-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
A Critique of Red Letter Media’s Bigoted Content (See Staff Post)
- Thread starter PhoncipleBone
- Start date
I figured I'd post my personal experience with RLM content here. I've never talked about it before, but I used to love the Harry S. Plinkett reviews. Like, a lot. I guess it's going to read kind of bloggy. Sorry about that. It's probably not that interesting.
I was in my mid-to-late teens when the original Plinkett reviews of the prequel trilogy came out. They were unlike anything else on the internet at the time and I thought they were truly sensational. I came across the Phantom Menace review shortly after its first release and was part of the crowd that clamored for them to "do the other movies" in between each review. I rewatched them pretty regularly. Every time I met someone who liked Star Wars but hadn't seen them we would make an evening out of watching them. I've seen the Plinkett prequel reviews more times each than I have seen any of the actual Star Wars films. Although I am part of the group that have "revisited the prequels" with some positivity my experience with them is still very largely defined by the RLM Plinkett videos.
As the Plinkett series went on and started to have an actual narrative behind the reviews I thought it was amazing experimental film-making and a seminal internet experience. I watched the Baby's Day Out and the Avatar reviews like once a month. I thought they were really funny, but more importantly, I found them extremely validating. Having a multi-hour analysis dedicated to something you largely agree with was a thrilling self-indulgent exercise. I didn't love these videos just because I thought they were funny and unique. I loved them because I thought they were right. I agreed with them. They weren't just funny to me, they were validating.
I never really got in to the actual personalities behind the show. I never watched the "real" reviews like the Half in the Bag. I was only in it for the Plinkett stuff. In a weird way those Plinkett reviews are part of why I loved Star Wars. Even though they were exceedingly negative and comedic, relating to the brand over how much I hated parts of it was really cathartic. That negativity was how I expressed my enthusiasm. While I definitely do not hold those videos in the same reverence that I did as a teenager, they definitely got me started on approaching things critically and trying to explain why I liked (or didn't like) something instead of just treating my opinion like its own absolute. They are juvenile, but so was I, and they were a great place to start at my age.
What changed how I felt about all of it was the Plinkett review of The Force Awakens, which prompted a great deal of self-reflection on my part. I still very vividly remember what got me reflecting on things. It was from an AV Club article linking the review. I was able to find it.
When I read this, I thought it was spot-on. Harry S. Plinkett was always a post-modern Comic Book Guy to me. The Comic Book Guy in The Simpsons was an obvious archetype for the super-nerd who felt they were the authority on everything they loved. They spoke about their interests with pretentious exactitude and the audience was never meant to relate to this parody archetype. Comic Book Guy was funny, familiar, and common, but he was not portrayed as right.
Harry S. Plinkett was interesting to me because it cranked up the intensity to an almost Troma-level absurdity but he was also often right. What made him so captivating wasn't just the character, it's that you were meant to find what he was saying interesting, insightful, and even correct. You were supposed to relate to his criticism and beliefs even though you laughed at his character. I loved Harry S. Plinkett because I agreed with him. He said what I felt. The satire element wasn't only that he was extreme and perverse - it's that he gave good criticism too.
This meant Harry S. Plinkett wasn't just a satirical construct, he was a reflection of the viewer. Of me, even, which I was perfectly fine with. I thought it was good to portray such intense fan criticism with a self-deprecating tilt. Like, maybe we're all super in to what we love and have a lot to say about it, but what makes us different from that guy? Besides bestiality and murder, of course.
Then I watched the new video.
I haven't rewatched it since, so my memory is fuzzy, but there were several instances I remember as really uncomfortable. I remember him referring to the Star Trek movies and dropping a trans slur. I remember a diversion where he says he is "triggered" by the use of the phrase "mumbo-jumbo" and then goes on a fake tirade about how racist it is. This stuff sucked but I put off my response until the end of the video. And then it ended with a diversity rant... a long diversity rant. And this was really hard for me to parse. Because Plinkett was supposed to be a gross old murderer who said and did suspect things but ultimately said things I agreed with. His criticism was the selling point of the series. But this wasn't Plinkett saying what I was thinking. This was Plinkett making fun of me. This wasn't me relating to the Plinkett character in a tongue-in-cheek way, this was the Plinkett character making me the enemy.
And that was tough.
I thought back to the AV Club description of the Plinkett character from before I watched the video:
After watching the Force Awakens review, I didn't think this was true anymore. Instead of being a subversive construct that peddled legitimate and insightful film criticism under the veneer of a cranked-up Comic Book Guy, he'd become something totally different. The Plinkett character was definitely a hateful slob, but he wasn't self-aware anymore. He was, unironically, the kind of character he was supposed to be parodying. I liked the Plinkett character because it took my grievances with fandom and Star Wars movies and it put them in to words. It made them funny and far-reaching and somewhat smart. But Plinkett wasn't legitimizing my armchair criticism of Star Wars movies anymore. Now he was legitimizing ideas that hurt me. That part wasn't about Star Wars. That part was about me.
I just stopped watching after that and left any interest I had in their stuff behind. I was never really in to the RLM brand itself. I'm not on a first name basis with anybody. I don't know who anybody is or what they actually believe. But I know that I used to be really in to some of their content and felt really let down and targeted by that inclusivity rant. It made me rethink the whole series of reviews, and the entire character, and I felt completely alienated by something I used to really like. There have always been people who hated the Plinkett reviews and thought they were damaging to Star Wars discourse. I never gave any credence to that and still don't. I don't think saying "Phantom Menace doesn't have a main character" is damaging to Star Wars discourse. I don't think the super-flawed "how many things can you say about this character?" sequence hurts anybody. You can disagree with the method or the meaning but it's not damaging, I don't think.
But ranting about inclusivity and downplaying the significance it has, especially on young people, does hurt the discourse. It does hurt people. Because, just like I used to, there are people who watch the Plinkett reviews and laugh their ass off and think "this guy gets it!" I feel like the review for The Force Awakens validates the wrong kind of people and the wrong kind of criticism. That comes at my expense.
People can take what they want from this sort of content and maybe they can more easily separate out what they agree with and what they don't. But I really hate when people respond to these criticisms with claims of satire. Satire is not a shield. It's not a magic word that means you can say whatever you want without scrutiny. The whole point of satire, the very crux of its use, is to impart a political message. Including this section as a bullet point in a long review of Star Wars and the state of the brand isn't satirizing anything. It's airing a grievance. There is no way to delegitimize this part of the critique because the review presents it as legitimate.
I think continuing the Plinkett character in 2016 was a mistake. Star Wars discourse was extremely different after The Force Awakens and a character like Plinkett ceases to be subversive in an era where racists and misogynists reign social media with transparent fervor. Plinkett does not embody "the best and worst" qualities of anything anymore. It's just the worst.
And that makes me think back on how much I used to enjoy the content and how many people I initiated in to the character. I still can't think of pizza rolls without thinking of Plinkett. I still sometimes say "if you want to tell jokes, go to the circus." I still sometimes say "you might not have noticed, but your brain did." Stuff from Plinkett content that has been hard-coded in to my brain from all the times I watched the videos and shared them with others.
I wonder: did I change or did the content change? Did the Plinkett character become different or simply more of what it always was?
Anyway, I've never watched anything else from the site and am not very familiar with any of their modern or non-character content. I don't have any personal grievance with the site or the content beyond condemning the above and being disappointed by something I used to really like. From what one of my friends told me, their contemporary content is still very largely based on validating the existing feelings of their audience. So it probably isn't for me.
That's my sad story about how I used to like some funny internet videos and now I don't. Much ado about nothing, I suppose. But nice to talk about at least once.
Edit: Fixed some early-morning typos.
I was in my mid-to-late teens when the original Plinkett reviews of the prequel trilogy came out. They were unlike anything else on the internet at the time and I thought they were truly sensational. I came across the Phantom Menace review shortly after its first release and was part of the crowd that clamored for them to "do the other movies" in between each review. I rewatched them pretty regularly. Every time I met someone who liked Star Wars but hadn't seen them we would make an evening out of watching them. I've seen the Plinkett prequel reviews more times each than I have seen any of the actual Star Wars films. Although I am part of the group that have "revisited the prequels" with some positivity my experience with them is still very largely defined by the RLM Plinkett videos.
As the Plinkett series went on and started to have an actual narrative behind the reviews I thought it was amazing experimental film-making and a seminal internet experience. I watched the Baby's Day Out and the Avatar reviews like once a month. I thought they were really funny, but more importantly, I found them extremely validating. Having a multi-hour analysis dedicated to something you largely agree with was a thrilling self-indulgent exercise. I didn't love these videos just because I thought they were funny and unique. I loved them because I thought they were right. I agreed with them. They weren't just funny to me, they were validating.
I never really got in to the actual personalities behind the show. I never watched the "real" reviews like the Half in the Bag. I was only in it for the Plinkett stuff. In a weird way those Plinkett reviews are part of why I loved Star Wars. Even though they were exceedingly negative and comedic, relating to the brand over how much I hated parts of it was really cathartic. That negativity was how I expressed my enthusiasm. While I definitely do not hold those videos in the same reverence that I did as a teenager, they definitely got me started on approaching things critically and trying to explain why I liked (or didn't like) something instead of just treating my opinion like its own absolute. They are juvenile, but so was I, and they were a great place to start at my age.
What changed how I felt about all of it was the Plinkett review of The Force Awakens, which prompted a great deal of self-reflection on my part. I still very vividly remember what got me reflecting on things. It was from an AV Club article linking the review. I was able to find it.
When I read this, I thought it was spot-on. Harry S. Plinkett was always a post-modern Comic Book Guy to me. The Comic Book Guy in The Simpsons was an obvious archetype for the super-nerd who felt they were the authority on everything they loved. They spoke about their interests with pretentious exactitude and the audience was never meant to relate to this parody archetype. Comic Book Guy was funny, familiar, and common, but he was not portrayed as right.
Harry S. Plinkett was interesting to me because it cranked up the intensity to an almost Troma-level absurdity but he was also often right. What made him so captivating wasn't just the character, it's that you were meant to find what he was saying interesting, insightful, and even correct. You were supposed to relate to his criticism and beliefs even though you laughed at his character. I loved Harry S. Plinkett because I agreed with him. He said what I felt. The satire element wasn't only that he was extreme and perverse - it's that he gave good criticism too.
This meant Harry S. Plinkett wasn't just a satirical construct, he was a reflection of the viewer. Of me, even, which I was perfectly fine with. I thought it was good to portray such intense fan criticism with a self-deprecating tilt. Like, maybe we're all super in to what we love and have a lot to say about it, but what makes us different from that guy? Besides bestiality and murder, of course.
Then I watched the new video.
I haven't rewatched it since, so my memory is fuzzy, but there were several instances I remember as really uncomfortable. I remember him referring to the Star Trek movies and dropping a trans slur. I remember a diversion where he says he is "triggered" by the use of the phrase "mumbo-jumbo" and then goes on a fake tirade about how racist it is. This stuff sucked but I put off my response until the end of the video. And then it ended with a diversity rant... a long diversity rant. And this was really hard for me to parse. Because Plinkett was supposed to be a gross old murderer who said and did suspect things but ultimately said things I agreed with. His criticism was the selling point of the series. But this wasn't Plinkett saying what I was thinking. This was Plinkett making fun of me. This wasn't me relating to the Plinkett character in a tongue-in-cheek way, this was the Plinkett character making me the enemy.
And that was tough.
I thought back to the AV Club description of the Plinkett character from before I watched the video:
After watching the Force Awakens review, I didn't think this was true anymore. Instead of being a subversive construct that peddled legitimate and insightful film criticism under the veneer of a cranked-up Comic Book Guy, he'd become something totally different. The Plinkett character was definitely a hateful slob, but he wasn't self-aware anymore. He was, unironically, the kind of character he was supposed to be parodying. I liked the Plinkett character because it took my grievances with fandom and Star Wars movies and it put them in to words. It made them funny and far-reaching and somewhat smart. But Plinkett wasn't legitimizing my armchair criticism of Star Wars movies anymore. Now he was legitimizing ideas that hurt me. That part wasn't about Star Wars. That part was about me.
I just stopped watching after that and left any interest I had in their stuff behind. I was never really in to the RLM brand itself. I'm not on a first name basis with anybody. I don't know who anybody is or what they actually believe. But I know that I used to be really in to some of their content and felt really let down and targeted by that inclusivity rant. It made me rethink the whole series of reviews, and the entire character, and I felt completely alienated by something I used to really like. There have always been people who hated the Plinkett reviews and thought they were damaging to Star Wars discourse. I never gave any credence to that and still don't. I don't think saying "Phantom Menace doesn't have a main character" is damaging to Star Wars discourse. I don't think the super-flawed "how many things can you say about this character?" sequence hurts anybody. You can disagree with the method or the meaning but it's not damaging, I don't think.
But ranting about inclusivity and downplaying the significance it has, especially on young people, does hurt the discourse. It does hurt people. Because, just like I used to, there are people who watch the Plinkett reviews and laugh their ass off and think "this guy gets it!" I feel like the review for The Force Awakens validates the wrong kind of people and the wrong kind of criticism. That comes at my expense.
People can take what they want from this sort of content and maybe they can more easily separate out what they agree with and what they don't. But I really hate when people respond to these criticisms with claims of satire. Satire is not a shield. It's not a magic word that means you can say whatever you want without scrutiny. The whole point of satire, the very crux of its use, is to impart a political message. Including this section as a bullet point in a long review of Star Wars and the state of the brand isn't satirizing anything. It's airing a grievance. There is no way to delegitimize this part of the critique because the review presents it as legitimate.
I think continuing the Plinkett character in 2016 was a mistake. Star Wars discourse was extremely different after The Force Awakens and a character like Plinkett ceases to be subversive in an era where racists and misogynists reign social media with transparent fervor. Plinkett does not embody "the best and worst" qualities of anything anymore. It's just the worst.
And that makes me think back on how much I used to enjoy the content and how many people I initiated in to the character. I still can't think of pizza rolls without thinking of Plinkett. I still sometimes say "if you want to tell jokes, go to the circus." I still sometimes say "you might not have noticed, but your brain did." Stuff from Plinkett content that has been hard-coded in to my brain from all the times I watched the videos and shared them with others.
I wonder: did I change or did the content change? Did the Plinkett character become different or simply more of what it always was?
Anyway, I've never watched anything else from the site and am not very familiar with any of their modern or non-character content. I don't have any personal grievance with the site or the content beyond condemning the above and being disappointed by something I used to really like. From what one of my friends told me, their contemporary content is still very largely based on validating the existing feelings of their audience. So it probably isn't for me.
That's my sad story about how I used to like some funny internet videos and now I don't. Much ado about nothing, I suppose. But nice to talk about at least once.
Edit: Fixed some early-morning typos.
Last edited:
"If you're doing this diversity shit for the kids and for them to have role models or whatever.. I have a news flash for you: they don't give a shit." -RLM asshole
Actually we do give a shit, why the fuck is this white person( the most represented race in media) assuming that children of underrepresented minorities don't care about representation because of some fucking kids commercial, I grew up as a Hispanic kid and I'll tell you I always loved it when I saw a Cuban character in media, I always automatically connected with the character and felt happy seeing my country be represented
Actually we do give a shit, why the fuck is this white person( the most represented race in media) assuming that children of underrepresented minorities don't care about representation because of some fucking kids commercial, I grew up as a Hispanic kid and I'll tell you I always loved it when I saw a Cuban character in media, I always automatically connected with the character and felt happy seeing my country be represented
Fan entitlement. The very thing they sought to parody with those silly "Nerd Crew" videos.
When they are pandered they consume it with nothing beyond false awareness and jokey attitude for their viewers.
They are literally the kind of character they were supposedly parodying. But mostly, they are bigots.
Lol gaslight? You made observations on why you think white people can get a film made.
You make so many assumptions in your posts and generally uneducated declarations that it is hard for me to tell if you are being serious. How do you know the demographic breakdown of Era?
This is a good post. However, I will say that Plinkett has always had this problem, it's just not as obvious until the viewer is able to examine the content under a different lense.
I tried watching the PT reviews, something I used to watch pretty often around the time they were released. They're filled with a lot of the same racist, sexist and generally bigoted commentary that we see in the OT.
I'm currently talking to someone I met online, and she brought up how she loves Plinkett. She hadn't seen the PT reviews in years though, and tried watching them yesterday and hardly made it 5-10 minutes before shutting off the video. Her response to me was "this really hasn't aged well".
I tried rewatching them recently (a year ago); same thing happened to me.
The reason it feels uncomfortable is because it's clearer now that many of those jokes and comments are more easily distinguishable between Plinkett the character and Mike the commentator. It's very easy to tell that the jokes are often told at the expense of the person/people who the joke is about, even if it wasn't intended that way at the time.
I think the only real difference between then and now is that those viewpoints and perspectives become more clear when Mike the commentator spells it out for you in segments like The Diversity Awakens.
Last edited:
I haven't revisited them for this reason. I think it would be a very negative experience and not worth subjecting myself to. There are so many more longform analysis videos of everything under the sun these days. The niche Plinkett used to fill is well populated now. I'd prefer to just move on. I don't doubt that you're correct. I just couldn't say myself because I haven't gone back.
I do take some comfort in the fact that two of the friends I still talk to who I initiated to the content had a similar experience that I did and have since moved on to more palatable pastures.
A choice Plinkett quote being "Black people don't care about Star Wars"
That line makes more sense now.
That line makes more sense now.
I always thought they were doing it tongue in cheek once in a blue moon (like a character you're supposed to hate on a show) because I don't watch a lot of their stuff but this is quite eye opening; I had no idea they were this consistent and more importantly, serious about this garbage.
Thanks OP. Easy to not watch their stuff.
Thanks OP. Easy to not watch their stuff.
etc. etc.
I'm glad I could bring you guys some happiness.
It's a bit frustrating that everything else I've ever said here is now irrelevant, and I will be forever remembered as the guy who needed a synonym for "arrogant" and used an awkward term instead.
I have done some research and I have found that "uppity" is indeed usually hate speech used almost exclusively with regard to women or African-Americans.
I would like to think that I have not internalized a certain misogynist stance. I have now been accused of actively hating Brie Larson, being lumped in with trolls who refer to women as "females". She merely comes off as somewhat unlikable to me. As do Robert Downey Jr. or Chris Hemsworth. Or many other people that I don't know personally. But as the discussion was about her specifically, I was referring to Brie Larson in particular.
Does that mean I have a sexist attitude that I don't acknowledge? I hope not.
I did not mean to defend RLM as I've actually turned my back on them quite a while ago.
But please continue to call me the "uppity. body. language." guy.
What I've learned from this experience is that even though being the butt of a joke makes you question yourself, I shouldn't define myself by the way people see me on the internet.
And no, I do not have alt accounts.
I don't think he gets that calling her arrogant and unlikable is no less crazy.
Calling a woman like Brie Larson arrogant and unlikable is loaded with sexist connotations.
People got on your case because "Uppity Body Language" is such a stupid and sexist thing to say. I would hope you would have taken a step back and realize why it was wrong to say that, ESPECIALLY because of the history of sexist attacks on her.
But nope. Instead you turn this into a rant about how you're the victim. Of course.
Jesus, we could power entire cities on the sheer antipathy that certain folks seem to have over Brie Larson and her strangely undefinable arrogant/unlikable/uppity demeanor. Like, do people spend this much energy angsting over genuine Hollywood assholes like Sean Penn?
Nothing Brie Larson has said it done has offended me, but are people not allowed to dislike certain celebrities now?
Shit! No one told me!
Guys, you have to tell me shit like that!
Being called out for double standards against women (and subscribing to alt-right dog whistles about Larson) isn't disallowing you from having an opinion on a celebrity.
After all
What better authority is there on black opinion than RLM and Grace Randolph
I enjoyed this whole write-up, and especially these two paragraphs. I think you hit it right on the head.
Great post. Rather much echos my evolution of thinking.
I'd probably have a better view of RLM as a whole if Plinkett have been left to die (as a series and character) after the prequel videos and the staff of RLM had put the series behind them as just being their dumb breakout thing. Basically go "Yeah it was our first big video series and we'd have done the character differently if we did it again, but we'd rather move on and leave it as a historical footnote.", then start putting out good critique without the awfulness of Plinkett. Some of their critique has been solid (eg re:view), but as shown by the examples they really didn't really mature in their creations or viewpoints since the prequel videos.
Great video. Really managed to nail what current Disney is and why I can't stand these recent movies.
"Black...lightning?!" and they even bother to show Jay's reaction as if that was a good joke.
Another great video with an insightful view, instead of a bigoted one like the usual RLM, on power levels and dismissing representation:
( And a great OP by JCHandsom :D )
( And a great OP by JCHandsom :D )
What about calling her a witch?
It's just jokes bro don't get offended, definitely has nothing to do with their Brie Larson rant
Finale Fireworker hey I enjoyed reading that and I remember when the prequel Plinkett reviews came out I thought they were a riot and kind of the perfect storm for their time, high levels of self-indulgence for sure. I haven't engaged much with their content since and there seems to be a lot I've missed out on (what with 25 pages in a thread that keeps getting bumped) but I can say that on returning to see a Plinkett review the character felt really tired, not that funny.
Christ i fucking hate the way she speaks.
Yep. Reminds me of this.
Never heard of them but this is about the level of shittiness I expect from popular geeks on YouTube.
What a shock. RLM is still pushing bullshit sexist talking points.
How very shocking. Sexists being consistently sexist. Who would have thought?
The preferred weapon of the fragile white male.
The petty insecurity that drives these jokes is what I find funny.
User banned (1 week): trolling and antagonizing other members over sexism
Fucking mind blowing how thin-skinned some of you are.
If by thin skinned you mean calling out inexcusable bigotry, sure
You spent all that time making this account so you could "Troll" us and THIS is the best you can come up with???
How disappointing.
Yeah the problem isn't sexism, its those who don't like sexism, right?
I didn't create an account to troll, it's just that reading through this thread there are some people who will label anyone with differing views (even if they have no implication of racism/sexism etc) as a bigot.
This post for example:
There is nothing sexist about calling her arrogant or unlikable. I realise a lot sexist people will jump on that bandwagon, but there IS an arguement to be made of her being arrogant without sexist connotations. There's that one particular interview (with Don Cheadle and Hemsworth) where she just has an inability to joke about herself and comes off as being humourless and sanctimonious. How is that sexist?
You are really going down this route? Really?
She's too arrogant, yep nothing sexist about that at all.