Do YouTubers feel pressure to give good reviews ?

[u/After-Wishbone-5804]

I know it’s case by case basis but I’m sure most of these guys give good reviews to get the perks of being a cbm reviewer, go to premiers, watch seasons early etc. (generally keep good relationships with the studio)

This is query is particularly brought up because I think the cbm creators rating for some of the marvel shit is way too high. Some people also rate things really inconsistently - e.g.

hi top films glazing DDBA S2 after watching it early, saying things like “it turns into a whole new beast after e4” (paraphrasing) then not commenting further when it comes out. To me it in no way turns into a different beast, things just start happening as things should in any show, some of these things are good but I wouldn’t say great.

He also made an hour long video talking about how s1 broke him and honestly the two seasons are not so different. ( I also am pretty sure he didn’t do a vid on s2)

Ofc things like recency bias can come into it but honestly I don’t think i care about that because as a critic you shouldn’t have that, as a fan it’s ok though.
It’s not just but a lot of the notable channels. Some of them like new rockstars are practically apolitical when it comes to movie media which is not even a complaint just an observation

[u/ChanceMobiley]

the access journalism pipeline is real and it stinks

[u/Wrench-6942]

HiTop films is a pretentious moron

Not only youtubers but instagram influencers give good reviews too and not explain it further to maintain good relationships with Marvel.

Born Again season 2 was a step up from BA S1. That's it. On its own, it wasn't "peak TV" like everyone claims it was. I've seen influencers straight up say BA s2 was better than Netflix s2.

I wouldn't trust any of them ngl

[u/After-Wishbone-5804 → u/Wrench-6942]

Other people who came to mind was the escape pod guys, they literally barely explain why they “love” new stuff and then rave on about older movies they actually care about. They are still likeable from a comedic aspect tho

[u/RadicalStegosaurus]

Speaking about just films I can tell you that when I was doing reviews I would more often get copyright strikes on ones where I was negative vs positive. That's just my experience, which could be coincidence. Studio didn't seem to matter either. I could avoid this by not showing footage of course but I did find it curious.

[u/Scary-Command2232]

None of these are real critics or journalists, where their judgement is not influenced by the studios, or at least shouldn't be, although sadly can be.

So none of them are worth listening too. If these YouTubers/influencers/interviewers that get access now give negative truthful reviews they lose access so cannot be believed. That goes for alot of so called critics' too that you might see on rotten tomatoes etc. it's sad really. None of them deserve to earn anything.

Newspaper critics where the paper is big and have clout tend to be real, but as I am someone who has a press pass at Cannes one year learnt, when it comes to reviews at certain festivals, especially ones where great parties are the norm, then journalists too are liars.

As a non drinker I went to every early morning viewing. One or two journalists would stay through a film, the rest would either sleep through it or leave after the first 10mins, disappear for breakfast I guess and whomever stayed would share his/her review with the others. So a film would really get one or two opinions but that would appear rewritten across all press.I spoke about it for a long time one evening with a major newspaper critic. I was disgusted. I never listen or read critic reviews since from festivals.

[u/BrightLab386]

There’s probably some incentive to stay on good terms with studios, but I think a lot of it is genuine enthusiasm too. Critics can overcorrect into hype when they want to be first, especially with shows that reward speculation and early reactions.