I watched this video as an avid Youtube watcher, and a contributor to the crowd funding campaign to get the movie started.
The movie itself is fun, it seems like it is made for an audience that is outside of a youtube viewership community. If you go in with that in mind, you'll definitely enjoy it more.
There are also a number of contradictions, for example, there is a segment where they discuss the money there is to be made on youtube, there are fast cuts of youtubers talking about how they are well off now, but it's not about the money. Then the next several minutes spend time with a character who is apparently broke. It left me wondering, which is it? Do Youtubers make money? Don't they? The movie left me wondering, how do popular Youtubers end up broke? How is it that other Youtubers are very comfortable?
Another example the film seeming to contradict itself is the tone of the film throughout is how much people love what they are doing, but in the latter third or so it seemed to focus on how much work it is to be a Youtuber. It sounded like whining at some parts. Am I to believe that the people showing joy for being a Youtuber are being fake? The documentary says that vlogging is a real connection from viewer to creator, but then Charles Trippy discusses how the vlog only sees 10 minutes of his day. Leaves me wondering, how much is real? What is fake? There's a more complicated story to tell.
These are just two examples, but I can't fit much more in only 1000 words.
There are some obvious frustrations as a backer of the film, the campaign promised that it was going to be made by ApprenticeA, and Shaycarl, It was directed by someone else. There are broken promises about who the main characters were going to be, that didn't happen. It's obviously not the same movie I and many others backed years ago when they started. Then there are broken promises about refunding the backers if the movie gets sold (which it did) etc...
The movie itself is fun, it seems like it is made for an audience that is outside of a youtube viewership community. If you go in with that in mind, you'll definitely enjoy it more.
There are also a number of contradictions, for example, there is a segment where they discuss the money there is to be made on youtube, there are fast cuts of youtubers talking about how they are well off now, but it's not about the money. Then the next several minutes spend time with a character who is apparently broke. It left me wondering, which is it? Do Youtubers make money? Don't they? The movie left me wondering, how do popular Youtubers end up broke? How is it that other Youtubers are very comfortable?
Another example the film seeming to contradict itself is the tone of the film throughout is how much people love what they are doing, but in the latter third or so it seemed to focus on how much work it is to be a Youtuber. It sounded like whining at some parts. Am I to believe that the people showing joy for being a Youtuber are being fake? The documentary says that vlogging is a real connection from viewer to creator, but then Charles Trippy discusses how the vlog only sees 10 minutes of his day. Leaves me wondering, how much is real? What is fake? There's a more complicated story to tell.
These are just two examples, but I can't fit much more in only 1000 words.
There are some obvious frustrations as a backer of the film, the campaign promised that it was going to be made by ApprenticeA, and Shaycarl, It was directed by someone else. There are broken promises about who the main characters were going to be, that didn't happen. It's obviously not the same movie I and many others backed years ago when they started. Then there are broken promises about refunding the backers if the movie gets sold (which it did) etc...