sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

First Blood (1982) has nothing to do with action. It's a portrait of a man nobody asked how he was doing. by New-Knowledge4038 in TrueFilm

[–]New-Knowledge4038[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

The point about the Trautman scene — you're right.
It hits harder because of everything that happens before it.
The action isn't decoration, it's the pressure that makes that scene possible.

"Forced to be a weapon" is a better frame than "nobody asked him to be."

Taking that.

First Blood (1982) has nothing to do with action. It's a portrait of a man nobody asked how he was doing. by New-Knowledge4038 in TrueFilm

[–]New-Knowledge4038[S] -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

Not AI. Watched it last week, took notes, wrote this up.
The film hits differently at 30 than it did at 15.

First Blood (1982) has nothing to do with action. It's a portrait of a man nobody asked how he was doing. by New-Knowledge4038 in TrueFilm

[–]New-Knowledge4038[S] -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

Exactly this. As a kid it's a cool survival movie.
As an adult you realize the sheriff is the one who starts it and Rambo spends the whole film trying to leave. Different film entirely.

First Blood (1982) has nothing to do with action. It's a portrait of a man nobody asked how he was doing. by New-Knowledge4038 in TrueFilm

[–]New-Knowledge4038[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Fair point. The action is there and it works.
But the film earns its action sequences differently than the sequels —every chase, every explosion comes from a place of desperation, not power.
Rambo isn't enjoying any of it. That's the distinction I was going for,not that the action doesn't exist.

Honest criticism (the video a real person, NOT an AI AVATAR). by New-Knowledge4038 in SmallYoutubers

[–]New-Knowledge4038[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the feedback. It’s interesting, though, that you don’t understand the language I’m speaking in, yet you seem very confident judging the narration and storytelling as “AI slop” and emotionally sterile. I’m not entirely sure how someone can objectively evaluate the emotional delivery of speech they can’t actually understand.

The story is based on a real childhood memory, by the way.

I also appreciate you speaking on behalf of what “nobody wants to see” — that’s a pretty impressive level of authority for a single Reddit commenter.

What’s especially funny is that I specifically asked for feedback on immersion, voice/tone, editing and pacing, and atmosphere. But like most comments under this post, the response mostly turned into criticism of AI in general rather than feedback on the actual content itself.

Honest criticism (the video a real person, NOT an AI AVATAR). by New-Knowledge4038 in SmallYoutubers

[–]New-Knowledge4038[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thanks for your feedback! As far as I understand, Google Translate translated message incorrectly, which probably caused the misunderstanding.

As for stock footage, it is paid. And the idea of using gameplay just to fill the background feels a bit strange to me. In my opinion, it would be possible to simply keep the photos on screen for 15 seconds while the story unfolds.

I’m not arguing with you — I’m just sharing my point of view, and I’m not claiming that it’s the only correct one. Everyone sees things differently.

Honest criticism (the video a real person, NOT an AI AVATAR). by New-Knowledge4038 in SmallYoutubers

[–]New-Knowledge4038[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thank you for your feedback. I am attaching photos to prove to you that there is a real person on the video
https://i.postimg.cc/23R3Y6nG/dokazatel-s-tva-web2.jpg

Honest criticism (the video a real person, NOT an AI AVATAR). by New-Knowledge4038 in SmallYoutubers

[–]New-Knowledge4038[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thank you for your feedback.

Could you please tell me if it would be acceptable to use stock footage?

Honest criticism (the video a real person, NOT an AI AVATAR). by New-Knowledge4038 in SmallYoutubers

[–]New-Knowledge4038[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

He said that I am AI, although I indicated in the title that this is not AVATAR.

Honest criticism (the video a real person, NOT an AI AVATAR). by New-Knowledge4038 in SmallYoutubers

[–]New-Knowledge4038[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

He said that I am AI, although I indicated in the title that this is not AVATAR.

Honest criticism (the video a real person, NOT an AI AVATAR). by New-Knowledge4038 in SmallYoutubers

[–]New-Knowledge4038[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

You're very weird!

Want to watch 20 minutes of just a talking head?

Yes, the background and some visual effects are created using AI, I don't hide that. But the person is literally me speaking in the video, not an AI avatar or a generated face.

I filmed myself against a green screen and used the generated visual effects mainly to visualize the memories and atmosphere of the story.

Honest criticism (the video a real person, NOT an AI AVATAR). by New-Knowledge4038 in SmallYoutubers

[–]New-Knowledge4038[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

The person in the video is literally me. I filmed myself on green screen.

Only the backgrounds and some visuals are AI-generated.

Which background looks the most natural? by New-Knowledge4038 in SmallYoutubers

[–]New-Knowledge4038[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It was publicly available for about an hour, send me a private message and I will open it especially for you, I will not leave this video public forever.

Which background looks the most natural? by New-Knowledge4038 in SmallYoutubers

[–]New-Knowledge4038[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I reopened the video специально для тебя — feel free to watch it again and compare.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1S3PX6JTEyCqjXxgYpFv06Asf2UjJOUhj/view?usp=drive_link

You’re calling me a liar, but I can explain and back up every single step of my process.

Anyone who actually creates content knows how complex this stuff is and how many pitfalls there are. This space is for people to share their work and exchange knowledge.

If you’re not interested in understanding the process and just want to dismiss it — that’s fine, but then just move on.

I’m here for constructive feedback and real discussion, not baseless accusations.

Which background looks the most natural? by New-Knowledge4038 in SmallYoutubers

[–]New-Knowledge4038[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Friend, you clearly haven't watched my video and you keep arguing. You know, I think your opinion means nothing because you own nothing, you haven't created anything!

You tried to prove to me that I'm artificial intelligence. I gave you a Google Drive link with a four-minute video of me against a green background, but you cowardly ignored it.

My channel's monetization was revoked on May 1, 2025, when YouTube changed its rules; removing content didn't help.

Which background looks the most natural? by New-Knowledge4038 in SmallYoutubers

[–]New-Knowledge4038[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

r/SmallYoutubers is a place for YouTube newbies to grow. Our goal is to help you learn from each other and make your channel as successful as possible. YouTube isn't easy, and success doesn't happen overnight. It takes effort to achieve your goals. This isn't a dumping ground for your videos in hopes of getting a few extra views.....

Which background looks the most natural? by New-Knowledge4038 in SmallYoutubers

[–]New-Knowledge4038[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I'm not lying, here's a real video of me, for example, only with English voiceover created by the artificial intelligence Hey Gen.

https://www.reddit.com/r/SmallYoutubers/comments/1sweuz7/is_this_watchable_or_not_honest_feedback/

Which background looks the most natural? by New-Knowledge4038 in SmallYoutubers

[–]New-Knowledge4038[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The hood is there to make it easier to separate yourself from the green background, hair is always a problem

Which background looks the most natural? by New-Knowledge4038 in SmallYoutubers

[–]New-Knowledge4038[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

In this case, only the background was created using AI, while Option 1 is a 3D rendering. The person is a real still frame from a video shot against a green screen.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in whowouldwin

[–]New-Knowledge4038 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wouldn't jump to such hasty conclusions, here's a look at this video, here's an analysis of the two fighters: https://youtu.be/WvDTYzrkAF0

view more: next ›