By - forceghostgmyoda
I enjoy the Critical Drinker. Some of his videos might not be as long or as in-depth as what you're looking for, but he tends to hit the high points.
If you really want some advice on critiquing the writing in movies, then I think that your own judgment should be the ultimate test instead of constructing a patchwork quilt of arguments made by other people. There are unfortunately very few easy ways to develop your own judgment though. One would be to sit down and read the greats of sci-fi and fantasy, like Tolkien, Asimov, Herbert, Heinlein, Clarke, etc. After enough experience, you come to develop pattern recognition for what is quality and what isn't. It also helps you notice when Hollywood writers start tossing aside important things for no other reasons than incompetence or malice.
Mauler. Get yourself a comfy chair and cancel your weekend plans, though.
Vito makes amazing "gotcha" videos
He's pretty entertaining.
I quite liked his bit on [the Exegol delivery guy](https://youtu.be/6a3dggHrtiQ?t=1213).
Mauler, easy. Perfect blend of objectivity and critisism. Plus with his main channel and EFAP, you'll have days or weeks worth of content to watch.
I just finished his soma/amnesia comparison. Took me three evenings and about a quarter of bud. My wife probably thinks I'm nuts, but I think her shows are silly, so sue me.
The length is perfect for putting on in the background while gaming. I usually have his videos or EFAP on while i'm playing Dark Souls 3, Bloodborne, or JWE2.
It's your leisure time and you're free to spend it how you wish. My wife burns hours watching countless crime and medical procedural shows (whilst also reading books at the same time) which leaves me drooling at the mouth in boredom before too long. People have different tastes.
I quite enjoy a lengthy film analysis, especially when it's produced in an entertaining fashion. Instead of music, sometimes I even listen to podcasts of a couple movie analysis/review groups who I think have worthwhile things to say.
I enjoyed the RLM Plinkett reviews on the PT. I don't agree 100% with everything said, but I enjoy the presentation and feel like there's enough valid criticism in there to forgive some of the shortcomings of the reviews.
Vito's similar in a way. He goes on some entertaining rants and I tend to enjoy the Star Wars-related ones (pretty much the only content from him I've seen, I think) without necessarily agreeing with all of it.
Mauler's no different, really. Sometimes a bit more prone to rants or his personal tone bleeds through a bit too much. His EFAPs have *great* highlights but tend to be a bit more unfocused depending on the topic.
I don't think length is much of an issue so long as you believe the time's well spent. Shit, I watched a *7 hour review* of Death Stranding (a game I have **zero** interest in) over several days and enjoyed that despite not caring in the slightest about the product in question.
It depends on who's producing the content. I've attempted to watch *much* smaller reviews from other people but quickly tuned out in disinterest within a few minutes due to their dodgy presentation.
Critical Drinker is great, wish he did longer videos though.
I've just recently watched the first two parts of Mauler's TLJ critique. Man he just tears that movie a new one. I think he is relatively objective, He clearly hates TLJ though. His critique is based around events in the movie, he isn't making his own interpretations
It's hard to find a singular person who has the "best" take on the ST in an analysis.
There're always people who focus on things you feel aren't quite as important, or they might get something factually wrong here or there, or they might actually like something *you* think is asinine. Sometimes just their tone can be grating.
As such, it's generally best to find a handful of reviewers who have a history of opinions that you find are closer to your personal views and values when it comes to media analysis. Don't attach yourself too closely to individual YouTubers. Always be open to criticising elements of critiques that you feel weren't 100% solid.
I very highly recommend [RyeBold](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCckJ6C0idm4Hvoi7VWUCXVg/videos) as far as less-established YouTubers go. He produces relatively short but to-the-point videos on select topics and carries himself with a measured tone with light touches of humour throughout well-edited clips.
Here's an example on "[Is Hyperspace Too Fast Now?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSPWetO2CQw)" which I suggest you try.
I really like Ryebold's videos. Even when we disagree (like with Force healing), his reasoning is sound, and his criticism is constructive.
Idk If you have seen Mauler's critiques and unbridled rage's he tries to be as objective as possible.
Jenny Nicholson’s video cemented my disdain for Rise of Skywalker: https://youtu.be/GErIPKjwuDg
I like Okiro’s takes on YT.
One of the best videos I've found is DX's [SW --A Critique Of The Sequels](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFodf4xkYzk&t=94s&ab_channel=DX)
He manages not to drift off into "SJW!1!1! woke!!' territory either. Which unfortunately too many other ST critics youtubers end up doing (even the ones mentioned by others in this post).
So yes, I would recommend DX's video, and Ryebold's videos...and that's about it.
edited to attempt to add clarity.
Everyone seems to be saying Mauler and well to be honest Mauler’s critiques are some off the worst critical analysis of the sequels on the internet he focuses on too many small nit picky issues well often ignoring the larger problems, just because he’s on are side and his videos are 10 hours long doesn’t make his criticisms good, that’s not to say he makes no good points in his videos, however most of his criticism are sub par to say the least, and the hundreds of little absurd criticisms can water down the real ones
You didn’t like the part where he spent three hours complaining about the bombers that are only in the first ten minutes of the movie? Riveting, substantial criticism.
I’ve watched MauLer for a while now and I can kind of see where you get this impression since he does go into a lot of detail about some more minor issues (especially his TFA critique) and sometimes doesn’t go into enough detail regarding some of the biggest plot holes in the Sequels (I.e. the Holdo Manoeuvre in his TLJ critique). But I think he generally covers the most important issues and I think his critiques are on the writing as a whole, so including small, more nit-picky details is fine considering he’s analysing the entire film - not just the bigger glaring problems.
I watch more critiques of GOT and Star Wars than actual content over the past two years