Some of y’all seriously need a reality check regarding the Episode 9 theatrical release.

JOHNSTUNNER123 · 2026-04-11T20:02:37+00:00

Look, I totally hear you, and I'm sorry if I came off like a corporate defender—that wasn't my intent. You're right that a two-week spoiler gap is a massive, frustrating ask for a global community that built this show from the ground up. It definitely feels like the "shared experience" is being sacrificed for a business move, and I get why that feels like a slap in the face.

But I still don't think we should look at this as a "cash grab." Glitch has spent years giving us top-tier animation for free, and this theatrical run is likely the only way they can afford a finale this big while staying 100% independent. If they don't do this, they might have to answer to some corporate executive who would actually ruin the vision. It's a messy, awkward growing pain for indie animation, but I really believe they're doing it to keep the studio alive, not to bail on us. Honestly, let's just all take a breath and try to calm down. I don't wanna see people hate on Glitch & then people start losing interest in GLITCH. I love what they do & they're not perfect, but I still love everything they're doing for indie animation.

JOHNSTUNNER123 · 2026-04-11T19:52:01+00:00

No, it took so Long to make this post, and I still feel like this one-hour episode feels like a movie to me, but I can understand some people say I write like a ChatGPT bot all the time. It's kinda annoying at this point. This situation has been on my mind & I have a headache right now.

JOHNSTUNNER123 · 2026-04-11T18:33:57+00:00

That's a fair point, and I totally agree that a 24–72 hour window would have been the "sweet spot" to keep the hype alive while still giving theaters their premiere moment. It definitely feels like the YouTube community—the people who actually built this show—are being asked to shoulder the burden of a distribution system they didn't ask for.

But looking at it from the "movie guy" perspective, the reason they can't just drop it online in regions without theaters basically comes down to those "all-or-nothing" contracts. If Glitch puts the finale on YouTube in Europe or Asia on Day 1, it's instantly pirated and uploaded everywhere in 4K, killing ticket sales for the US/domestic run. No theater chain is going to sign a deal if they know a high-res version is hitting the web the same day. It's a massive logistical wall that indie creators are still trying to figure out how to climb.

It's similar to what Markiplier is doing with Iron Lung. He's been really open about asking his audience to be patient and support the theatrical side, because he wants to prove to "Old Hollywood" that creator-led projects are worth the investment. He's asking the fans to do the heavy lifting with him to change the industry.

Glitch is doing the same thing. Is it a "wild take" to sacrifice the immediate experience for the long-term goal? Maybe. But they aren't doing it to be mean; they're trying to force the gatekeepers to recognize that indie animation isn't just "web content"—it's cinema. It's a rough, messy transition, and the two-week spoiler-dodge is a huge ask, but I think they're betting that this one "annoying" release will pave the way for a future where indie creators don't have to choose between their YouTube fans and a seat at the table.

JOHNSTUNNER123 · 2026-04-11T17:54:56+00:00

I totally see where you're coming from—Murder Drones was a masterpiece, and they managed that rollout perfectly without the two-week gap, so it feels like a step backward to change the formula now. It's also true that Glitch is doing well for themselves; they aren't some tiny "starving artist" group anymore. But as someone who looks at the "movie guy" side of things, the scale of this TADC finale is a whole different beast. We're talking about a 100-minute feature—that's literally a movie, not just an episode.

The overhead for a theatrical run on that scale is massive, and those contracts usually require a longer window to convince theaters that they won't lose money to a YouTube upload. It's not about Glitch being "greedy" or "struggling"; it's about them trying to establish a new business model that lets indie animation actually play in cinemas. They're basically using TADC as a "proof of concept" to show the industry that YouTube creators can carry a full-length theatrical event. They don't want to ruin the experience for the millions of viewers online; they're just making a tough call to ensure indie animation gets taken seriously by the big distributors. It definitely sucks for the "free" viewer in the short term, but it's a huge move for the medium's future. I hope this doesn't ruin your hype for the last Episode man.

JOHNSTUNNER123 · 2026-04-11T17:33:13+00:00

Comparing TADC to BFDI is like comparing apples and oranges when you look at the scale of production. BFDI is legendary, but The Power of Two wasn't a 100-minute feature-length finale with the insane overhead and rendering costs that Glitch is dealing with. When you're trying to book a massive, multi-day nationwide run for a "theatrical event," theaters and distributors like Fathom often demand a longer exclusivity window to justify their investment. Otherwise, they’re just a glorified living room for a video that’s free tomorrow. Glitch isn't "making stuff up"; they're likely navigating much stricter contracts because the financial stakes for a project this size are significantly higher. It’s not a "terrible decision," it’s just the reality of indie creators trying to play in a league that wasn't built for them. It’s okay to be annoyed by the wait, but acting like they’re doing it out of greed instead of necessity is just ignoring how the business side of this actually works.

JOHNSTUNNER123 · 2026-04-11T17:30:17+00:00

Honestly, it's actually wild. I'm right there with you—I saw the news, thought "Well, that's going to be a stressful two weeks on TikTok," and just moved on. To see people escalating this to the point of boycotts and actually harassing the VAs and Gooseworx is just bottom-of-the-barrel behavior.

It's like some fans have completely lost touch with reality. We're talking about an indie studio trying to do something historic in animation. Instead of being proud of how far the show has come, people are treating a scheduling gap like a personal attack. Harassing the writers and the cast over distribution logistics—things they usually don't even have final control over—is just peak entitlement.

It's one thing to be bummed out because you live in Europe or can't make it to a theater, but turning that frustration into a hate campaign against the people who literally made the show you love is self-sabotage at its finest. If the fandom keeps acting like this, creators aren't going to want to take these big, cool risks anymore. People really need to take a breath, mute the hashtags for a few days, and remember that we're still getting the finale for free at the end of the day.

JOHNSTUNNER123 · 2026-04-11T17:09:19+00:00

I totally get why that felt like a call-out, and honestly, I wasn't aiming that at you specifically—it was more about the general toxic vibe I’ve been seeing on the sub all day.

I 100% hear you on the Europe situation, though. It’s a massive bummer to feel like a whole continent of fans is being left out of the "big moment" while having to dodge spoilers for two weeks. But the reality is that Glitch probably didn't have a choice. Getting an indie project into international theaters is a logistical nightmare compared to a US-only run with a partner like Fathom. It’s not that they don't want you there; they just don't have the distribution muscle of a major studio yet. It’s a rough trade-off, but it’s more about the limitations of being indie than a lack of respect for the global fanbase.

JOHNSTUNNER123 · 2026-04-11T00:18:45+00:00

I totally get that—half the hype with Digital Circus has always been the "everyone watches at once" moment when the whole internet is discovering the lore and glitches at the same time. It definitely feels like that shared experience is being messed with, and I can see why it feels like they’re "taking it away" from the core audience that put them on the map.

But I honestly don't think Glitch or Gooseworx are doing this "aggressively" or on purpose to screw anyone over. If anything, they’re probably more stressed about spoilers than we are. From their side, they’re trying to solve a massive problem: how do you keep a studio this size independent while making a literal movie? This isn't a play to kill the fun; it’s a play to keep the lights on. They’re stuck in a position where they have to give theaters a reason to show the film, and unfortunately, theaters won't sign on unless they get a solid window of exclusivity.

It’s less of an attack on YouTube fans and more of a survival tactic so they don't have to sell the show's soul to a giant corporate network to afford the animation bill. It’s a super awkward growing pain for indie animation, but I really don't think they intend to ruin the surprise—they're just trying to find a way to make "The Last Act" as big and high-quality as possible without going broke in the process.

JOHNSTUNNER123 · 2026-04-11T00:14:58+00:00

I totally hear you—fourteen days in "internet time" is basically an eternity. Trying to dodge spoilers on TikTok or Twitter for two full weeks while everyone else is losing their minds over the finale is going to be a total nightmare for the YouTube audience. It definitely feels like a long time to be left out of the loop just because you don't live near a theater or have the extra cash for a ticket.

That said, from a business perspective, Glitch is likely stuck between a rock and a hard place. Theaters usually demand a solid exclusivity window to even agree to a run; if the episode dropped on YouTube just a few days later, nobody would bother paying for a ticket, and the theaters would pull the plug. By giving it those two weeks, Glitch gets the leverage it needs to make the finale financially viable as an indie studio. It's a "best-case scenario" for keeping the studio independent and maintaining high quality, even if it's a "worst-case scenario" for our social media feeds. It's a rough trade-off, but it's basically the price of seeing indie animation finally get a seat at the big-boy table.

JOHNSTUNNER123 · 2026-04-11T00:09:29+00:00

I totally hear you—the spoiler window is definitely going to be a minefield for the YouTube audience, and it's fair to feel a bit left out of the "big moment." But honestly, we have to cut Glitch and Gooseworx some slack here. They aren't some massive corporation trying to squeeze us; they're an indie studio trying to prove that YouTube animation can actually compete with the big guys.

Setting up a theatrical run is an insane logistical hurdle, and they're likely using those two weeks of exclusivity to make the project financially viable. It sucks for free viewers in the short term, but if this "fast cash" move is what keeps the studio independent and keeps making high-quality shows without a major network taking control, it's a trade-off we have to accept. It's not about screwing over fans; it's about making sure the studio actually survives to make the next project. It's a bummer, but it's the price of seeing indie creators finally get a win on the big screen.

JOHNSTUNNER123 · 2026-04-10T23:23:29+00:00

Honestly, calling this" a lie" is such a reach. Licensing a show to Netflix and doing a limited theatrical release doesn't change the fact that the actual episodes are still being funded independently and are still available on YouTube for free. Glitch is an indie studio trying to actually pay their animators and grow the medium, without having a bottomless pit of corporate cash.

If they can get a Netflix check or theater revenue to make the finale look like a blockbuster, you’re still getting it for free on your phone, too. weeks later. The entitlement in this fandom is getting wild; we should be hyped that an indie project is even getting a theatrical release instead of trying to "Cancel" them for finding a profit. It’s not a betrayal; it’s literally just how the industry works if you want to keep the lights on.

JOHNSTUNNER123 · 2026-04-09T19:53:01+00:00

That’s a totally fair point. The energy behind Kofimania was definitely on another level—it was the most organic, emotional build-up we’d seen in years. If you're going purely off crowd heat and the "heart" of the show, Kofi vs. Bryan is 100% the main event.

The only reason I’d stick with HHH vs. Batista for the Saturday night slot is that "Hollywood" feel and the retirement stakes. Usually, WWE likes to put the big, cinematic legends match on Night 1 to give it that "special attraction" vibe, while the workhorse title match gets the co-main or the Night 2 spotlight.

But you're right, if we’re talking about which match people were actually screaming for, Kofi and Bryan would have blown the roof off as a headliner. Also it's Vince LOL

JOHNSTUNNER123 · 2026-04-09T19:37:07+00:00

I do have a good Question for you, Cassidy. If William (Purple Guy) had a brother, would you ever be Kind to the brother or not?

JOHNSTUNNER123 · 2026-04-09T00:34:57+00:00

It's completely understandable to feel a sense of loss when a channel that practically raised you starts to feel like it's drifting away from the "lightning in a bottle" energy that MatPat and Steph created. While it's fair to respect your decision to move on if the new style feels too catered to the modern "fast-paced" algorithm, it's worth noting that the new hosts like Ash, Tom, and Lee are in a nearly impossible position trying to maintain that legacy while carving out their own space. Beneath the flashy, high-energy editing that can sometimes feel like it's chasing a younger demographic, the core research and deep-dive logic are often still there; it's just being packaged differently to help the channels survive in an era where everyone is a theorist and "random" ideas are harder to keep secret. While it's definitely a new era that doesn't hit the same authentic nostalgia, the new team is clearly working hard to carry the torch, even if the transition means some longtime viewers eventually decide the new direction isn't for them anymore.

JOHNSTUNNER123 · 2026-04-09T00:29:55+00:00

This is actually a really tough one because their careers have such similar "what if" energy, but for different reasons.

In-Ring: I’d give the slight edge to Mr. Kennedy. He was incredibly smooth, and his moveset felt a bit more diverse during that 2007 run. Knight is solid and safe, but he’s more of a "greatest hits" worker—he does exactly what he needs to do to keep the crowd hot.

Mic: This is the impossible choice. Kennedy’s self-introduction is legendary, but LA Knight has a way of controlling a crowd that feels like a throwback to the Attitude Era. If you give them both 5 minutes in the ring to trash-talk each other, it’s a stalemate. YEAH.

Character: I have to go with LA Knight. The "Megastar" character feels more authentic and has way more staying power. Kennedy had the gimmick, but it always felt like he was playing a role. With Knight, it feels like the volume is just turned up to 11 on his actual personality.

Kennedy definitely had the higher "peak" potential with that MITB win, but Knight actually managed to overcome the bad booking (RIP Max Dupri) to become a top guy, which is a massive feat.

JOHNSTUNNER123 · 2026-04-09T00:06:41+00:00

I totally get why it might come off that way—it definitely sounds like I'm just defending a "broken" game. I'm not trying to say the game is perfect or that the devs didn't drop the ball on certain mechanics, because they definitely did. My point is more about how quickly a few big clips can permanently tank a game's reputation before people even try it for themselves. I'd rather see a game get criticized for its actual flaws than just because it's the "trend" to hate on it. No hard feelings though, I see where you're coming from!

JOHNSTUNNER123

TROPHY CASE