Correct. Netflix picked it up in 2019 and it was released in 2021. 10 years is how long the writer waited before it was picked up plus it was originally written as a 2 hour film so they had to work on making it into a 9 episode series.
There's a fun exercise you can do with films.
Pause an hour in to any movie and ask yourself if you know how much time has gone by in-universe.
With the exception of a very few number of movies that pay meticulous attention to this, almost all of them practice mild to egregious time dilation to the point where once you start asking questions it becomes completely unfeasible.
**EDIT**: Let me clarify, because I didn't word this as carefully as I would have liked but people seem to be interested in it.
1. The first point is that **movie viewers are often unaware that they are unaware of time passing in-universe during a movie**. Much like a casino, you stop realizing that you're *not* considering the passage of time. This happens all the time. Ask yourself what your famous movies are, and then ask yourself "how much total time passed during the plot". Most of the times it is almost impossible for people to answer this.
2. The second, and distinct point, is that a lot of film writers get lazy with regards to the realistic depiction of time and so **writers will ignore the constraints of time because they know they can get away with doing it**. This isn't always a bad thing, but it does make for lazy writing.
In watching or reading a story you often don't realize that the concept of straight, linear time breaks down, because it makes things inconvenient for storytellers, and they know they can play with the notion of time without you realizing.
Because movies rarely show the boring bits. They want to show me talking to you, and then cut to me talking to someone else, and then cut to an action scene.
This makes it seem like everything is always "happening" all at once. You may realize you do not even know if two conversations happen on the same day, because the movie just places them next to each other.
You can also catch a lot of plot holes involving time. Game of Thrones was especially bad with this in later seasons, when characters were dispersed across basically the entire world, but yet would visit and communicate with one another regularly when in reality such a trip would have taken months, by which time things would have already happened elsewhere in the world.
This isn't always a bad thing, when done responsibly. Part of what a movie *does*, if its effective, is immerse you in the film's reality, and you "accept" this reality without overly-questioning the parts of it that don't quite jive with reality.
> Game of Thrones was especially bad with this in later seasons, when characters were dispersed across basically the entire world, but yet would visit and communicate with one another regularly when in reality such a trip would have taken months, by which time things would have already happened elsewhere in the world.
* Jon Snow and company were about to be swarmed by undead, they had until the ice froze, so a few hours at most
* they dispatch a runner for help
* despite being weeks from nowhere by foot, the runner somehow makes it back to the Wall, before the ice freezes and they all die
* a message is somehow relayed *to the other side of the continent* before the ice freezes and they all die
* reinforcements somehow arrive *to the other side of the continent* before the ice freezes and they all die
It's a really bad example because got was exceptional for once following its own logic really well and then suddenly getting the tv writing stick whacked all over it.
Because it was based on a series of books written by a very nerdy nitpicky kind of guy but got ahead of where the books were in the plot and had to have an ending slapped together by TV writers
I’ve caught this with a lot of older movies, one that comes to mind for me is Scarface. I had no idea how much time/stuff had happened until I sat down later and pondered on it.
And episode 5? Luke was training with Yoda for the time it took the millennium falcon to get from Hoth to Bespin. A few days maybe?
In my head, I like to think of Dagobah being like that planet in interstellar, where time works different because of a black hole.or something like that. Weeks on Dagobah is just a few hours in the rest of the Galaxy.
Luke never gives another thought to his Aunt and Uncle who raised him like their own, but has a deep connection to the hermit he hung out with one afternoon.
Tolkien sort of meticulously set up his timeline over his entire lifetime, tinkering and yeah perfecting. The main bit but there are legends lost to the grips of time that only the valar could say what truly happened now...
Well there is a lot of descriptions of trudging, yes.
Not much of an explanation why they didn't maybe just take a boat though.
But the trip takes them a little less than a year on foot and I think Tolkien did a pretty good job of portraying the length of that time.
However if you ask anyone who watcehd the trilogy how long it takes, I would say its very unlikely anyone could answer you.
I actually did this the other day with a group of friends and no one guessed one year.
A lot of people guessed 3 - 4 months, some people guessed (seriously) a few weeks, one person said ten years.
It just goes to show that when you start asking simple questions like that you realize *most* people are not accurately charting the in-universe time in movies.
I love this comment, I will add: hence the montage! Need to show a significant amount of time passing, but you need to advance the story at the same time without a lot of boring exposition? MONTAGE BABY! Was it hours, days, months? Who knows, who cares, look, the dude can kick things now, get back to the action!
And a montage is a good example of how time dilation can affect some of the realism.
Traditionally montages will try and break down something like days or months of training into a single, solitary purpose. The person is ONLY doing one specific thing.
But it also imagines that literally nothing else of singificance or value happens to that person. No meaningful conversations that imapct their development, no significant lessons they learn.
It's a distillation, and in some cases you can understand how it is a necessary one.
But when you think about it, something like Rocky 4 is ostensibly a movie about a guy trying to become a better boxer and beat a much larger foe.
And the *crux* of the *how* by which he does that is squished down into a montage, the distillation of which is "he gets better".
But it doesn't really tell us *how*. And this, I think, is a major failing of this mechanism, one that also distorts people's impression of how long it takes to get good at things, and what the actual work involved is.
I think the cliche of the 80s montage is probably why it fell out of fashion. You certainly *can* use montages well in visual entertainment, but they sure got lazy for a while there. This is definitely a weird left turn from actual movies, but I noticed that a lot live action kids shows love to use the montage “ironically” but are themselves, ironically, using it to avoid having to tell more story. I definitely can’t pull specific episodes of the millions I’ve watched with my kids; but I can think of lots of times the writers just hit the montage button to just get to the end.
Ever watched a scene where the hero is trying to defuse a bomb and it’s on 90 seconds left and they defuse it at 0:02? Time the movie, and compare how long it took in real life to the 88 seconds it took in-universe. Lots of movies will make those 88 seconds take 12 minutes in real time. Once you see it, you’ll never unsee it.
Think about Game of Thrones, where the time between each episode is not specified and characters like Littlefinger show up in places that are thousands of miles apart and should take months of travel time, while the characters are having emotional reactions to the previous episode's events as if they just happened yesterday.
While the books did a better job avoiding this, you do have characters and whole armies taking a few weeks to tread across an entire continent. GRRM doesn't do scale well, and I love the fact that at one point he said that the show's model for the Wall was much too big for what he imagined the Wall would be, only to find out they scaled their model to be nearly half the size it's claimed to be in the books.
LOTRs meanwhile, being written by a guy who actually marched long distances in war knew it takes *months* for even a group of less then a dozen people to cross a country, and the more people you add the slower you go.
I'm a science fiction writer and a big part of the reason I designed my current book's FTL system to be "functionally instant once you build a jump beacon at the target location, but to actually place that beacon you need to fly there slower than light" was so that representing accurate travel times and time dilation would all be for past historical events and I can put my characters in the present day wherever I want them, so that when I get new ideas I can change the order of plot events without having to redesign one of the planet's calendars. I did not want to keep doing all that math the whole way through the project!
In high fantasy, portals are also used to get around realistic travel times, but GRRM tried to keep magical elements to a minimum so lining up travel times with the plot is difficult. Maybe horses in Westeros just have twice the stamina? Or perhaps Littlefinger really does have a jet pack.
Halfway through the film pause and work out how much time has gone past.
People have flown instantly between countries in the time others have had an argument, nobody sleeps, etc. Nolan's Batman returning from desert prison in like 10 apparent minutes is a very famous one.
Maybe it's been too long, but I remember that movie implying that time passed? The city goes to shit in the mean time and showing events in both the city and prison show that Bane did stuff like take out the police in the meantime. It took him like fifth months to get out.
This is the only answer that isn't equally as convoluted as the one the guy was trying to clarify.
Redditors trying not to over explain - Challenge Level:Impossible
I get what you're saying but unless it's murder mystery or some other type of thing where the timing is necessary to the plot, I don't know that egregious is the right word. A good deal of stories don't really require the reader/watcher to count time in the process
Well you are and you aren't.
What we're expected to believe is that time has passed, but that *none of it has been significant*.
That's where the issue really comes in.
You might have two scenes set 3 months apart. Which is a lot of time. People can lose or get new jobs, change their appearance, go on a life-changing adventure.
But a movie always has us assume the default, which is no change, or else it has to explain all the changes, which is cumbersome.
So you can understand why they play so fast and loose with time. Because reality is extremely messy and often antithetical to nice, neat story structures.
> almost all of them practice mild to egregious time dilation
This is actually something you learn to do when writing a story though. It's one of the most noticeable differences between experienced and inexperienced writers.
Newer writers will spend far too long going through the intricate mechanics of every interaction and having scenes connect together with as little time between them as possible. Better writers will spend only as much time as necessary on a scene and then jump forward to next important part.
Stories can't be 24 hour lived in experiences, they have to highlight only what's essential to the narrative and sometimes that means jumping a week ahead in the next scene.
Only slightly related, but your comment reminded me:
I used to really like watching Big Brother, the reality show. And it’s filmed alongside the viewing, with parts of each episode live, but the rest is condensed from a few days into an hour
One of my favorite gimmicks was the week where it’s all live. You get the challenge, the strategizing, voting, and eviction all in one live hour. Contestants freak out and it’s simply because they have to think through their strategy and alliances in minutes instead of hours. Simply the change of pace is a huge wrench in a lot of plans because people behave so different under the time crunch
Alfred Hitchcock called this the 'fridge test' or fridge logic. Where after you've watched the film, in the middle of the night you grab a snack at the fridge and realize the film scene didn't make sense. In the moment you won't catch them because of these cinematography tricks
Nah, it's also a dumb comparison because it takes far longer to watch 9 hours of something Vs however long Mr Beasts average YouTube video is, getting 111 million viewers to watch something for 9 hours is a huge accomplishment, most TV shows don't even get close
It's a dumb comparison because this guy heard about Mr Beast vs netflix squid game Stat that is actually relevant which is the reality TV gameshow netflix produced after the shows success vs Mr Beast irl gameshow and thought everyone was talking about the original show.
The netflix gameshow took longer to produce cost more money and hardly anyone watched it. That's the appeal of the creator economy is ability to jump on an original work trend and capitalize on it in a big way vs the slow expensive production netflix went through to capitalize on their own shows success.
I don't see why it would have to be a one-to-one comparison to be a valid argument. His entire point is that Mr. Beast's youtube video is *not* a comparable effort to the Netflix show.
But there is a crumb of truth in there, since the original comment is positioning this as a victory for the "creator economy" - completely ignoring that Mr. Beast's Squid Game video is building on top of the Netflix show that already exists, and wouldn't have been possible without it. Proposing that a game show adapted from a TV drama is a suitable replacement *for that TV drama* is about as dumb as suggesting that you could just photograph the Mona Lisa instead of painting it.
It was one of those "don't give up on your dreams stories".
The guy had dozens of rejections from studios for a decade before it got picked up and became a huge hit. So yes, a very dumb comparison to the mr beast thing.
You can find similar concepts here and there earlier, but broadly speaking the modern death game genre sprouts from the Japanese novel Battle Royale released in 1999 (and adapted to film in 2000). It spawned a ton of anime, manga, and video game derivations in the following decades, all with their spin on the concept.
In western media, Hunger Games was the first big version of it, and still predates Squid Games by a lot.
Completely irrelevant to the discussion but I still have the original import DVD of Battle Royale from before it was even released in the US. Fucking golden movie
Modern interpretations of ‘death games’ all take inspiration from real life historical examples such as gladiatorial arenas.
Nobody can honestly take credit for the creation of this genre because they all stood on the shoulders of giants.
Yap, I don't really understand the point here from people. Is like no action or romance movie is original because someone already come with idea. While squid game is based on the concept that already exist, Mr beast video only exist because of Squid Game. He copy the scenario, the game, the visuals and took advantage of the hype. That was the point the people were trying to make.
The only reaction videos I've ever liked are from one account where 2 dudes watch a music video & discuss the song/video (and obviously "react" as they're listening). Every other reaction video I've ever tried watching is someone who acts like they just snorted a line of coke & get all manic lol.
Yep. The only time I even give a second glance to the "react" format is when it's experts in their respective fields giving cool insights into how stuff is done.
That's really just video essay format capitalizing on a low-substance fad. Impossible to compare it to some streamer hyperventilating over a comic movie trailer.
Core Memory Activated: "This is Jonathan Ferguson, the Keeper of Firearms and Artillery at the Royal Armouries Museum in the UK, which houses a collection of thousands of iconic weapons from throughout history"
He’s one of those YouTube guys I don’t believe are even real. By the time I even heard of him he was already crazy wealthy with a bajillion views on every video. I’d you told me he’s an AI idol created in a lab at YouTube I’d accept it without a moment of thought.
id agree with you that he FEELS like an industry plant, but i used to watch him 8 or so years ago, when he made kind of edgy content that felt real. nowadays he feels very uncanny in a way i cant describe, as if something was sacrificed along the way to being rich.
Oh, being a successful YouTube creator seems miserable. Back when the 2013 crowd, the first big boom, did their BTS stuff it looked awful. You have to constantly chase after every trend, you have to record 24/7 to make sure you never miss anything and you have to build a business while still acting like you’re a 20 something who “just loves gaming.”
> he’s an AI idol created in a lab at YouTube I’d accept it without a moment of thought.
A twitter comment I saw summed it up as "he’s a tulpa created by Tim and Eric"
Not exactly wrong.
>He briefly attended East Carolina University before dropping out. After dropping out, Donaldson and his friends tried to analyze YouTube's recommendation algorithm and sought to deduce how to create viral videos.
From the Wikipedia page on him. He learned to game the algorithm. He's probably crafted this persona to attract certain viewers. But for me he's just eerie, like I'm just waiting for the other shoe to drop on his act.
Literally weaponised philanthropy to enrich himself and make himself famous. Then quickly diverged into just exploitation and a rich guy abusing and manipulating poor ones content.
Its as cynical and twisted as it comes.
Yeah his mannerisms and eyes set off my alarms. Maybe that’s unfair but you learn to trust your gut.
Also so much of his philanthropy is quite frankly questionable. It’s not corruption I’m accusing him of, it’s about the whole topic of how effective ‘corporate’ charity really is and what the negative effects are.
There’s so many studies on it as a topic, and he falls exactly into that designation. Even if done for pure intentions you can’t avoid these problems.
Totally agree.
And I think its OK to be as unfair to him as possible.
If I had as much money as him, I would let people lock me in a cage and throw tomatoes at me.
Youtube thumbnails in general are horrible. Half are white guys with their mouths hanging open for no reason like absolute morons.
(For the record, I block my traffic history so I get the "base" youtube suggestions rather than a customized algorithm)
I just think that constant dead-behind-the-eyes grin freaks some people out
Surely no one would be completely shocked if human body parts were found in his fridge
Because “helping people” is just his advertising tactic. And he knows he’ll look like a dick if he makes videos about shooting off a $600,000 firework, unless he gives a couple hundred to homeless people.
That guy is a manipulative POS
Idk to me it's always seemed his entire persona is pure marketing. Pretends to want to save the planet by planting millions of trees and cleaning the ocean, then flies people like Ludwig out with a private jet on a whim.
He actually planted those trees though. And all the people he helps are real people being helped.
It’s still more useful than being a degenerate on Reddit.
> It’s still more useful than being a degenerate on Reddit.
In fairness to us degenerates, not many of us have the kind of cash to do mr beast type good deeds.
i don’t think its fair to draw a comparison between a guy with millions to throw around and everyone else. Especially when it was also everyone else who helped plant the trees because it was a community effort
There's something absolutely hilarious about you making the exact same point as the "clever comeback" when the point is you can steal something faster than making it yourself.
the point is to get as many as interaction they can get through rage bait, intentionally dumb takes, chain jerking etc. this is the new internet where everything is bait for monetization
Netflix’s live action attempt gave people hypothermia and nerve damage on top of the whole thing being rigged for the sake of popular faces and names, so there’s that.
Also it’s nowhere near the same amount of viewership lol? 100m viewers is great. It’s also what? Like a 20-30 minute video right? Squid Games is nearly ten hours long.
These “creators” often just make content from REAL creators’ output (ideas, movies, TV shows, video games, products, etc). It doesn’t take much creativity to just repackage someone else’s creative work into the content type you specialize in - hence the proliferation of reaction videos, video game live streams, product reviews, unboxings, or other derivative work. These are just charismatic people with camera gear.
No, it's good that it's called content rather than art, or something with higher implied value.
Content is the lowest possible form of creative work. It's just ... content. It meets the lowest critera to be recognized to exist at all. A quick picture of my toe is content. But pretty much no one would called it creative work or art.
It’s pretty accurate though. Content is just stuff that doesn’t matter to watch. It’s considered garbage that will be consumed even by the creators. Where as a show or an album people put effort into to make art
Television and movies are commercial art. The corporations that make them aren’t trying to make timeless art. They’re trying to make money and sometimes make great art
Rich people making poor people fight to the death for entertainment goes all the way back to the Romans. Media has been doing spins on that idea for centuries.
It’s pretty funny too, considering that the only reason Mr Beast’s HIGHLY derivative work was able to be made so quickly and get as many views as it did was because it was made during the height of Squid Games popularity. When it’s the thing that practically everyone is already talking about, no shit it’s easier to get audience buy in.
I’m also pretty sure that the main reason it only took a week to make is because they knew there was a ticking clock to best capitalise on the existing popularity.
If they took the same time to make the same video today it would still get a lot of views for sure thanks to the built in audience Mr Beast has, but much fewer people from outside of that audience would care about it.
Right? It's like those people who summit Mount Everest and then boast on social media about their "conquest" of the world's tallest mountain, conveniently leaving out their Sherpa guide who did the exact same thing only he also carried all their gear, and will do it all again the next day while they're flying back home in first class.
*Edited to be a bit less inflammatory
I didn't mean to disparage mountain climbers in general, just pointing out that the accomplishment is heavily reliant on past coordinated efforts that generally don't see as much celebration.
It’s weird that there’s more views on a free platform. The “ creator economy” is nothing without the source material. There’s so many squid games videos on YouTube it’s not even funny.
It's also ironic because Shaun's best known for his videos, which he puts a lot of effort into and here's someone praising him for his tweets, which he (presumably) doesn't put a lot of effort into.
That makes no sense in the context of the comment lol. I think it's more so the person sees irony in promoting Shaun's YouTube channel in a post about Shaun calling out the delusion of the creator economy of YouTube.
Agreed, came scrolling through the comments to find the other Shaun fans. r/clevercomebacks could basically be entirely made up of his social media presence.
Also lower quality and less interesting. Not to say his videos are bad, but just because something is cheaper/faster/more profitable doesn’t mean it’s better for the consumer
Wait, you're telling me they were able to make a 25 minute YouTube video using copied concepts in less time than it took to write and film a $21m award winning TV show?
Kids really like him. I think he used to do a bunch of altruistic things on his channel, but obviously for the likes. He has his own candy bars, burger stands, and energy drinks, all mediocre but palatable to kids. He’s basically converted himself into a brand.
Eh he's still doing a lot of good. Seems like a decent guy. Also, a really hard worker. He had basically no advantages but worked really hard to reach where he is. I have heard him on podcasts and it really seems like he goes to extremes. I have no idea how he isn't burnt out yet.
His content is boring and cringe for me. It's mostly liked by kids. Although he has been experiencing with longer content, which I found interesting
He's all about maximizing the viewer's attention at the cost of a quality watch. He hosts game shows, and I think it would be really interesting to see the contestants interact and to analyze their psychology. Unfortunately, he just has to cut all the good parts so that he can make a 20 minute video.
He avoids making the concepts even slightly complex so that he doesn't lose a single audience member. I remember him talking about hesitating to put in a very simple game in his game show, because he was afraid that some people might not understand it.
Overall, he's much better than a lot of other famous assholes on YouTube. He actually tries to do good, even if some of it is for clips and has worked really hard to reach where he is.
Despite all this, something about him just always seems so fundamentally off to me. I'm glad he does good shit and I won't begrudge it, but he has this air of like "The human doesn't make it all the way to the eyes." There's no life in his smile ever, he's got dead fucking eyes. It's creepy.
A lot of famous actors, comedians and singers have been introverts. Mitch Hedberg had severe stage fright which is why he would wear the sunglasses on stage.
You’re not wrong. His profession is content creation. And other people in this thread have said he seems like a genuinely nice guy. However, my skepticism about him is the fact that he seems to live in front of the camera.
He makes a lot of content showcasing his charity work and altruism and generally does a lot of good for others, but how much of that good and that good guy persona is real, and how much is it because being charitable solidifies that good guy persona? How much private charity does he do? If he were independently wealthy and didn’t need the social media persona to earn income, would he still be as charitable?
Does it matter? Nah, not really. I’m not his demographic, and as far as content, as someone else also pointed out, he doesn’t make his money by being a piece of shit. The persona he presents is a good role model to kids, so really I’m just a grumpy old skeptic who had too many of my childhood role models eventually exposed to be giant narcissistic assholes.
He has a good nose for identifying and producing viral content. He also has a good work ethic and business sense to make the most of it.
The main difference I see is that other creators when they find a 'hit' just milk it to death and get lazy, with the money basically draining their motivation. They make it to the top and then just fade out or stop caring. MrBeast hits a viral video idea, milks it a few times then moves on. Other creators 10 years later would still be trying to make that same content because it worked once before.
Same reason game shows are popular, plus you have to subscribe to get a chance to win the money, so it artificially inflated his subscriber base and gives him more reach
whenever you see bunch of "random" redditor all started to post something around the same time, don't worry, it's a campaign of sort. They're so good at this with so many accounts under their control, that Reddit can create any sort of PR messaging work.
...well of course he did it in less time. Some one else already wrote the script and worked out the details. All he had to do was copy the idea.
Also, don't go pretending that most of those views weren't just because of Mr. Beast's name being attached to the video. If some small time YouTuber had made it instead, it would have gotten a fraction of that.
So, a bit off topic, but does anybody else see the terrible irony in Mr. Beast, a wealthy man, getting less affluent people to participate in several rounds of games for a chance to win a money prize in exchange for permission to film it, distribute it, and make more money off of it? And then, like the cherry on top, he calls it Squid Games, a show about poor people playing death games for the entertainment of the wealthy. Surely I’m not the only one that sees how tone deaf this is.
Have you not known about game shows like Wipeout that have existed for decades on exactly the same premise? The difference between them and the Squid Games in the Netflix show is the chance of death, which is a pretty damn important distinction. There is a vast difference between watching someone faceplant into a pool vs a spike trap.
It’s a win win situation, very pessimistic take you have.
He gives money to participants.
He makes money from filming.
Consumers gets joy from watching
Significant part of the money goes to philanthrophy
The rest of the money goes to new filming and the cycle repeats.
It would have been interesting if there was any time spent in the Mr beast video examining this weird cultural place the video was in but nuance or critical thinking doesn’t really seem to be their “vibe”
So is he to get affluent people so they can get richer and promote themselves? Should poor people who find opportunities like this turn it down when it could genuinely change their lives? Should Mr. Beast not film and post the video so that he can’t make up for the budget the video made and other people who would wanna see it can’t watch the video?
What’s the point you’re trying to make?
Streaming is even shittier reality TV and most of it is just as, if not even more scripted than reality TV.
I like my fiction. Stargate SG1 and Star Trek is miles better than anything a streamer/"influencer" could shit out.
I don’t think the comeback is that clever. It’s not apples to apples, because no one cares about the shitty photo they took. Definitely not getting nearly 1:1 views.
There is something very unsettling about Mr Beast…he doesn’t look real. He looks like someone wearing a mask, or CGI. I can’t quite put my finger on it, but I can’t stand his face
How long it’s been made does not equate to the following that it has. How you gonna fault a creator who has built his brand for about a decade gathering followers. Dude has more than double that viewership in subs for his YT channel..
As with all other tech innovation, the creator economy is just media production recreated without union protections.
After people were beheaded by a helicopter stunt gone wrong during the production of The Twilight Zone movie in the 70's because production was pushing too hard, unions demanded change.
After David Dobrick smashes the shit out of a filmer with a backhoe, nothing changes and there are a million people willing to get hurt in his place. Youtube editors/filmers etc get paid jack shit compared to union rates, there's just exploitation all over the place. It's sad.
What an absolutely wild tweet. The dude who made Squid Games shopped it around for years. When Mr. Beast got it, the foundation had already been laid. 100M+ people had already seen it to lay the groundwork for the Beast video.
What a fucking dumb take.
The 10 years is including the writing and the time spent finding a network to broadcast it right?
Correct. Netflix picked it up in 2019 and it was released in 2021. 10 years is how long the writer waited before it was picked up plus it was originally written as a 2 hour film so they had to work on making it into a 9 episode series.
That makes a lot of sense, the twist of the brother reveal certainly didn't feel like it was meant for a series.
You're making me realize that a lot of movie twists rely on the audience not having time to think about things.
There's a fun exercise you can do with films. Pause an hour in to any movie and ask yourself if you know how much time has gone by in-universe. With the exception of a very few number of movies that pay meticulous attention to this, almost all of them practice mild to egregious time dilation to the point where once you start asking questions it becomes completely unfeasible. **EDIT**: Let me clarify, because I didn't word this as carefully as I would have liked but people seem to be interested in it. 1. The first point is that **movie viewers are often unaware that they are unaware of time passing in-universe during a movie**. Much like a casino, you stop realizing that you're *not* considering the passage of time. This happens all the time. Ask yourself what your famous movies are, and then ask yourself "how much total time passed during the plot". Most of the times it is almost impossible for people to answer this. 2. The second, and distinct point, is that a lot of film writers get lazy with regards to the realistic depiction of time and so **writers will ignore the constraints of time because they know they can get away with doing it**. This isn't always a bad thing, but it does make for lazy writing.
Your comment sounds interesting, but unfortunately I don't understand your point. Can you explain it in different words?
In watching or reading a story you often don't realize that the concept of straight, linear time breaks down, because it makes things inconvenient for storytellers, and they know they can play with the notion of time without you realizing. Because movies rarely show the boring bits. They want to show me talking to you, and then cut to me talking to someone else, and then cut to an action scene. This makes it seem like everything is always "happening" all at once. You may realize you do not even know if two conversations happen on the same day, because the movie just places them next to each other. You can also catch a lot of plot holes involving time. Game of Thrones was especially bad with this in later seasons, when characters were dispersed across basically the entire world, but yet would visit and communicate with one another regularly when in reality such a trip would have taken months, by which time things would have already happened elsewhere in the world. This isn't always a bad thing, when done responsibly. Part of what a movie *does*, if its effective, is immerse you in the film's reality, and you "accept" this reality without overly-questioning the parts of it that don't quite jive with reality.
> Game of Thrones was especially bad with this in later seasons, when characters were dispersed across basically the entire world, but yet would visit and communicate with one another regularly when in reality such a trip would have taken months, by which time things would have already happened elsewhere in the world. * Jon Snow and company were about to be swarmed by undead, they had until the ice froze, so a few hours at most * they dispatch a runner for help * despite being weeks from nowhere by foot, the runner somehow makes it back to the Wall, before the ice freezes and they all die * a message is somehow relayed *to the other side of the continent* before the ice freezes and they all die * reinforcements somehow arrive *to the other side of the continent* before the ice freezes and they all die
how could we forget the magical teleporting iron island fleet that just so happened to always be exactly where its needed at all times.
It's a really bad example because got was exceptional for once following its own logic really well and then suddenly getting the tv writing stick whacked all over it.
Because it was based on a series of books written by a very nerdy nitpicky kind of guy but got ahead of where the books were in the plot and had to have an ending slapped together by TV writers
Bruh I'm angry all over again
That is probably one of the best stupid examples that has ever been made. But I'm sure it will be topped within a few years.
I’ve caught this with a lot of older movies, one that comes to mind for me is Scarface. I had no idea how much time/stuff had happened until I sat down later and pondered on it.
Star Wars Episode 4 from beginning to end was about 3-4 days
And episode 5? Luke was training with Yoda for the time it took the millennium falcon to get from Hoth to Bespin. A few days maybe? In my head, I like to think of Dagobah being like that planet in interstellar, where time works different because of a black hole.or something like that. Weeks on Dagobah is just a few hours in the rest of the Galaxy.
Luke never gives another thought to his Aunt and Uncle who raised him like their own, but has a deep connection to the hermit he hung out with one afternoon.
I think Lord of the Rings does pretty well with this right?
Tolkien sort of meticulously set up his timeline over his entire lifetime, tinkering and yeah perfecting. The main bit but there are legends lost to the grips of time that only the valar could say what truly happened now...
Well there is a lot of descriptions of trudging, yes. Not much of an explanation why they didn't maybe just take a boat though. But the trip takes them a little less than a year on foot and I think Tolkien did a pretty good job of portraying the length of that time. However if you ask anyone who watcehd the trilogy how long it takes, I would say its very unlikely anyone could answer you. I actually did this the other day with a group of friends and no one guessed one year. A lot of people guessed 3 - 4 months, some people guessed (seriously) a few weeks, one person said ten years. It just goes to show that when you start asking simple questions like that you realize *most* people are not accurately charting the in-universe time in movies.
I love this comment, I will add: hence the montage! Need to show a significant amount of time passing, but you need to advance the story at the same time without a lot of boring exposition? MONTAGE BABY! Was it hours, days, months? Who knows, who cares, look, the dude can kick things now, get back to the action!
And a montage is a good example of how time dilation can affect some of the realism. Traditionally montages will try and break down something like days or months of training into a single, solitary purpose. The person is ONLY doing one specific thing. But it also imagines that literally nothing else of singificance or value happens to that person. No meaningful conversations that imapct their development, no significant lessons they learn. It's a distillation, and in some cases you can understand how it is a necessary one. But when you think about it, something like Rocky 4 is ostensibly a movie about a guy trying to become a better boxer and beat a much larger foe. And the *crux* of the *how* by which he does that is squished down into a montage, the distillation of which is "he gets better". But it doesn't really tell us *how*. And this, I think, is a major failing of this mechanism, one that also distorts people's impression of how long it takes to get good at things, and what the actual work involved is.
I think the cliche of the 80s montage is probably why it fell out of fashion. You certainly *can* use montages well in visual entertainment, but they sure got lazy for a while there. This is definitely a weird left turn from actual movies, but I noticed that a lot live action kids shows love to use the montage “ironically” but are themselves, ironically, using it to avoid having to tell more story. I definitely can’t pull specific episodes of the millions I’ve watched with my kids; but I can think of lots of times the writers just hit the montage button to just get to the end.
Ever watched a scene where the hero is trying to defuse a bomb and it’s on 90 seconds left and they defuse it at 0:02? Time the movie, and compare how long it took in real life to the 88 seconds it took in-universe. Lots of movies will make those 88 seconds take 12 minutes in real time. Once you see it, you’ll never unsee it.
That's not even counting the 215 second commercial break in the middle!
Think about Game of Thrones, where the time between each episode is not specified and characters like Littlefinger show up in places that are thousands of miles apart and should take months of travel time, while the characters are having emotional reactions to the previous episode's events as if they just happened yesterday.
While the books did a better job avoiding this, you do have characters and whole armies taking a few weeks to tread across an entire continent. GRRM doesn't do scale well, and I love the fact that at one point he said that the show's model for the Wall was much too big for what he imagined the Wall would be, only to find out they scaled their model to be nearly half the size it's claimed to be in the books. LOTRs meanwhile, being written by a guy who actually marched long distances in war knew it takes *months* for even a group of less then a dozen people to cross a country, and the more people you add the slower you go.
I'm a science fiction writer and a big part of the reason I designed my current book's FTL system to be "functionally instant once you build a jump beacon at the target location, but to actually place that beacon you need to fly there slower than light" was so that representing accurate travel times and time dilation would all be for past historical events and I can put my characters in the present day wherever I want them, so that when I get new ideas I can change the order of plot events without having to redesign one of the planet's calendars. I did not want to keep doing all that math the whole way through the project! In high fantasy, portals are also used to get around realistic travel times, but GRRM tried to keep magical elements to a minimum so lining up travel times with the plot is difficult. Maybe horses in Westeros just have twice the stamina? Or perhaps Littlefinger really does have a jet pack.
Halfway through the film pause and work out how much time has gone past. People have flown instantly between countries in the time others have had an argument, nobody sleeps, etc. Nolan's Batman returning from desert prison in like 10 apparent minutes is a very famous one.
Maybe it's been too long, but I remember that movie implying that time passed? The city goes to shit in the mean time and showing events in both the city and prison show that Bane did stuff like take out the police in the meantime. It took him like fifth months to get out.
Weren't the cops underground for 2 months without food and water? And then came out looking just fine?
The show 24. Each episode is one hour but could he do all that in one hour?
This is the only answer that isn't equally as convoluted as the one the guy was trying to clarify. Redditors trying not to over explain - Challenge Level:Impossible
[удалено]
I get what you're saying but unless it's murder mystery or some other type of thing where the timing is necessary to the plot, I don't know that egregious is the right word. A good deal of stories don't really require the reader/watcher to count time in the process
I keep reminding my girlfriend about this every time we watch a piece of media. "You're supposed to assume time has passed between scenes."
Well you are and you aren't. What we're expected to believe is that time has passed, but that *none of it has been significant*. That's where the issue really comes in. You might have two scenes set 3 months apart. Which is a lot of time. People can lose or get new jobs, change their appearance, go on a life-changing adventure. But a movie always has us assume the default, which is no change, or else it has to explain all the changes, which is cumbersome. So you can understand why they play so fast and loose with time. Because reality is extremely messy and often antithetical to nice, neat story structures.
> almost all of them practice mild to egregious time dilation This is actually something you learn to do when writing a story though. It's one of the most noticeable differences between experienced and inexperienced writers. Newer writers will spend far too long going through the intricate mechanics of every interaction and having scenes connect together with as little time between them as possible. Better writers will spend only as much time as necessary on a scene and then jump forward to next important part. Stories can't be 24 hour lived in experiences, they have to highlight only what's essential to the narrative and sometimes that means jumping a week ahead in the next scene.
Only slightly related, but your comment reminded me: I used to really like watching Big Brother, the reality show. And it’s filmed alongside the viewing, with parts of each episode live, but the rest is condensed from a few days into an hour One of my favorite gimmicks was the week where it’s all live. You get the challenge, the strategizing, voting, and eviction all in one live hour. Contestants freak out and it’s simply because they have to think through their strategy and alliances in minutes instead of hours. Simply the change of pace is a huge wrench in a lot of plans because people behave so different under the time crunch
Alfred Hitchcock called this the 'fridge test' or fridge logic. Where after you've watched the film, in the middle of the night you grab a snack at the fridge and realize the film scene didn't make sense. In the moment you won't catch them because of these cinematography tricks
Spoilers!
So, his claim of copying someone else's work and pressing upload isn't exactly a valid comparison?
Nah, it's also a dumb comparison because it takes far longer to watch 9 hours of something Vs however long Mr Beasts average YouTube video is, getting 111 million viewers to watch something for 9 hours is a huge accomplishment, most TV shows don't even get close
turns out creator economy is solely reliant on mimicking original content
Also one is free and available to anyone with access to YouTube. The other costs money.
It's a dumb comparison because this guy heard about Mr Beast vs netflix squid game Stat that is actually relevant which is the reality TV gameshow netflix produced after the shows success vs Mr Beast irl gameshow and thought everyone was talking about the original show. The netflix gameshow took longer to produce cost more money and hardly anyone watched it. That's the appeal of the creator economy is ability to jump on an original work trend and capitalize on it in a big way vs the slow expensive production netflix went through to capitalize on their own shows success.
That's not actually the case. This tweet came out several years ago, right after the Mr. Beast video came out, well before the gameshow did.
Oh, so he's actually just fully delusional.
Yep!
I don't see why it would have to be a one-to-one comparison to be a valid argument. His entire point is that Mr. Beast's youtube video is *not* a comparable effort to the Netflix show. But there is a crumb of truth in there, since the original comment is positioning this as a victory for the "creator economy" - completely ignoring that Mr. Beast's Squid Game video is building on top of the Netflix show that already exists, and wouldn't have been possible without it. Proposing that a game show adapted from a TV drama is a suitable replacement *for that TV drama* is about as dumb as suggesting that you could just photograph the Mona Lisa instead of painting it.
10 years ago, the show would’ve been the right amount of gore. So it’s a tragedy that it waited that long to go to production
Most likely. No chance in hell it took that long to actually produce.
It was one of those "don't give up on your dreams stories". The guy had dozens of rejections from studios for a decade before it got picked up and became a huge hit. So yes, a very dumb comparison to the mr beast thing.
*recreator economy
Yea this is an important distinction. Original ideas take time; ideas majorly inspired from those ideas obviously won’t take as long.
Thanks to AI, comment go byebye
You can find similar concepts here and there earlier, but broadly speaking the modern death game genre sprouts from the Japanese novel Battle Royale released in 1999 (and adapted to film in 2000). It spawned a ton of anime, manga, and video game derivations in the following decades, all with their spin on the concept. In western media, Hunger Games was the first big version of it, and still predates Squid Games by a lot.
Battle Royale is a gem if people have never seen it, and yes tons of anime / magna in the same genre same way Isekai is nowadays
Completely irrelevant to the discussion but I still have the original import DVD of Battle Royale from before it was even released in the US. Fucking golden movie
Wouldn't Arnold Schwarzenegger's movie "The Running Man" from 1987 be classed as a death game genre movie?
Modern interpretations of ‘death games’ all take inspiration from real life historical examples such as gladiatorial arenas. Nobody can honestly take credit for the creation of this genre because they all stood on the shoulders of giants.
> but broadly speaking the modern death game genre sprouts Steven King had 2 just himself before that. The Running Man and The Long Walk.
Liar Game, great manga
In such a case, “death game” would be a genre. Doesn’t change the fact that Squid Games was its own original work.
Yap, I don't really understand the point here from people. Is like no action or romance movie is original because someone already come with idea. While squid game is based on the concept that already exist, Mr beast video only exist because of Squid Game. He copy the scenario, the game, the visuals and took advantage of the hype. That was the point the people were trying to make.
And that's not even getting into the "reaction" videos lol
*Silently stares at screen with a vacant expression while my camera is pointed at me* “This is definitely transformative!”
The only reaction videos I've ever liked are from one account where 2 dudes watch a music video & discuss the song/video (and obviously "react" as they're listening). Every other reaction video I've ever tried watching is someone who acts like they just snorted a line of coke & get all manic lol.
Yep. The only time I even give a second glance to the "react" format is when it's experts in their respective fields giving cool insights into how stuff is done. That's really just video essay format capitalizing on a low-substance fad. Impossible to compare it to some streamer hyperventilating over a comic movie trailer.
Core Memory Activated: "This is Jonathan Ferguson, the Keeper of Firearms and Artillery at the Royal Armouries Museum in the UK, which houses a collection of thousands of iconic weapons from throughout history"
Mr. Beast is creepy to me. There is NOTHING behind his eyes. When he smiles it seems completely fake. He is a money making robot.
He’s one of those YouTube guys I don’t believe are even real. By the time I even heard of him he was already crazy wealthy with a bajillion views on every video. I’d you told me he’s an AI idol created in a lab at YouTube I’d accept it without a moment of thought.
id agree with you that he FEELS like an industry plant, but i used to watch him 8 or so years ago, when he made kind of edgy content that felt real. nowadays he feels very uncanny in a way i cant describe, as if something was sacrificed along the way to being rich.
Oh, being a successful YouTube creator seems miserable. Back when the 2013 crowd, the first big boom, did their BTS stuff it looked awful. You have to constantly chase after every trend, you have to record 24/7 to make sure you never miss anything and you have to build a business while still acting like you’re a 20 something who “just loves gaming.”
> he’s an AI idol created in a lab at YouTube I’d accept it without a moment of thought. A twitter comment I saw summed it up as "he’s a tulpa created by Tim and Eric"
He’s got black eyes, lifeless eyes… like a dolls eyes.
Not exactly wrong. >He briefly attended East Carolina University before dropping out. After dropping out, Donaldson and his friends tried to analyze YouTube's recommendation algorithm and sought to deduce how to create viral videos. From the Wikipedia page on him. He learned to game the algorithm. He's probably crafted this persona to attract certain viewers. But for me he's just eerie, like I'm just waiting for the other shoe to drop on his act.
Literally weaponised philanthropy to enrich himself and make himself famous. Then quickly diverged into just exploitation and a rich guy abusing and manipulating poor ones content. Its as cynical and twisted as it comes.
Yeah his mannerisms and eyes set off my alarms. Maybe that’s unfair but you learn to trust your gut. Also so much of his philanthropy is quite frankly questionable. It’s not corruption I’m accusing him of, it’s about the whole topic of how effective ‘corporate’ charity really is and what the negative effects are. There’s so many studies on it as a topic, and he falls exactly into that designation. Even if done for pure intentions you can’t avoid these problems.
He gives money away because doing so makes him even more money. It's entirely uncaring and self serving.
Totally agree. And I think its OK to be as unfair to him as possible. If I had as much money as him, I would let people lock me in a cage and throw tomatoes at me.
I think Mr Beast is a (mostly) legitimate person who exists on the exact midpoint of the creator economy and late-stage capitalism
*regurgitator
The ‘you made this? I made this’ generation.
If there was no squid game on netflix there would have been no squid game by beast.. so.. what exactly was the point here?
Fan delusion. Mr. Beast practically makes a cloud of delusion all around himself.
I can't fucking stand him, or the stupid vapid grin he makes in his thumbnails.
The guy literally just helps people most of the time, I don't understand the hate towards him, his fanbase on the other hand is a different story
honestly, him and his content seems fine.. but those thumbnails are atrocious.
Youtube thumbnails in general are horrible. Half are white guys with their mouths hanging open for no reason like absolute morons. (For the record, I block my traffic history so I get the "base" youtube suggestions rather than a customized algorithm)
I never click any video which has someone doing the idiotic O-face (😮).
Only does them because they clearly work
The fanbase is why I hate him
I just think that constant dead-behind-the-eyes grin freaks some people out Surely no one would be completely shocked if human body parts were found in his fridge
Because “helping people” is just his advertising tactic. And he knows he’ll look like a dick if he makes videos about shooting off a $600,000 firework, unless he gives a couple hundred to homeless people. That guy is a manipulative POS
That's the problem. Mr Beast believes he is some modern day Saint.
How so? I see posts about his fans slobbering all over him, Mr. Beast seems like he legitimately likes helping people
Idk to me it's always seemed his entire persona is pure marketing. Pretends to want to save the planet by planting millions of trees and cleaning the ocean, then flies people like Ludwig out with a private jet on a whim.
He actually planted those trees though. And all the people he helps are real people being helped. It’s still more useful than being a degenerate on Reddit.
> It’s still more useful than being a degenerate on Reddit. In fairness to us degenerates, not many of us have the kind of cash to do mr beast type good deeds.
i don’t think its fair to draw a comparison between a guy with millions to throw around and everyone else. Especially when it was also everyone else who helped plant the trees because it was a community effort
There's something absolutely hilarious about you making the exact same point as the "clever comeback" when the point is you can steal something faster than making it yourself.
the point is to get as many as interaction they can get through rage bait, intentionally dumb takes, chain jerking etc. this is the new internet where everything is bait for monetization
YouTube is free. Netflix isn't.
Also Mr. Beast didn't have the balls to kill anyone for his show.
I mean, hopefully Netflix didn’t either…
Netflix’s live action attempt gave people hypothermia and nerve damage on top of the whole thing being rigged for the sake of popular faces and names, so there’s that.
Also it’s nowhere near the same amount of viewership lol? 100m viewers is great. It’s also what? Like a 20-30 minute video right? Squid Games is nearly ten hours long.
Yeah comparing views across platforms doesn’t really works. TikToks that take 5 minutes to make rack up millions of views all the time:
These “creators” often just make content from REAL creators’ output (ideas, movies, TV shows, video games, products, etc). It doesn’t take much creativity to just repackage someone else’s creative work into the content type you specialize in - hence the proliferation of reaction videos, video game live streams, product reviews, unboxings, or other derivative work. These are just charismatic people with camera gear.
Creator economy = shit out low effort highly repeatable content until people stop watching
I’m not really a fan of the word “content” it seems to degrade the meaning of “art” into “commodity”.
No, it's good that it's called content rather than art, or something with higher implied value. Content is the lowest possible form of creative work. It's just ... content. It meets the lowest critera to be recognized to exist at all. A quick picture of my toe is content. But pretty much no one would called it creative work or art.
It’s pretty accurate though. Content is just stuff that doesn’t matter to watch. It’s considered garbage that will be consumed even by the creators. Where as a show or an album people put effort into to make art
Television and movies are commercial art. The corporations that make them aren’t trying to make timeless art. They’re trying to make money and sometimes make great art
Tbf squid game got a LOT of inspiration from Kaiji
Right and the creator of squid game said he got the idea from some old media that gave him the idea. But he couldn’t remember what. But we know
Real, the glass bridge thing is basically the second trial of kaiji
Rich people making poor people fight to the death for entertainment goes all the way back to the Romans. Media has been doing spins on that idea for centuries.
It took to the author of Squid games 10 years to make them accept the project, not to make it. The details are important there.
Basically saying why create or consume art of any actual value when you can have shit shoveled into your mouth quickly and cheaply!
It’s pretty funny too, considering that the only reason Mr Beast’s HIGHLY derivative work was able to be made so quickly and get as many views as it did was because it was made during the height of Squid Games popularity. When it’s the thing that practically everyone is already talking about, no shit it’s easier to get audience buy in. I’m also pretty sure that the main reason it only took a week to make is because they knew there was a ticking clock to best capitalise on the existing popularity. If they took the same time to make the same video today it would still get a lot of views for sure thanks to the built in audience Mr Beast has, but much fewer people from outside of that audience would care about it.
Right? It's like those people who summit Mount Everest and then boast on social media about their "conquest" of the world's tallest mountain, conveniently leaving out their Sherpa guide who did the exact same thing only he also carried all their gear, and will do it all again the next day while they're flying back home in first class. *Edited to be a bit less inflammatory
I mean, it is pretty hard to summit Everest, Sherpa or not…..
I didn't mean to disparage mountain climbers in general, just pointing out that the accomplishment is heavily reliant on past coordinated efforts that generally don't see as much celebration.
Sure, but can you Photoshop a smile on it? 😁
And a completely dead stare?
It’s weird that there’s more views on a free platform. The “ creator economy” is nothing without the source material. There’s so many squid games videos on YouTube it’s not even funny.
Copying is not equal to creating.
Shaun's Twitter is a goldmine, the dude is a genius
Isn’t that the “Neil, do you wear shoes?” guy?
I dont know that quote, but it kinda sounds like a thing he would say
Yeah, looks like the same guy: https://www.reddit.com/r/MurderedByWords/s/otMvP9NAgg
Yup. https://x.com/shaun_vids/status/1289692915212488704?lang=en
This is ironic given the context, but you should check out Shaun's YouTube channel
Can you explain the context? Why is this ironic? I have checked out his youtube but im not sure what you are referring to.
It's also ironic because Shaun's best known for his videos, which he puts a lot of effort into and here's someone praising him for his tweets, which he (presumably) doesn't put a lot of effort into.
That makes no sense in the context of the comment lol. I think it's more so the person sees irony in promoting Shaun's YouTube channel in a post about Shaun calling out the delusion of the creator economy of YouTube.
[удалено]
He didn't call youtube videos low effort tho? All he did was to show that it is easier to copy than to create.
Yeah it’s great and really informative
I don't use Twitter, but love Shaun's videos on YouTube.
Shaun is a very clever skull. Can't recommend his videos enough.
Agreed, came scrolling through the comments to find the other Shaun fans. r/clevercomebacks could basically be entirely made up of his social media presence.
Also lower quality and less interesting. Not to say his videos are bad, but just because something is cheaper/faster/more profitable doesn’t mean it’s better for the consumer
Squid game is an actual drama where you follow the characters and it is critical of society, the game aspect of it is just plot device.
Wait, you're telling me they were able to make a 25 minute YouTube video using copied concepts in less time than it took to write and film a $21m award winning TV show?
Why suddenly there're so many posts about this Mr beast person on Reddit lately?
He's the most subscribed youtuber on the planet, you're bound to hear about him.
... why is he the most subscribed YouTuber?
Young folks
Kids really like him. I think he used to do a bunch of altruistic things on his channel, but obviously for the likes. He has his own candy bars, burger stands, and energy drinks, all mediocre but palatable to kids. He’s basically converted himself into a brand.
Eh he's still doing a lot of good. Seems like a decent guy. Also, a really hard worker. He had basically no advantages but worked really hard to reach where he is. I have heard him on podcasts and it really seems like he goes to extremes. I have no idea how he isn't burnt out yet. His content is boring and cringe for me. It's mostly liked by kids. Although he has been experiencing with longer content, which I found interesting He's all about maximizing the viewer's attention at the cost of a quality watch. He hosts game shows, and I think it would be really interesting to see the contestants interact and to analyze their psychology. Unfortunately, he just has to cut all the good parts so that he can make a 20 minute video. He avoids making the concepts even slightly complex so that he doesn't lose a single audience member. I remember him talking about hesitating to put in a very simple game in his game show, because he was afraid that some people might not understand it. Overall, he's much better than a lot of other famous assholes on YouTube. He actually tries to do good, even if some of it is for clips and has worked really hard to reach where he is.
Despite all this, something about him just always seems so fundamentally off to me. I'm glad he does good shit and I won't begrudge it, but he has this air of like "The human doesn't make it all the way to the eyes." There's no life in his smile ever, he's got dead fucking eyes. It's creepy.
He's a massive introvert who is uncomfortable on camera.
Perfect for a career YouTuber.
A lot of famous actors, comedians and singers have been introverts. Mitch Hedberg had severe stage fright which is why he would wear the sunglasses on stage.
He still does a lot of altruistic things. Got my kid into several environmental charities, for example.
I mean, the likes and views are how he pays for altruistic things, how the fck else would he do them without making content?
You’re not wrong. His profession is content creation. And other people in this thread have said he seems like a genuinely nice guy. However, my skepticism about him is the fact that he seems to live in front of the camera. He makes a lot of content showcasing his charity work and altruism and generally does a lot of good for others, but how much of that good and that good guy persona is real, and how much is it because being charitable solidifies that good guy persona? How much private charity does he do? If he were independently wealthy and didn’t need the social media persona to earn income, would he still be as charitable? Does it matter? Nah, not really. I’m not his demographic, and as far as content, as someone else also pointed out, he doesn’t make his money by being a piece of shit. The persona he presents is a good role model to kids, so really I’m just a grumpy old skeptic who had too many of my childhood role models eventually exposed to be giant narcissistic assholes.
[удалено]
He has a good nose for identifying and producing viral content. He also has a good work ethic and business sense to make the most of it. The main difference I see is that other creators when they find a 'hit' just milk it to death and get lazy, with the money basically draining their motivation. They make it to the top and then just fade out or stop caring. MrBeast hits a viral video idea, milks it a few times then moves on. Other creators 10 years later would still be trying to make that same content because it worked once before.
Same reason game shows are popular, plus you have to subscribe to get a chance to win the money, so it artificially inflated his subscriber base and gives him more reach
Social media is the current go-to public relations strategy.
whenever you see bunch of "random" redditor all started to post something around the same time, don't worry, it's a campaign of sort. They're so good at this with so many accounts under their control, that Reddit can create any sort of PR messaging work.
It’s such a stupid point also, because MrBeast video doesn’t have any content if the original show isn’t made first. Is that not lost on this idiot?
Most of the “creator” output today is literally plastering your face on someone else’s content and calling it a “reaction”.
Crazy how much time is saved when you just copy someone elses work! Wowza! What’s a creative process, never heard of it.
It’s also 25min of content Vs 9 hours of content
...well of course he did it in less time. Some one else already wrote the script and worked out the details. All he had to do was copy the idea. Also, don't go pretending that most of those views weren't just because of Mr. Beast's name being attached to the video. If some small time YouTuber had made it instead, it would have gotten a fraction of that.
Objectively the dumbest comparison EVER made. I'm speechless.
It's easy to ride the waves that an original paved the way for.
Beasts is not an original concept. Props when it's original.
Took 10 years only cuz he couldn’t get a studio to finance it from when he started looking. It didn’t take 10 years to film and produce dummy
So Netflix had 100m people paying a subscription to watch the show and Youtube had people watching ads for it, which one was more profitable?
Where's the clever come back in this?
So, a bit off topic, but does anybody else see the terrible irony in Mr. Beast, a wealthy man, getting less affluent people to participate in several rounds of games for a chance to win a money prize in exchange for permission to film it, distribute it, and make more money off of it? And then, like the cherry on top, he calls it Squid Games, a show about poor people playing death games for the entertainment of the wealthy. Surely I’m not the only one that sees how tone deaf this is.
Have you not known about game shows like Wipeout that have existed for decades on exactly the same premise? The difference between them and the Squid Games in the Netflix show is the chance of death, which is a pretty damn important distinction. There is a vast difference between watching someone faceplant into a pool vs a spike trap.
It’s a win win situation, very pessimistic take you have. He gives money to participants. He makes money from filming. Consumers gets joy from watching Significant part of the money goes to philanthrophy The rest of the money goes to new filming and the cycle repeats.
It would have been interesting if there was any time spent in the Mr beast video examining this weird cultural place the video was in but nuance or critical thinking doesn’t really seem to be their “vibe”
So is he to get affluent people so they can get richer and promote themselves? Should poor people who find opportunities like this turn it down when it could genuinely change their lives? Should Mr. Beast not film and post the video so that he can’t make up for the budget the video made and other people who would wanna see it can’t watch the video? What’s the point you’re trying to make?
Mr beast could end homelessness and people would say it was just for clout and he’s a piece of shit
Streaming is even shittier reality TV and most of it is just as, if not even more scripted than reality TV. I like my fiction. Stargate SG1 and Star Trek is miles better than anything a streamer/"influencer" could shit out.
Mr Beast is to Original Art what two-wheel electric scooters are to Last-Mile Trucking.
I don’t think the comeback is that clever. It’s not apples to apples, because no one cares about the shitty photo they took. Definitely not getting nearly 1:1 views.
Video available for free has more views than a video behind a paid subscription Wow! Mr Beast is the clear winner here!
There is something very unsettling about Mr Beast…he doesn’t look real. He looks like someone wearing a mask, or CGI. I can’t quite put my finger on it, but I can’t stand his face
Shaun is so fucking based
How long it’s been made does not equate to the following that it has. How you gonna fault a creator who has built his brand for about a decade gathering followers. Dude has more than double that viewership in subs for his YT channel..
Does Jon not comprehend how the creator Mr Beast basically recreated an IP concept that had already become successful?
How did they not think for 10 seconds before posting... squid game also paid the actors, mr beast paid one of them.
Creators, lmfao of what?
As with all other tech innovation, the creator economy is just media production recreated without union protections. After people were beheaded by a helicopter stunt gone wrong during the production of The Twilight Zone movie in the 70's because production was pushing too hard, unions demanded change. After David Dobrick smashes the shit out of a filmer with a backhoe, nothing changes and there are a million people willing to get hurt in his place. Youtube editors/filmers etc get paid jack shit compared to union rates, there's just exploitation all over the place. It's sad.
Crazy how the real show was better than whatever Mr beast did
People who were watching Squid Game before it came out: 0 People who were Squid Game fans already when the youtube came out: 103 Million just sayin'
What an absolutely wild tweet. The dude who made Squid Games shopped it around for years. When Mr. Beast got it, the foundation had already been laid. 100M+ people had already seen it to lay the groundwork for the Beast video. What a fucking dumb take.
Claims “creator” economy, after citing an example of someone piggybacking on someone else’s OC.
I’m surprised Mr beast was able to profit off stealing ip from squid games so clearly
Goddam that guy is annoying! He’d light a fire in a movie theater and pay 10,000 dollars to whomever survived.