MartialHorror discusses his review of “Cover Art Fail”.
lol, I had difficulty reading my notes.
Points I forgot about:
-I considered mentioning him playing with his ‘toys’ on his review of “Demon Tail”. Likely would include a gag involving Space Godzilla and Anguirus, but changed my mind.
– I mispronounced his name as Blee, when it’s really meant to be B-Lee. Derp on my part.
7) Sounds like he reads off of script. Before you say “Dont you read off the script”? I dont have talent. If I had talent, do you think I’d be making video reviews.
2) Very clinical voice, but becomes more lively.
4) indirectly reviews video games
5) Very well produced. There’s a new image for every sentence.
6) Got better; sounds more interested.
7) Background music
8) Hard to learn the tricks of the trade.
9) Interesting stuff.
10) Some wild theories
11) Plays with Toys (Demon Tail)
1) Today’s subject, Cover Art Fail by Blee427.
2) Now, there will always be a reason for someone to hate your work- whether you’re the most popular reviewer on the net or an obscure nobody in the same medium. But one criticism that’s often directed at me is that I review other video reviewers.
4) –Many just think it’s a crude, mean spirited and/or pointless idea which turns them away from my videos. It’s really a daft complaint- as you’d think they’d know what they’re getting into BEFORE they watch my videos- but it’s also a relevant one. But sometimes a subject is so baffling to a viewer that they detest it, sometimes being meanie douches about it. Where am I going with this? The whole idea of Cover Art Fail is just fail to me.
5) Cover Art Fail is about cover art…that fails.
6) -Bet you didn’t know that.
7) More specifically, he’s critiquing video game cover art. Is that really important? Oh sure, cover art can mislead a viewer into thinking a game is shit or epic but none of this pertains to now because he primarily assesses cover art from the 90’s or earlier. It’s just a way for him to get the Nerdsploitation crowd while not being totally and utterly a cliché.
8) – So I don’t like the show because I don’t like the subject. Wait, why does the script say that I like it then? And why am I confused about this when I wrote the script?
9) To answer my questions. I like him not for the concept, but because of his execution of said concept. -As for the second question, I’m just…obnoxiously meta. Actually, I have to confess that at first I was worried-. Since the beginning, his primary focus has been information. Well, fear not, while cover art is his primary objective, he often finds himself indirectly examining the video games in question too. The background information appears to be very well researched, even if he’s not above making mistakes himself. The actual writing of his reviews is very smooth and articulate. He knows his shit but conveys this in a way so he isn’t catering to gaming newbs or veterans of the subject. His actual critiquing is very well thought out and engaging, dissecting everything about the art. When it comes to the video games, he explains why he likes or dislikes them coherently and reasonably. Plus, if you were a gamer in the 80’s or 90’s, there’s a lot of nostalgia to be found here.
10) – Sure, his theories have drawn ire from some rabid fanboys, but I understood where he was coming from, so….fuck off.
11) But the informing side of his works has never been a problem. Since his very first review, I’ve admired this. An arrow goes up! His only real hitch with me was how he delivered said info.
16) His performance was sort of flat and lifeless, making his videos very dry and lethargic. But over time, this improved and he began to deliver his lines with more energy and style. He knew when to pause, slow down, speed up, when to emote excitement or anger. Whereas he sounds like he’s reading from a script during his earlier reviews, he now sounds more natural while never stumbling over a word or being a victim to awkward gaps.
17) This transformed his reviews from informative to informative AND interesting. Soon, I was watching his reviews like a…insert witty comparison that chronicles my growing obsession with Cover Art Fail here.
18) – My style of humor is pretending that there is humor in my reviews.
19) Speaking of which, there are some jokes and they are usually well placed and funny. They bring a much needed lightness to the videos, often being about his reactions, clever dialogue and how he says said dialogue. So an arrow goes from him to the critiquing and humor, because he drives them both.
20) -I won’t say that his brand of comedy is original, but it’s easily accessible and never forced. For some reason, he’s always reminded me of Acorn Cinema, although not quite as hilarious.
21) Still, another arrow points up. The technicals add a whole new dimension to his reviews. Now when people think of great production values, they think of Angry Joe, Irate Gamer or even someone who exploits a gimmick like the Spill Crew or Yahtzee. But do you know what my favorite kind of technical achievements are? It’s when every sentence is met with a visual of some sort. There’s always something new flashing up on the screen, showing that a lot of effort was put into editing and creating their videos. An Example. It’s the perfect use of overlaying pictures, video and sound. Oh yeah, I love the background music too. When done right, background music can make your videos epic and his use of it makes them epic. He’s almost entirely in VO mode, in contrast to his Gaming Anthropologist webshow, so there’s no glitches in the video and the audio’s only problem is sometimes the music overtakes it. Otherwise it’s flawless. Obviously a positive arrow once again
22) -So his videos have substance and insight, but are also fun and well made. I still don’t especially care too much for the subject, but he surpassed his limitations and turned out to be a very enjoyable reviewer. I learned a lot too.
23) But speaking of Gaming Anthropologist. That is the name of his other webshow where examines he topics of gaming culture and it IS trapped within its limitations. But As CR proved to me, I can’t say ‘You will only be interested if you like whatever topic he’s covering’, because fanboys will beat me.- And rape me, Hewy Toonmore-
24) Still, Blee427 is just as good on-screen as he is off screen, the information is just as powerful, the videos are wonderfully produced and even ambitiously edited. They’re good, but the difference between the two is the Gaming Anthologist feels like it was designed more for actual gamers- which I am not- while Cover Art Fail can be enjoyed by the masses. So Cover Art Fail gets a 3.5/4 stars, it’s only real drawback being I still can’t fully accept the premise, but everyone should give it a look away. While the Gaming Anthropologist gets a ¾, so worth watching if your a gamer. All that’s left to talk about is how he got youtube partnership when I was refused if he has fewer subscribers than me and less original content. If Blee427 does not answer this, he shall suffer the same fate as my jacket. Apparently on my bed….
25) – And more quality videos is not an answer. Oh, wait, yes…yes it is. If you wish to check out his review, go to the links in my description. Comment, vote and follow me and twitter before I come to your house. My name is MH and I’m here to tell you ONE MORE FUCKING REVIEWER AND I AM DONE WITH THIS SEASON.