CinemaSins, YourMovieSucks, and similar comedy-driven critiques of blockbuster movies had their cynical style of humor unintentionally influence their audience's willingness to have a good-faith attempt at a film. It can be funny and I'm not saying they can't make comedy criticisms of "bad" movies but unless you have already enjoyed the piece on your own beforehand, it's a slippery slope to biasing you into this mindset to look for flaws more. Negativity has permeated the internet so strongly over the years (Youtube and the Commentary Channel genre has caused a lot of damage in how it shaped the content on the site over the 2010s) that it's just par for the course to see cinema channels post a vid on a new movie with a title suggesting that they will tear it to shreds. People LOVE to watch things get torn apart, I am extremely guilty of this (I just have transitioned to watching these types of movies after I've been able to look at it from an unbiased viewpoint. I prefer to be completely blind when I view movies so I don't even watch trailers if possible)
And oftentimes, you will see these channels take the most poor-faith interpretation you can make just because they could, to highlight their perceived absurdity of a scenario. It's one thing to articulate a charitably put-together critique of a movie but these types of channels will not critique the flaws in films they like with anywhere near the amount of harshness and nitpicking. I guess it would hurt their brand of being the cynical movie guy-- so much so that a stranger created CinemaWins because the inconsistent sinning system got old after a few years. These roasting-movies-channels get big and implicitly develop a sense of authority thanks to parasocial relationships with their audience as that is the nature of social media-- people won't give two shits what a critic on RottenTomatoes has to say or someone that writes film criticisms for New York Times about the quality of the movie, they do want to know what their favorite youtuber's opinion is in hopes it will make for a funny cynical review or agree with them.
At least the critics that write a well-thought out analysis in their articles are regarded positively like film analysis channels who seem to actually enjoy movies enough to talk about the cool stuff in the things they watch. You can just kinda tell who loves to watch movies and analyse them vs someone that just likes to brand things as "this sucks and you should think it sucks too"
And oftentimes, you will see these channels take the most poor-faith interpretation you can make just because they could, to highlight their perceived absurdity of a scenario. It's one thing to articulate a charitably put-together critique of a movie but these types of channels will not critique the flaws in films they like with anywhere near the amount of harshness and nitpicking. I guess it would hurt their brand of being the cynical movie guy-- so much so that a stranger created CinemaWins because the inconsistent sinning system got old after a few years. These roasting-movies-channels get big and implicitly develop a sense of authority thanks to parasocial relationships with their audience as that is the nature of social media-- people won't give two shits what a critic on RottenTomatoes has to say or someone that writes film criticisms for New York Times about the quality of the movie, they do want to know what their favorite youtuber's opinion is in hopes it will make for a funny cynical review or agree with them.
At least the critics that write a well-thought out analysis in their articles are regarded positively like film analysis channels who seem to actually enjoy movies enough to talk about the cool stuff in the things they watch. You can just kinda tell who loves to watch movies and analyse them vs someone that just likes to brand things as "this sucks and you should think it sucks too"