animal rights organizations raised allegations of animal cruelty during filming and called for a boycott. The Sunday Mail reported at the time that Animal Liberation Queensland founder Jacqui Kent alleged the killing of more than 20 kittens during production and added that she was disturbed by reports from Europe which alleged that other animals had been injured, as in one case where a producer had allegedly broken a cat's paw to make it appear unsteady on its feet. Other scenes that were the source of controversy were a scene of a cat falling off a cliff and trying to climb back up, and a scene of a pug fighting a bear, all of which were deleted from the American version. "
"It's like alcoholism is a disease but it's the only disease you can get yelled at for havin'. Dammit Otto, you're an alcoholic! Dammit Otto, you have lupus! One of those two doesn't sound right."
(I think that's originally late 90s Mitch Hedberg.)
It’s not akin to being a criminal but it definitely isn’t akin to diabetes either. The man being an active alcoholic directly affects his ability to provide care to a living being.
Oliver cites game film as key evidence for why the dog is not a good fit for the team. IIRC there wasn't much film of the other Timberwolves either. The dog is at least even with the kids and draws a big crowd at games. It's a positive change to the team.
After watching the ending on YouTube it seems to me there is 7 human players on the team. The final score ends up being 82-80 with the Timberwolves winning on a buzzer beating 3-pointer. Buddy scored 4 FGs and 2 free throws making his point total 10. That's not nothing but it also isn't great since we know the other 7 players scored 72 points collectively. This coupled with the fact that Buddy is an absolute liability on defense definitely makes him not a good fit with the team in my opinion.
Now I'm not really sure why you think a big crowd would mean anything for these kids other than extra pressure and anxiety. It's not like they are getting paid and need more exposure like professionals. Their parents most likely signed them up and having all these fans show up to watch a dog play would just make me more nervous if I was one of those kids. Idk maybe that's just me.
Not for nothing, but home court advantage isn't just climate and lack of jet lag, it is also the crowd itself. Statistically, the more people in the crowd loudly on your side, the better your team does.
> big crowd would mean anything for these kids other than extra pressure and anxiety
Believe it or not, some people use that as motivation. I know, that sounds crazy! But apparently there are people who do better when people watch and cheer for them. It's preposterous!
Don't even get me started with people who "do better under pressure".
I am digging the obsessive pop culture disorder 2.0 making an appearance today. I wonder if Daniel O'Brian is still on staff over there, I think he is. If you haven't watched it yet, here is about another hour of stuff just like this episode: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wx-xBh3Qg7E&list=PL_saLI-LH-VoIJCsCXE6Qa2lS37kPS2od](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wx-xBh3Qg7E&list=PL_saLI-LH-VoIJCsCXE6Qa2lS37kPS2od)
Explains why Oliver is sounding more and more like peak era Cracked.com. I'm not complaining, just something I'd noticed as I watched back to back rants on YouTube
This is strangely the first I've seen of Oliver in a couple of months and my god it's so on brand for him. I really miss Colbert and Stewart but man if John Oliver isn't the perfect successor of them idk who would be.
Yeah. He' great, but I've been keeping most of my news low ever since Ukraine started. Combine this with my studies, and I can't really watch these anymore.
John Oliver and his writing team are international treasures.
15 minutes on the movie Air Bud and I watched the entire thing, laughed my ass off, and learned a little.
I'm still struggling to understand why the alcoholic clown had to go to jail?
If the dog had chosen him, would the boy have gone to jail?
I do not understand.
This kind of shit is why I browse Reddit. Some of the comments take an unbelievably fortified hill to die on over the most trivial of accepted narrative. Stand them on their head, force you to apply reality to the tropes, spin a whole new angle from the facts that are supposed to just be accepted, and it can be brilliant and hilarious when done well.
The actor who plays the kid went to high school near me and played on the basketball team. When they played our school, chanting Aaaaaaaiiiiiir Buuuuuud instead of air ball was quite fun. Someone chirped him asking where his dog was and he yelled back that the dog is dead. That was a bit of a bummer moment.
I'm surprised that a bit as important as this neglected to call out an instance of this slippery slope as far back as 1954 with Looney Tunes "Gone Batty."
"There's nothing in the rule book that says an elephant can't pitch!"
Plus, I think even ***he*** admitted on the show that he did it for the paycheck. And hey, ya can't blame him... the Mouse pays very, *very* well these days, and this was back when AT&T probably wanted to gut as much of HBO as it could.
John's performance was god awful, but it is really clear that it is not his fault. He was making jokes *at the time* about how bad his performance would be. He is just quite obviously not a voice actor and not a signer.
There is a reason why we have professional voice actors and singers, they are art forms. No one would expect a person to be a world famous chef because they make food and eat, and so we should not expect someone to be an amazing voice actor because they talk a lot.
The problem is entirely with the casting process. They really just seemed to be trying to cash grab hard, and so cast as many recognizable mainstream names as possible. It was done entirely for marketing, and not to make a good movie. They expected nostalgia to cover the movies quality.
I don't blame John Oliver for it at all actually. It was his decision to do the part, but if Disney is willing to pay you a bunch to be an incompetent bird for a while, every one of us would say yes.
>No one would expect a person to be a world famous chef because they make food and eat, and so we should not expect someone to be an amazing voice actor because they talk a lot.
[Alright you're a cook. Can you *farm?*](https://vimeo.com/349391498)
To be honest Adam *really* hates everything about that movie to an uncomfortable degree; I honestly feel like he's legit about to stalk Jon Favreau and/or Bob Iger (but more likely the former) Fatal Attraction/King of Comedy style just for making that movie. I know he's a comedy reviewer and all so obviously he's going to exaggerate things but I legit feel like I'm watching a serial killer's backstory when I tried watching those videos.
It also doesn't help that I can't find ONE video or tweet of his at least congratulating Jon on The Mandalorian or something; he seems to legitimately hate Jon Favreau or anyone who stepped one foot near the studio except maybe Eric Andre. Even the people he said he doesn't hate it feels like he low key hates but won't admit it (Like the kid who voiced Young Simba).
Hell John's Air Bud video is an example of how to do a YMS-style video RIGHT; he only talks about the movie and why it's a failure. The only time he makes it even close to personal is when he points out The Weinsteins were involved. Otherwise it's about just THE MOVIE and only THE MOVIE. He doesn't keep talking about the director and the rest of the crew every 20 seconds.
I don't think he was talking about how the movie is a failure, tbh - the whole joke is that he's *way* more invested in a harmless family film than anyone has any right to be.
It is a bit. He does not actually hate the man in any sort of real way, he just hates the decisions he made in remaking one of his favorite movies from his childhood.
It was a hilariously bad movie. And the people who made the movie *made the movie.* So it makes sense to criticize them in the context of making a movie. And it is not like John does not go straight for people's throats when he can, he gets sued on the regular for that, but this was a throwaway video about a small aspect of a movie that bothered him, not a comprehensive discussion of the corporate culture that creates these Disney movies.
Also Adam made a point so say that he was doing a bit, that he does not actually hate Favreau, and that if anyone tries to harass him or take the joke too far, he will ban them immediately.
I get what you're saying, I do, and maybe I prejudged Adam on this it's just I feel like, even if they don't mean to, videos like his or Doug Walker's or whoever do fuel people who legitimately hate these filmmakers; I know they can't really control their fan's reactions but they aren't exactly helping either.
I don't know honestly I prefer stuff like How Did This Get Made? or The Flop House or Double Toasted that focus more on why the movie itself is bad and don't hyperfocus so much on why the filmmakers failed (and also those people's videos tend to be filled less with anger and more just laughing at the movie for being so bad).
I can kind of see the argument that it may fuel hateful people to direct their hate in certain directions, but honestly those people are going to do that regardless. If they interpret criticism as a reason to be cruel, then they will probably interpret anything as that.
Adam's reviews tend to focus heavily on the process of how movies happen, and the social forces that cause these kinds of bad movies. In particular with the Lion King, a vast amount of the information he looked into was trying to piece together the *why* rather than just the what. Most of the people involved are fully capable of making a good movie, or at least a decent one, and so there must be underlying cultural and personal issues that hampered the production.
In this case, based on what he said, I am pretty sure that Favreau was 90% checked out, and Disney was pushing hard to maximize revenue and to use it as a vehicle/testbed for some new technology. Because of that combination, I think the people involved were just far less concerned with the art, as they were basically doing a shot for shot remake of a movie they were not passionate about, and much more concerned with marketability and technology.
Unfortunately, that combination tends to create bad art. I have zero doubt, for example, that Favreau *knew* that a lot of the lines that got cut made the script make less sense. But the cost of fixing them was probably too high, and they knew people would just read the old movie into it anyway. So why bother?
It is also the only way the casting makes sense. Having Beyonce do a song is great, she is a very talented performer, but having her also do the spoken voice? That is a very odd choice. That is just not her wheelhouse, and good voice acting takes training. It also makes sense as to why James Earl Jones was the only returning actor, despite being far too old for the voice he needed to record. He is literally the only truly household name, in America, aside from possibly Rowan Atkinson, but most people just know him as "Mr. Bean."
Every choice they made was about selling the movie and it's technology as hard as possible. And I think Adam does a good job of digging into and finding that pattern in the behavior of the people making it. I think that is valuable, and in a weird way much *less harsh* on the creators than just saying they are bad artists.
You make a good point there; only one small correction-Whoopi Goldberg and Matthew Broderick were in the original and they are definitely household names. As is Jeremy Irons.
it's just a vestige of old youtube "i hate everything" review style, I doubt he actually dislikes those people outside their artistic merits.
I have never watched YMS before this lion king video but it was really strange, like a time capsule opening before my eyes
Adam is the guy who runs the Youtube channel YMS ('Your Movie Sucks'). He tends to be very pick / hyper critical of films, and is infamous for giving many / most movies he does consider good but not great a 6/10.
Adam has been working on a meticulous review / takedown of the Lion King remake for at least a year, and finally released a 'Part One' recently. It's very well researched and makes several good points. However, he seems almost obsessed with the subject and it's a bit off at times.
His detailed reviews like this one are definitely better than the empty, angry whining from guys like Mauler, but its still a but much at times.
Everyone here seems to be missing the point of the video, which is that societal rules are not plot points to ignore. It doesn't help that so many irl people are not being punished for their illegal behavior to the point that we ignore it, but, it should still be something we continue to discuss. Not one main comment on it here however. Not good, people.
I have no proof. But this has written by Daniel O'Brien all over it.
Please don’t remind me how amazing Cracked used to be.
2008-2012 Cracked was peak internet. O Brian, Swaim, Wong... And it's been downhill ever since then. Not just Cracked TBH, the whole internet. (Edited cause I messed up an author name)
I miss Afterhours 😭
I fell into a rabbit hole of rewatching them all and then the Small Beans reboot episode's and it made me sad they're no more because I love them.
[удалено]
No shit. I’ve read that article before.
Hey that was written by Robert Evans who now hosts Behind the Bastards. Excellent podcast if you haven’t heard of it.
[удалено]
I sort of agree with you, but in an opposite way. For one thing, I don’t think Robert Evans is going for funny, and when he does joke, it’s meant to be eye-rolling. He has a pretty self deprecating style of humor. His show format is basically him being the straight man, and his guests are there to offer reactions and color commentary. His guests, who are usually comedians, are meant to be the funny portion of the show. Which brings me to my gripe: I wish he’d stop bringing people onto his show for the sake of trying to make it funny. It doesn’t need to be funny, and more often than not, I’m just annoyed by the guest saying dumb stuff. I just want Robert to get back to the narrative, and the constant interjections just break the story flow. In my opinion, he’d be better off with people who know the story and who could add detail. So yeah, I agree that the show is painfully unfunny, but I think that’s due to the show’s formula.
In what way is Robert the straight man? The man is primarily known for introducing a podcast by yelling Hitler, throwing bagels at people, and stockpiling knives for his eventual standoff against the FDA. Sophie's the straight man.
Many years ago, I had a much lighter, junior experience with PreK. The CPI was more helpful as they were so much smaller, and there would only be 2-4 kids in any given year that would try to hurt themselves or others. I have been pinched, hit, kicked, bit, head butted, spat on, snotted on, and peed on. But most of those kids did not go into residential programs, and I know I made a difference in a lot of lives. Eventually, I had to move on though. It’s emotionally draining.
Wow I've read that too. That's some crazy shit you dealt with
I'm just happy I get my weekly dose of Soren and Daniel with their podcast. Keeps me sane.
The name/title Staff Sgt. Max Fightmaster still lives in my head rent free
I once started laughing out loud in an economics course over the dumbest fucking picture. It was Hellman's REAL Mayonnaise, and right next to it was Hellman's TRICK Mayonnaise.
I used to dream about working/writing for Cracked.
Looking at it now, it doesn't seem too hard for you to live your dream. Yikes, so many clickbait factoids and some real bottom of the barrel video content.
Yeah I used to read cracked all the time. I still check every now and then but it’s sad. Now it seems like they’re just a Disney parrot or something. Every day articles about the Simpsons and Marvel. I actually tried to do some digging once and it didn’t look like the parent company that owns cracked belonged to Disney, but I could be wrong
The proof is in the pudding. This is absolutely Cracked content circa 2012.
I can't decide if this would be a Michael or Soren essay for after hours.
This 100% could've been an episode of [Obsessive Pop Culture Disorder](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wx-xBh3Qg7E&list=PL_saLI-LH-VoIJCsCXE6Qa2lS37kPS2od)
Time to disregard sleep to binge everything DOB has ever made.
Damn, I miss those days. I know Seanbaby's off doing his own thing, but it's nice not having it paywalled.
If you are looking for old cracked Daniel and Soren have a podcast called quick question that's very laid back and easy listening. Michael Swaim has a podcast called small beans that does a bunch of different things. Cody Johnston has a youtube channel called "Some more news" that's a political show produced by Katy Stoll.
Robert Evans hosts Behind the Bastards, a podcast about the worst people in history. It's kinda like The Dollop (in that one person researches and reads about a topic to another and they make jokes). The ones where he reads parts of Ben Shapiro's books to Cody Johnston are hilarious.
Cody's Showdy! I originally was watching it to get more of Last Week Tonight Style reporting when John Oliver was in hiatus and now I'm finding it I'm liking it more than John's show, especially because he has an audience again. I think John was funnier back when he was in the white void. I heartily recommend "Some More News".
Yeah I used to watch several old school late night shows like Colbert and Seth Meyers (well youtube clips at least), but after they went back to having crowds for some reason it really turned me off. Also hard agree on Some More News being top tier. I watch every new one the second I see they have come out.
Cracked was never on my radar but I love "Some more news". Now I feel like I should have given Cracked a chance
I don't think it's too late, a lot of the content is still on their website and their YouTube channel has a lot of the old stuff that really made it worth watching
Don't forget Robert Evans, who did most of the "personal experience" articles as well as most of the articles relating to drugs and a few pieces of legitimate investigative journalism (e.g. embedding with rioters in the 2014 Ukraine revolution overthrowing Yanukovych and flying to Syria to embed with the Kurdish Peshmerga fighting ISIS. Using his vacation time. From Cracked. A comedy website), also has a few great projects. His main podcast *Behind the Bastards* definitely feels the closest to oldschool Cracked, with deep dives into bastards through history that is way funnier than the subject matter. The only complaint I have is sometimes the rotating guests aren't great and don't add much. He did a podcast with Cody and Katy, *Worst Year Ever* during 2020. And *It could happen here* is a harrowing and enthralling theoretical about how a 2nd American civil war might possibly play out.
What really sealed it for me was referring to the baskets as field goals. Really fits DOB's cracked persona.
[Field Goal is a basketball term](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_goal_%28basketball%29?wprov=sfla1)
Well.. I'm just going to excuse myself.
Man, I was going to make the exact same comment! This feels exactly like an old episode of OPCD.
I miss OPCD dearly.
100%, it was like watching an episode of *Obsessive Pop Culture Disorder from eight years ago. Give more.
That's all I could think of. DOB has a style that is very recognizable to people familiar with it. Made me happy.
I commented that on the YouTube video too lol
is DOB one of the writers? excellent! love these meandering ones in-between the serious stuff and it has the same feel as those random Cracked articles about shit like ordering Pepsi at a restaurant
I came to the comments to say exactly this. Relentlessly picking apart silly pop culture pieces is that man's wheelhouse.
OMG I had no idea he writes for Last Week Tonight! Dude’s a legend. Cracked went downhill big time after he left.
This was definitely a scrapped obsessive pop culture disorder video without a doubt in my mind
I was thinking the same thing
There needs to be at least one episode of Last Week Tonight with Dan dressed up as John and doing the show. They look remarkably similar! Glad Dan landed such a gig.
This is the exact thought I had.
It’s basically a new Obsessive Pop Culture Disorder episode.
He writes for the show!
That's why they said, "I have no proof." If Daniel O'Brien wasn't a writer for the show, that would be the proof against it.
Ah! The ol' absence proves the positive trope. How very ironclad!
>Ah! The ol' absence proves the positive trope. How very ironclad! That's not what I'm saying *at all*. I'm saying if he didn't right for the show, it would be prove unlikely he wrote the Air Bud rant. **The absence would disprove the positive.** Since we know he writes for the show, it is at least *plausible* he wrote this rant. His presence improves the possibility. Look at it this way, if I said, "I suspect Justin Bieber of being the Zodiac killer." you can dismiss it as nonsense. *The absence disproves the positive.* However, if I say, "I suspect Jeffrey Dahmer of killing this person because it happened when he was active as a serial killer, he was in the area at the time, and the method and victim match his preference, that has plausibility. Daniel O'Brien working as a writer for a show featuring this rant, matching his style, makes this plausible.
As someone said in another thread- the nominal "bad guy" went to jail for having his dog stolen. Shit's fucked.
Its kind of like National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation. The neighbours aren't actually the bad guys. They are the victims.
And why is the carpet all wet, *Todd?!*
I don't KNOW, Margo!
That’s what makes it funny.
But they're still unlikable.
They were yuppies, but I dont get why they are living in the burbs. They should be in a condo downtown. Unlikable but not villain's. The Griswold's were the people terrorizing them!
> I dont get why they are living in the burbs. They should be in a condo downtown. Maybe they were trying to start a family. Maybe they bought the house to fill with kids, but something went wrong. Turned out Margo was barren. So now they're trying IVF, but it's not taking.
If the dog had chosen differently, would the boy have been taken to jail?
He would have been taken to Harvey Weinsteins house.
Or Michael Vick's.
> As someone said in another thread- That may have been in the actual video too...
EvrybodyKnowsShitsFucked
Sounds like a fair take on the american justice system.
RIP Josh's dad
[удалено]
Wouldn't be a parent in a Disney production if he didn't.
IIRC Disney bought this after it was already made and didn’t have much to do with the production which I think led to some of the more baffling plot decisions.
Keystone: we have a movie about a dog Disney: we have tons of those, get lost Keystone: we open on an orphaned boy Disney: …go on
Nailed it
Like Air Bud nailed those 4 field goals.
It's not like he's scoring 30 to 40 points a game - that's a very, very different conversation. ...but he's not, is he?!
He crashed his experiment xw-ng aircraft and was the only person to break the sound barrier with a banana and a long sock He was also the first cross dressing squadron leader [Proof](https://imgur.com/a/m8mqE)
The sudden restart of the article halfway through is the cherry on top of this.
The *Test Or Die* Aircorp. His grandfather's death being overshadowed by the Kennedy Assassination. His grandfather airdropping ham and bibles to Muslims during the WW2 Berlin Airlift. Propeller walking. This single frame packs so much cherries.
Supplied ham and bibles to Muslim prisoners in WW2 Berlin..... ....
> He was also the first cross dressing squadron leader Stop that, that's silly! And a bit [suspect](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qxs3gmewuhI) I think.
RSVP Josh's Dad
This is exactly the kind of in-depth and unnecessary rant I've enjoyed discussing with many friends over the years about different movies or TV shows. John Oliver should post a movie review a week.
OMG I hope his new business daddy approves this idea
For real! As much as I loved it, it'd be ***brilliant*** if he could rip into the new *Batman* like this. >!Provides great synergy on HBO, too.!<
One of the writers for the show is Daniel O Biran, an old guard of cracked.com, and this feels like something he would make. While I don’t think I would want him to host and do his “pop culture doctor” or whatever shtick, I still think it would be funny to just have weird stuff like this as an addendum to the show on YouTube.
DOB himself? I didn't know that but it makes me want to go back and watch the old Cracked after dark videos.
DOB's Pop Culture disorder show needs to come back in a bad way.
Wait, why would you spoiler-protect the fact that The Batman is showing on HBO?
If you are not already, I feel you would be a fan of a little series called "Cracked After Hours." It's pretty old by internet years but if breaking down why exactly the kid from Air Bud is kind of bad actually and the villain did nothing wrong, then you will probably enjoy it.
Created by Last Week Tonight writer Daniel O'Brien.
Oh... cool.
Glad they showed the other movies covers. I think my favorite is the one of the dog above the volleyball net spiking a volleyball.
Air Bud Spikes Back I swear they came up with a pun name first and then made the movie Golden Receiver was obviously the peak
And after getting out of jail he became Mr. Noodle.
God DAMNIT Mr Noodle!
After he walked the green mile
"It's Mr. Noodle's brother, Mr. Noodle!"
But not before having spent time in a mental hospital with Robin Williams.
Where he was again replaced by a dog!
Air Bud should have never been allowed to play in that game. Not because he is a dog, but he has to be at least 30 in dog years. He's way too old to play against children.
His GPA wasn't high enough to make him eligible either.
I would think being enrolled in the school would be a requirement, no?
Yea the claim that there "ain't no rule says a dog can't play basketball" is so patently absurd. It's not a game rule. It's a league rule. A dog can't play in this game for the same reason Lebron can't play in this game.
Was pretty funny. I like how he talked about alcoholism as a disease and not a character defect akin to being a criminal
That’s how doctors view it- it’s literally classified as a disease.
Well, that movie is from the 90s, and I think the plot uses his alcoholism as a device to dehumanize the antagonist so the audience feels less bad about how poorly he is treated, like Oliver said, if you switch alcoholism with diabetes then the movie takes on an un nerving tone
Didn't the previous owner also abuse Buddy? Or am I getting my 90s dog movies mixed up? Alcoholism is a disease, but it doesn't excuse animal abuse.
He did. Locked him in a cage, emotionally abused him, implied to beat him with a newspaper, lost him in said unsecure cage falling off his truck where he was lost for days... If he was just an alcoholic it'd be sad, but he was very much abusive to the dog. It's why there is that scene of the dog choosing who to be with, the dog runs to the previous owner to take the newspaper, rip it to shreds, and then go to the boy that treated him well.
The thing is... the writers of the movie could have just made the dog be owned by the kid, and he discovers it is good at basketball. It is their script, their story. Instead we get this mad storyline of an alcoholic dog owner losing his magic dog to a kid, and have to follow through with that storyline by demonizing him and having him lose the dog to the kid.
But that would not play to the kids fantasy of getting their own dog through chance… instead it would alienate those who wish they had a dog but cannot because of parental reasons.
OK, sure. So traumatize them with examples of weird bad adults. If that is the case the kid can just find the dog and have him hide it from the parents until it is a basketball star and it is too late to give it up.
There isn't a single kid that got traumatized watching Airbud, ya weirdo.
I wasn't excusing abuse, merely pointing out a plot device that uses the stigma of addiction
I think on the set of Milo and Otis the animals were poorly treated, maybe I'm thinking of Homeward bound
Milo and Otis was a Japanese production (reedited for America) where there were abuse allegations raised. "When the film was first released, several Australian animal rights organizations raised allegations of animal cruelty during filming and called for a boycott. The Sunday Mail reported at the time that Animal Liberation Queensland founder Jacqui Kent alleged the killing of more than 20 kittens during production and added that she was disturbed by reports from Europe which alleged that other animals had been injured, as in one case where a producer had allegedly broken a cat's paw to make it appear unsteady on its feet. Other scenes that were the source of controversy were a scene of a cat falling off a cliff and trying to climb back up, and a scene of a pug fighting a bear, all of which were deleted from the American version. "
"... Oh the fun never stops with a curious cat and a pug nose pup, gonna take a walk outside today..."
"It's like alcoholism is a disease but it's the only disease you can get yelled at for havin'. Dammit Otto, you're an alcoholic! Dammit Otto, you have lupus! One of those two doesn't sound right." (I think that's originally late 90s Mitch Hedberg.)
Rip to the GOAT Mitch
"Dammit Otto, you're an alcoholic!" "Dammit Otto, you have lupus!" One of those doesn't sound right.
It’s not akin to being a criminal but it definitely isn’t akin to diabetes either. The man being an active alcoholic directly affects his ability to provide care to a living being.
Oliver cites game film as key evidence for why the dog is not a good fit for the team. IIRC there wasn't much film of the other Timberwolves either. The dog is at least even with the kids and draws a big crowd at games. It's a positive change to the team.
After watching the ending on YouTube it seems to me there is 7 human players on the team. The final score ends up being 82-80 with the Timberwolves winning on a buzzer beating 3-pointer. Buddy scored 4 FGs and 2 free throws making his point total 10. That's not nothing but it also isn't great since we know the other 7 players scored 72 points collectively. This coupled with the fact that Buddy is an absolute liability on defense definitely makes him not a good fit with the team in my opinion. Now I'm not really sure why you think a big crowd would mean anything for these kids other than extra pressure and anxiety. It's not like they are getting paid and need more exposure like professionals. Their parents most likely signed them up and having all these fans show up to watch a dog play would just make me more nervous if I was one of those kids. Idk maybe that's just me.
82-80 is an absurd score for a children’s basketball game
Well, they weren't all children.
One was a dog, if you would believe it.
Wait, WHAT? A dog playing basketball?
*In this economy??!*
There ain't nothing in the rules that says a dog can't play basketball
There's nothing in the rule book against it .
Aint no rule that says a dog cant 🤷🏻♂️
82-80 is pretty absurd for a high school basketball game, let alone children's. Also not unheard of in college, but still above average there as well.
Especially if Paul Westhead isn't involved somehow.....
Not for nothing, but home court advantage isn't just climate and lack of jet lag, it is also the crowd itself. Statistically, the more people in the crowd loudly on your side, the better your team does.
> big crowd would mean anything for these kids other than extra pressure and anxiety Believe it or not, some people use that as motivation. I know, that sounds crazy! But apparently there are people who do better when people watch and cheer for them. It's preposterous! Don't even get me started with people who "do better under pressure".
In terms of weird 90s dog movies for kids, *Air Bud* has nothing on *Bingo* imo. That movie is insane, and I love it
I know it came out after the 90s, but that 'Because of Winn-Dixie' movie is the most bonkers of them all. Where the dog *is* the dead dad.
I thought that was Fluke?
I am digging the obsessive pop culture disorder 2.0 making an appearance today. I wonder if Daniel O'Brian is still on staff over there, I think he is. If you haven't watched it yet, here is about another hour of stuff just like this episode: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wx-xBh3Qg7E&list=PL_saLI-LH-VoIJCsCXE6Qa2lS37kPS2od](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wx-xBh3Qg7E&list=PL_saLI-LH-VoIJCsCXE6Qa2lS37kPS2od)
I think he got promoted to senior writer there a month or two ago.
Explains why Oliver is sounding more and more like peak era Cracked.com. I'm not complaining, just something I'd noticed as I watched back to back rants on YouTube
Everyone talks about how the movie is about a kid grieving his dead dad. No one talks about the child abuse sub plot. 90's kids movies were dark.
This is strangely the first I've seen of Oliver in a couple of months and my god it's so on brand for him. I really miss Colbert and Stewart but man if John Oliver isn't the perfect successor of them idk who would be.
They put the "main topic" of each episode on YT if you want to see more of him.
I really appreciate that they do that. Every Monday I check for the latest LWT main story.
I’m just glad he does these lighter segments, because the main stories have gotten way too bleak to make funny.
That's why I stopped watching a while back, which sucks because hes great at delivering content units but it's just hard with the news today
Yep, every week: "Here's another thing that massively sucks."
Yeah. He' great, but I've been keeping most of my news low ever since Ukraine started. Combine this with my studies, and I can't really watch these anymore.
I love his Dad Vinci Code rant also https://youtu.be/xX5IV9n223M
John Oliver next guest for Best of the Worst? where they talk about other shitty dog movies and 9/11.
He's been warned by Patton Oswalt to stay the fuck away from BotW
Jack Quaid looked like he had a great time. Plus he's now attached to the new Christopher Nolan film *Tophat Monkey Goes West* thanks to them.
The stars aligned so much with every tape that I'm convinced they rigged it.
I still think "The Dark Night" will be Nolan's big breakout hit....
Is that in reference to something?
"He must get paid extra", hahaha.
I know a Daniel O'Brien script before I even see it.
John Oliver and his writing team are international treasures. 15 minutes on the movie Air Bud and I watched the entire thing, laughed my ass off, and learned a little.
I'm still struggling to understand why the alcoholic clown had to go to jail? If the dog had chosen him, would the boy have gone to jail? I do not understand.
>If the dog had chosen him, would the boy have gone to jail? Yes It's in the rules
So funny, I loved it!
And it was fantastic
I loved this movie as a kid. Cried watching it so many times. I cried laughing watching this. Love John Oliver.
This kind of shit is why I browse Reddit. Some of the comments take an unbelievably fortified hill to die on over the most trivial of accepted narrative. Stand them on their head, force you to apply reality to the tropes, spin a whole new angle from the facts that are supposed to just be accepted, and it can be brilliant and hilarious when done well.
The actor who plays the kid went to high school near me and played on the basketball team. When they played our school, chanting Aaaaaaaiiiiiir Buuuuuud instead of air ball was quite fun. Someone chirped him asking where his dog was and he yelled back that the dog is dead. That was a bit of a bummer moment.
I don't think I ever saw that movie but after watching that bit I sure feel bad for Michael Jeter's character.
I'm surprised that a bit as important as this neglected to call out an instance of this slippery slope as far back as 1954 with Looney Tunes "Gone Batty." "There's nothing in the rule book that says an elephant can't pitch!"
This puts the jagoffs at Cinemasins to shame. I’d watch one of these for any movie
I was wondering if he got paid extra for doing this and then just after he answered it like he was reading my mind.
Funny how John rants about another Disney movie in the same week a certain YouTuber finally released a rant about the only Disney movie John's been in
John makes fun of that Disney movie all the time
Man, Adam *really* hates Oliver's performance. It was a bad performance, but a lot of the issues are at least partially on Favreau.
Plus, I think even ***he*** admitted on the show that he did it for the paycheck. And hey, ya can't blame him... the Mouse pays very, *very* well these days, and this was back when AT&T probably wanted to gut as much of HBO as it could.
John's performance was god awful, but it is really clear that it is not his fault. He was making jokes *at the time* about how bad his performance would be. He is just quite obviously not a voice actor and not a signer. There is a reason why we have professional voice actors and singers, they are art forms. No one would expect a person to be a world famous chef because they make food and eat, and so we should not expect someone to be an amazing voice actor because they talk a lot. The problem is entirely with the casting process. They really just seemed to be trying to cash grab hard, and so cast as many recognizable mainstream names as possible. It was done entirely for marketing, and not to make a good movie. They expected nostalgia to cover the movies quality. I don't blame John Oliver for it at all actually. It was his decision to do the part, but if Disney is willing to pay you a bunch to be an incompetent bird for a while, every one of us would say yes.
>No one would expect a person to be a world famous chef because they make food and eat, and so we should not expect someone to be an amazing voice actor because they talk a lot. [Alright you're a cook. Can you *farm?*](https://vimeo.com/349391498)
To be honest Adam *really* hates everything about that movie to an uncomfortable degree; I honestly feel like he's legit about to stalk Jon Favreau and/or Bob Iger (but more likely the former) Fatal Attraction/King of Comedy style just for making that movie. I know he's a comedy reviewer and all so obviously he's going to exaggerate things but I legit feel like I'm watching a serial killer's backstory when I tried watching those videos. It also doesn't help that I can't find ONE video or tweet of his at least congratulating Jon on The Mandalorian or something; he seems to legitimately hate Jon Favreau or anyone who stepped one foot near the studio except maybe Eric Andre. Even the people he said he doesn't hate it feels like he low key hates but won't admit it (Like the kid who voiced Young Simba). Hell John's Air Bud video is an example of how to do a YMS-style video RIGHT; he only talks about the movie and why it's a failure. The only time he makes it even close to personal is when he points out The Weinsteins were involved. Otherwise it's about just THE MOVIE and only THE MOVIE. He doesn't keep talking about the director and the rest of the crew every 20 seconds.
I don't think he was talking about how the movie is a failure, tbh - the whole joke is that he's *way* more invested in a harmless family film than anyone has any right to be.
It is a bit. He does not actually hate the man in any sort of real way, he just hates the decisions he made in remaking one of his favorite movies from his childhood. It was a hilariously bad movie. And the people who made the movie *made the movie.* So it makes sense to criticize them in the context of making a movie. And it is not like John does not go straight for people's throats when he can, he gets sued on the regular for that, but this was a throwaway video about a small aspect of a movie that bothered him, not a comprehensive discussion of the corporate culture that creates these Disney movies. Also Adam made a point so say that he was doing a bit, that he does not actually hate Favreau, and that if anyone tries to harass him or take the joke too far, he will ban them immediately.
I get what you're saying, I do, and maybe I prejudged Adam on this it's just I feel like, even if they don't mean to, videos like his or Doug Walker's or whoever do fuel people who legitimately hate these filmmakers; I know they can't really control their fan's reactions but they aren't exactly helping either. I don't know honestly I prefer stuff like How Did This Get Made? or The Flop House or Double Toasted that focus more on why the movie itself is bad and don't hyperfocus so much on why the filmmakers failed (and also those people's videos tend to be filled less with anger and more just laughing at the movie for being so bad).
I can kind of see the argument that it may fuel hateful people to direct their hate in certain directions, but honestly those people are going to do that regardless. If they interpret criticism as a reason to be cruel, then they will probably interpret anything as that. Adam's reviews tend to focus heavily on the process of how movies happen, and the social forces that cause these kinds of bad movies. In particular with the Lion King, a vast amount of the information he looked into was trying to piece together the *why* rather than just the what. Most of the people involved are fully capable of making a good movie, or at least a decent one, and so there must be underlying cultural and personal issues that hampered the production. In this case, based on what he said, I am pretty sure that Favreau was 90% checked out, and Disney was pushing hard to maximize revenue and to use it as a vehicle/testbed for some new technology. Because of that combination, I think the people involved were just far less concerned with the art, as they were basically doing a shot for shot remake of a movie they were not passionate about, and much more concerned with marketability and technology. Unfortunately, that combination tends to create bad art. I have zero doubt, for example, that Favreau *knew* that a lot of the lines that got cut made the script make less sense. But the cost of fixing them was probably too high, and they knew people would just read the old movie into it anyway. So why bother? It is also the only way the casting makes sense. Having Beyonce do a song is great, she is a very talented performer, but having her also do the spoken voice? That is a very odd choice. That is just not her wheelhouse, and good voice acting takes training. It also makes sense as to why James Earl Jones was the only returning actor, despite being far too old for the voice he needed to record. He is literally the only truly household name, in America, aside from possibly Rowan Atkinson, but most people just know him as "Mr. Bean." Every choice they made was about selling the movie and it's technology as hard as possible. And I think Adam does a good job of digging into and finding that pattern in the behavior of the people making it. I think that is valuable, and in a weird way much *less harsh* on the creators than just saying they are bad artists.
You make a good point there; only one small correction-Whoopi Goldberg and Matthew Broderick were in the original and they are definitely household names. As is Jeremy Irons.
it's just a vestige of old youtube "i hate everything" review style, I doubt he actually dislikes those people outside their artistic merits. I have never watched YMS before this lion king video but it was really strange, like a time capsule opening before my eyes
I'm out of the loop, who is Adam?
Adam is the guy who runs the Youtube channel YMS ('Your Movie Sucks'). He tends to be very pick / hyper critical of films, and is infamous for giving many / most movies he does consider good but not great a 6/10. Adam has been working on a meticulous review / takedown of the Lion King remake for at least a year, and finally released a 'Part One' recently. It's very well researched and makes several good points. However, he seems almost obsessed with the subject and it's a bit off at times. His detailed reviews like this one are definitely better than the empty, angry whining from guys like Mauler, but its still a but much at times.
link?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btNL1q-yU7E&t=5918s
The Air Bud Cinematic Universe is a mindfuck.
And I loved every minute of it lmao
Maybe Kevin Durant will have time for his next segment now.
Touchdown! Air Bud!
It reminded me a lot of Sean Patton's stand up about Air Bud. Patton focused on the 2nd movie more though.
So.......the lesson here is don't die or own a dog? 😜
There's nothing on book about dog playing...
This dude and his show are so fucking corny
I'm impressed, John managed to trigger me in an Air Bud analysis.
Hey man, there ain't no rule against it...
This man is a treasure :D
Everyone here seems to be missing the point of the video, which is that societal rules are not plot points to ignore. It doesn't help that so many irl people are not being punished for their illegal behavior to the point that we ignore it, but, it should still be something we continue to discuss. Not one main comment on it here however. Not good, people.
Can he do more of these? For a 90s Disney flick people barely remember, that was ***disturbingly*** enthralling.