Dan & Phil Part 38: Everlasting as the Sun

[rizzo]

but you ain’t getting any praise from me if you do that with the same breath you shit on your active female audience and praise the 3% of dudes that watch your videos as if their criteria for what makes good content is the objective reality and you need to be catering to them to consider what you make good

so, which one is it, is the male view more valuable to you or is gender bullshit? it’s gotta be one or the other mate, you can’t just be down for ending stereotypes when they affect the way you are perceived or just when it comes to aesthetics, women, especially teenage girls, being perceived as less critical, smart or easier to please than dudes is a stereotype, and a really fucking annoying one, i might even argue than it’s the basis of gender inequality

i have faith he's gonna get it, eventually, i just wish he would hurry up a bit

These are such important points to make. It's something that didn't occur to me at all as I was watching yesterday so I'm really glad the point is being made here on the forum because it's worth talking about.

And I do also believe that Dan is someone with the capacity to understand this, but it would take the message coming from someone whose opinion he valued and whose voice didn't get lost in the wave of comments from his audience that don't resonate with him because they're fandom-oriented, and thus the cycle continues.

I made a botched comment about this elsewhere, but yeah, this.

I wonder if his emphasis on straight is because, how do I say this, if a straight guy likes his channel, then he is more likely to appreciate his content and less likely to fawn over his looks or the shipping facet of his internet past. So how does his opinion go on bisexual/pan/gay guys? Does he consider the potential of physical attraction somewhat cheapening the effort he puts into this videos? (I'm just thinking out loud at this point, not really making assumptions)

In another thought process, is he somewhat repulsed by the fact that people consider him attractive because he does not share that opinion (aka he has insecurities and doesn't see what people see in him) or because he wants to be "taken seriously" as a content creator? The teen magazines putting him in features must be embarrassing to him and I won't doubt his Youtube peers mocked him for it behind cameras. I think Dan worries that he's ended up as tween/teen fodder, especially for females. So him mentioning male names in the chat more often and making a point of it, is his way of comforting himself that he is indeed worth something without Phan or "omg so hot dan!!11!"?

It doesn't help that other Youtubers constantly cheapen him by mentioning him in their videos about how hot he is. I'm almost wondering if his insistence on black and "neutral" clothing is his way of greyrocking, where you try and be as "unintenteresting" and blend in as much as possible to attract less attention. He used to wear colourful and bright clothes in the days, and I'll argue that it's also just maturing and changing. But Phil still embraces it and isn't afraid to wear bright, in your face colours, he has almost a comic book vibe. Whereas Dan tries to come off as serious and ~thoughtful~ at almost every attempt, while disguising it with "irony".

I'll also go out on a limb and lowkey assume that other youtubers have mocked the phanbase. Which must be a weird paradox for Dan and Phil: on the one hand they are his bread and butter, they fund them and watch their videos and a lot of us are hilarious and funny and can raise money for charity and others, but there is also a flip side, an annoying side where they spam comments and spam youtubers and harass the internet and act in an "embarrassing way", which makes Dan cringe, and he is the avatar of this fanbase to his peers. It's like when you are the mother to monster children and you know it, but they are also your kids and you have to raise them and defend them.

I wonder if people have commented on Phil's content in that way, as in, it's not "serious". It seems Phil doesn't care though, which is great because he genuinely has fun with it, and that's what matters to him. Other youtubers get caught up in the self-ego stroking about being better, "more serious", "more integrity", like they are trying so hard to prove something, and Dan has fallen victim to that mentality.

sorry for chaos of thoughts

EDIT: An afterhought, I wonder if his mention of "ship him with his friend, cause they think it's kawaii" is a sort of apology to the straight edgy dudes watching the roast video like "yeah I know this happens and it's cringy pls don't think badly of me because it happens so much it's just cause they think it's cute honest it's nothing!"

First off, trashqueen, I love your post and agree so very much. Dan has, on several occasions, verbally come to the defense of "phan-girls", but his actions - or rather his insecurities - speak louder than his words. (As a note, I think this also applies to other areas of his life on a grander scale. See: comments about loving yourself, comments about a perceived 'quality threshold', etc...)

In some ways, I agree with melon lord that his focus on "straight boys" is likely to seek approval from those he believes don't allow physical attraction to over-ride their appreciation of the content. The problem with that being that he completely disregards huge chunks of females in the Phandom, the majority of whom - in my personal opinion - don't want to fuck him. So he can settle down, tbh.

The other party he generally disrespects are the shippers. Both the people that want them to be together and the ones that think they are and look out for it: the loud majority. I think his assumption is that males are less likely to ship and are probably watching him for the content. But if this is the case, it's doubly disappointing? Because at some point, he has to realize that the loving community that wants him and Phil to be together is filled with a lot of people who admire Deppy, who appreciate the boundaries that they're breaking, who want them to break more.... those are the people whose opinions he appears to value less. How disappointing.

It's difficult for me to see a situation where this lesson would hit home with him, because he's literally surrounded by people who make fun of the Phandom. His best friends think RPF is insane. (I mean, in the grand scheme of things, it's hard to blame them.) So, how do you convince someone that a female majority that obsesses over a shared glance can also value content equally or even more so than an "edgy straight male"? More specifically, how do you inform him that that's equally good content and that our enjoyment of it is no less valuable than some dude-bro loving the meme?

Re: the bolded part.... Dan has stated before, in no uncertain terms, that he's well aware people think he's pretty and that sometimes that's difficult because people don't end up appreciating what you have to offer other than that. (Unless I made this up, but I swear it was in an old live show...) I like to convince myself he's grown out of that, but I don't think that's the case.

[papierklemmen]

nice ending to todays dan's tumblr queue

[sentinel]

Could it be that may be, just may be, he is seeking the approval of his peers? His peers are male, 25 and pretentious. He is male, 25, and pretentious (to a degree).

[JustMe]

I too noticed how often Dan adresses "the male viewer", the "token straight guys" or whatever he calls them in his liveshows. While these must make a fraction of his complete audience. In comparison he almost never talks about teenage girls directly.
So even if he mentions the former group in a negative way (like the "edgy straight guys that watch me for the memes") he still gives them more recognition and value than his female/queer audience.

This is exactly what I was asking him during the last liveshow: 'Why do male filmmaker's opinions matter more than ours?' I'm genuinely interested in how he would answer that question and wonder if it would make him realise his ingrained (unconscious?) mysogony.

[gnostic]

[offtopic]So I just showed V-video to my friend (so sue me) and finally, FINALLY someone agrees with me at it looks very obviously scripted. I used to be so conflicted before because literally even the hardcoredest demon antiphannies I know would claim the video is an example of great performance from Phil and go on to dismantle it from there and at least one other person agrees it looks like a very technical acting job

I_am_not_alone_no_more.jpg[/offtopic]

[daichii]

I had been casually enjoying dan and phil content mostly because shows I'm watching came back and I get so much more entertainment from my show!ships than from phan these days but the pastel edits vid was so good and I was even looking forward to dan's liveshow and he just ruined that vid for me. I'm so over him dismissing vids he just made like if you think it's so unworthy of you and your precious male audience why make them in the first place? As silly as it sounds I had to unsubscribe, his liveshows are total downers these days and not what I need.

[SexyTrashCan]

[offtopic]So I just showed V-video to my friend (so sue me) and finally, FINALLY someone agrees with me at it looks very obviously scripted. I used to be so conflicted before because literally even the hardcoredest demon antiphannies I know would claim the video is an example of great performance from Phil and go on to dismantle it from there and at least one other person agrees it looks like a very technical acting job

I_am_not_alone_no_more.jpg[/offtopic]

I just rewatched it. good God I still feel guilty and awful watching or even discussing this. I honestly doubt it, but I can kind of see it like that for example there is a jumpcut and it looks like afterwards Phil had been laughing during it (which could've been nervous giggles or any number of things) but not convinced this was all some grand scheme...

And yeah atdaichii I noticed that and the whole reason I got into watching Deppy in the first place is because the videos made me laugh and be happy but honestly his livestream made me feel so negative and ugh.

[phamnotof]

I too noticed how often Dan adresses "the male viewer", the "token straight guys" or whatever he calls them in his liveshows. While these must make a fraction of his complete audience. In comparison he almost never talks about teenage girls directly.
So even if he mentions the former group in a negative way (like the "edgy straight guys that watch me for the memes") he still gives them more recognition and value than his female/queer audience.

This is exactly what I was asking him during the last liveshow: 'Why do male filmmaker's opinions matter more than ours?' I'm genuinely interested in how he would answer that question and wonder if it would make him realise his ingrained (unconscious?) mysogony.

delurking after a long hibernation, so i apologize for just jumping in:

i've only seen about half the liveshows lately, and the "straigh guy viewers" comments didn't jump out at me until last night, so i'm sorry if i'm missing a key elemment, however:

last night, it felt present for a reason. not sure it's a good one, but i can definitely understand. i think that dan just - really, really wants to talk about this stuff. gender stuff, specificaly, in his learning-to-walk-SJW-baby way, femininity and gender and what society ties to it. i feel like he's been getting really into it as a topic in itself and not just something that relates to him as a not too stereotypical queer bro

the issue, i think, is struggling to approach it as a topic on his own, as if his interest and caring about it aren't enough, like he requires prompting to say what he was gonna say regardless of the questions

and surely, he expected gender stuff to come up, so his head must have been overflowing with it, with pretentious thoughts about thoughs and also just really lovely, valuable stuff that needs talking about

but his perspective's weird, right? he's not yet fully in a place where he can say "as a not-straight man", where gender expression is a huge topic, he doesn't want to lie and talk about it "as a not entirely-traditional straight dude"

and talking about something just cause he wants to, as dan howell, seems an issue for him.

so oposition is what he's got left, cause who'd ask "hey dan what do you think about gender roles and how they intersect with how society views individual expressions of gender identity" in a liveshow? it just fails to work with the format. opossition is easy though.

what's even easier? the easiest enemy. the dudebro. the "here for the memes" crowd, which he might be partly inventing, but let's also remember that liveshows are not as exclusive of a party as they once were, and i'm sure it feels weird to bring that once sort of a beautiful community secret onto a side channel of potential millions viewers, where there is a lot more voices, and boy if the boi doesn't crave universal approval. so i think he brought them up repeatedly both to create the oposition he needed as a way into the topic and to appease some of his general audience.

not to mention that choosing to go off at a female commenter would bring bagage, too, as men telling women off for internalized misogyny is always a bit unfortunate and a symptom of privilege, right as they might be

it wasn't a perfect way in, as this really cool discussion has illustrated. but i also feel for him in this regard, of grabbing onto easy ways into complicated topics, of struggling to find a place in a huge ongoing conversation.

(i'm less happy about still getting the basics wrong-ish, like damn, 'heteronormativism', really? but learning. and hopefully he does keep doing that.)

and i do wonder, also, if getting this platform of 'hey there's assholes in need of a talking to out there, still' ready is a backdoor into bringing this stuff onto his main channel in some form.

[mez29]

discussion has moved on blah blah but I just caught up on Dan's liveshow and I am certain he said "Aaron" not "Erin". Someone with a mostly standard British accent would not pronounce the vowel in the second syllable of "Erin" in that way (whereas most Americans would, I guess).

Also, great to see various people here for the first time in a while!

[lishachi]

been lurking for the past few days because i've been busy with uni and stuff, i liked the sims video, was very chill and just nice to watch, that freeze ray is awesome!

the pastel edits video was a nice experience for me. however, as a few people have stated, this was basically shat on by dan in his liveshow. i was doing some watercolour painting, put him on to chill and relax and it was just so negative. i felt a bit shit afterwards if i'm honest. i want to rewatch it and point out exactly what it was, but i also don't cus i don't want to be in a down mood.

I had been casually enjoying dan and phil content mostly because shows I'm watching came back and I get so much more entertainment from my show!ships than from phan these days but the pastel edits vid was so good and I was even looking forward to dan's liveshow and he just ruined that vid for me. I'm so over him dismissing vids he just made like if you think it's so unworthy of you and your precious male audience why make them in the first place? As silly as it sounds I had to unsubscribe, his liveshows are total downers these days and not what I need.

this. he does seem to dismiss videos quite often doesn't he? as if they aren't quite up to scratch somehow? this was phils video, and i don't know how phil thinks nor do i claim to but he puts content out. done. (with some merch promo sometimes but hey ) i don't quite understand dan sometimes, is it overthinking? is it his audience? has his recent pass of 6 million attracted more males? i won't go into gender/sexuality etc because you guys did a good job of talking about that around the pastel edits (which i found v interesting btw)

just...kinda...don't wanna be down, y'know? i won't speak for everyone on here, i personally feel that i watch deppy for the entertainment, the happiness, the bantz etc. i know the liveshows aren't on main channels or obligatory to watch, just sucks when you do watch them and it's kind of meh. this is kind of why i enjoy phil more recently, i look at him more and more in gaming videos (it used to be the other way around) because he shares a positive outlook and is extremely funny. don't get me wrong i love dan.

tldr: kinda shitting on content is a bummer.

thanks for educating me guys, please share more insights it's fascinating to read. hope you're all having a good day.

[SquishPhan]

[Raspberrypi]

I think he meant a belated valentines meal

Is it normal to have this many celebrations for a birthday? I get it's one of the milestones, but jeez that's dragging it out a bit

[blackdenim]

I think he meant a belated valentines meal

Is it normal to have this many celebrations for a birthday? I get it's one of the milestones, but jeez that's dragging it out a bit

Didn't he (or Dan?) say in last week's LS they were going to go for a third birthday meal with friends this week, who'd cancelled on them before his birthday because they were ill?

Sounds like they were setting up an elaborate excuse for this post-Valentines Day date to me

PS I am turning 30 next year and you'd better believe I'll be celebrating for the whole month of July so you do you, Phil.

[fancy_nancy]

Could it be that may be, just may be, he is seeking the approval of his peers? His peers are male, 25 and pretentious. He is male, 25, and pretentious (to a degree).

To a degree? More like to the max hahaha, no but I think I really get what you mean, he often looks down upon "gleam team" type of content so when he makes/participates in a video that could have easily been made by someone like that, even if it's really entertaining and not supposed to be serious, he gets kind of embarassed and then tries to justify it. And i've said this before and I still believe it: if Dan could really really get rid of his danisnotonfire brand, I can see him making really pretencious "i'm oh so deep, almost Will Darbyshire like pretentiousness level videos" and i'm such trash i'd probably still watch him hahaha

[gnostic]

[offtopic]So I just showed V-video to my friend (so sue me) and finally, FINALLY someone agrees with me at it looks very obviously scripted. I used to be so conflicted before because literally even the hardcoredest demon antiphannies I know would claim the video is an example of great performance from Phil and go on to dismantle it from there and at least one other person agrees it looks like a very technical acting job

I_am_not_alone_no_more.jpg[/offtopic]

I just rewatched it. good God I still feel guilty and awful watching or even discussing this. I honestly doubt it, but I can kind of see it like that for example there is a jumpcut and it looks like afterwards Phil had been laughing during it (which could've been nervous giggles or any number of things) but not convinced this was all some grand scheme...

And yeah atdaichii I noticed that and the whole reason I got into watching Deppy in the first place is because the videos made me laugh and be happy but honestly his livestream made me feel so negative and ugh.

I was more talking about how he looks and sounds like a person reciting a well rehearsed script

Are we even allowed go disuss that video on this forum? Is it looked down upon in polite society?

[captainspacecoat]

Wow this is such an interesting discussion, why must I be Australian and sleep through the whole thing god damn it.

I agree with those who've said pastel can't constitute a subculture, or at the very least if it is a subculture I was unaware of it and I don't blame Dan for also being unaware. In my opinion, it's not comparable to punk as that was a political movement and I'm sorry but I fail to see the politics of pastel beyond mayyyyybe an interaction with gender norms (resisting masculinity I guess).

However I do think there have been some really interesting points made about the way Dan interacts with his male audience versus his female audience that shouldn't be dismissed. I think pilotlight's post was super informative and makes a lot of sense. It's something that, as a cis woman I don't feel I have a lot of authority to post about but I can definitely see how Dan would be seeking approval from other men. I see a lot of Dan's behaviour in live shows as coming from a place of insecurity and defensiveness, almost like he wants to address possible criticisms before they're even brought up by his audience. Gender and sexuality are very sensitive topics that can take a lot to grapple with, and I imagine it would be very uncomfortable to deal with/come to terms with them in front of such a large and scrutinising audience. Also really enjoyed phamnotof and melonlord's posts, I think they both articulated some of my thoughts really well and much better than I could tbh.

It's tricky, because I do think he's coming at this gender/sexuality discussion from a place of real interest, and also not a lot of knowledge. I'm a third year gender studies student and I've learned so much during my degree, a lot of which would have been difficult to self-educate myself on. My own opinions have grown and developed so much over the years, Dan's learning and stumbling and trying his best. However, like others I do find myself kind of frustrated at the disparity between his interactions with male viewers and female/non-male viewers. On the one hand, he seems to be kind of disparaging toward the males ("edgy straight guys just here for the memes") but then he also seems to put the most weight behind their (perceived) opinions.

I had been casually enjoying dan and phil content mostly because shows I'm watching came back and I get so much more entertainment from my show!ships than from phan these days but the pastel edits vid was so good and I was even looking forward to dan's liveshow and he just ruined that vid for me. I'm so over him dismissing vids he just made like if you think it's so unworthy of you and your precious male audience why make them in the first place? As silly as it sounds I had to unsubscribe, his liveshows are total downers these days and not what I need.

I get what you mean, I kind of felt that way too. However, I wouldn't say he totally dismissed it. He's promoted it quite a lot on his Facebook page in a way that I don't think was dismissive, and he posted that photo of him last night which didn't come across to me as uncomfortable or regretful. I think the liveshow was an interesting example but a lot of it to me came across as self-consciousness and the result of a heightened awareness of a possible straight male audience.

I think we have to remember that it's easier said than done to just shake off homophobia/emasculation. As much as he seemed to take those comments a lot more lightly than he once would have, I'm sure there was a part of him that felt very uncomfortable and that comes from a lifetime of being told that masculinity = x and to be a man you must look a certain way, and if you fail to do so this means some sort of inadequacy. Like others, I wish he would take his non-straight male audience as seriously as his straight male audience and recognise the diversity of opinions among the former group but I also understand why this isn't necessarily the case and I don't think his being a bit dismissive of the video in his liveshow necessarily indicates that he didn't enjoy the video or isn't proud of it, especially when considering the way he has promoted it outside of the liveshow.

[jesp]

Are we even allowed go disuss that video on this forum? Is it looked down upon in polite society?

Sure, just don't link it.

[000dia000]

I'm so happy that the whole audience issue is being spoken about now? It's literally one of my biggest pet-peeves ever, when anything that has a strong female interest is put down or undermined, particularly anything with teenage girls. This was the same story for that Sunday Times Article and pretty much any condescending "film maker" on YouTube or ex-YouTubers on the very high-brow We The Unicorns. I have nothing to add to the conversation that hasn't been said already, but I do hope that Dan comes to realize to VALUE his audience, while some are loud and attracted to the shipping I culture, they are essentially the ones paying his future mortgage. I feel that wishing Dan to know this is just screaming into the void, because I don't think most of Tumblr would have the incentive to feel off-put by the obvious kind of recognition Dan craves from the straight-white male. I mean, I understand Dan's desire to want to be appreciated for things other than his looks ( and may be why he "hides" himself and is self-depreciating, as others pointed out). But then, in the next opportunity shuts down the "gay" comments and feels disgusted by them. Dan is ranting and pointing a finger at everybody and everything but doesn't realize he himself is his own worst enemy, and he needs to change his opinion about himself, not change his audience.

[000dia000]

[offtopic]So I just showed V-video to my friend (so sue me) and finally, FINALLY someone agrees with me at it looks very obviously scripted. I used to be so conflicted before because literally even the hardcoredest demon antiphannies I know would claim the video is an example of great performance from Phil and go on to dismantle it from there and at least one other person agrees it looks like a very technical acting job

I_am_not_alone_no_more.jpg[/offtopic]

Not to completely dismiss this, because I can totally see why you'd think this and sometimes I think about the "scripted" thing too. But one thing that recently kind of changed my perception on it was when people found proof of people commenting on other "leaked" videos on Phil's channel or a similar sort of content. While no other proof of them exist other than the tweets, this kind of changed my mind about what I originally felt sceptic about "the holes" in the possibility of it being real. Then again, then videos could have been "embellishment" or others may completely dismiss it. But I find it a neat thing to sort of think about, to expand what we already know about voldy into a possible broader connection of videos-whether real or fake, based upon interpretation. While it's good to get a reaction to the video outside of the phandom-bias, context is important. Nevertheless, talking about voldy is like beating a dead horse so I'll stop.

[malday]

[offtopic]So I just showed V-video to my friend (so sue me) and finally, FINALLY someone agrees with me at it looks very obviously scripted. I used to be so conflicted before because literally even the hardcoredest demon antiphannies I know would claim the video is an example of great performance from Phil and go on to dismantle it from there and at least one other person agrees it looks like a very technical acting job

I_am_not_alone_no_more.jpg[/offtopic]

When i first saw it i thought it was scripted, and cringy and childish and couldn't believe people were taking it seriously.
But it fits with Phil's shitty(i mean that in an endearing way) editing and unemotional way of talking into the camera seen all throughout his old videos.

I think it's a mixture of reciting parts that he wrote down and ad-lib then editing it down.

p.s. in case you were wondering i think the emotions and events described are real even if the delivery is partly scripted

[anathema]

[offtopic]So I just showed V-video to my friend (so sue me) and finally, FINALLY someone agrees with me at it looks very obviously scripted. I used to be so conflicted before because literally even the hardcoredest demon antiphannies I know would claim the video is an example of great performance from Phil and go on to dismantle it from there and at least one other person agrees it looks like a very technical acting job

I_am_not_alone_no_more.jpg[/offtopic]

Not to completely dismiss this, because I can totally see why you'd think this and sometimes I think about the "scripted" thing too. But one thing that recently kind of changed my perception on it was when people found proof of people commenting on other "leaked" videos on Phil's channel or a similar sort of content. While no other proof of them exist other than the tweets, this kind of changed my mind about what I originally felt sceptic about "the holes" in the possibility of it being real. Then again, then videos could have been "embellishment" or others may completely dismiss it. But I find it a neat thing to sort of think about, to expand what we already know about voldy into a possible broader connection of videos-whether real or fake, based upon interpretation. While it's good to get a reaction to the video outside of the phandom-bias, context is important. Nevertheless, talking about voldy is like beating a dead horse so I'll stop.

Can you please explain what you mean by this? I'm not exactly sure what you're referencing here :wtf:

[oqua]

Random:

My favorite random Deppy outing that just happened to be close to Valentine's Day was when they went to Cirque du Soleil together in 2014 on February 15th:

And then in his next liveshow, Dan gets flustered when saying who got the tickets.


18 February 2014 Liveshow, at 23:47

“Oh, I went to see— oh that’s what I did at the weekend — I went to see Cirque du Soleil. ‘Cause, uhhh, a bunch— Who…who got the tickets? I dunno. But we went to Cirque du Soleil. And it was good.”

And let's not forget how romantic Dan later says circuses are:

[000dia000]

[TW=][/TW]

[offtopic]So I just showed V-video to my friend (so sue me) and finally, FINALLY someone agrees with me at it looks very obviously scripted. I used to be so conflicted before because literally even the hardcoredest demon antiphannies I know would claim the video is an example of great performance from Phil and go on to dismantle it from there and at least one other person agrees it looks like a very technical acting job

I_am_not_alone_no_more.jpg[/offtopic]

Not to completely dismiss this, because I can totally see why you'd think this and sometimes I think about the "scripted" thing too. But one thing that recently kind of changed my perception on it was when people found proof of people commenting on other "leaked" videos on Phil's channel or a similar sort of content. While no other proof of them exist other than the tweets, this kind of changed my mind about what I originally felt sceptic about "the holes" in the possibility of it being real. Then again, then videos could have been "embellishment" or others may completely dismiss it. But I find it a neat thing to sort of think about, to expand what we already know about voldy into a possible broader connection of videos-whether real or fake, based upon interpretation. While it's good to get a reaction to the video outside of the phandom-bias, context is important. Nevertheless, talking about voldy is like beating a dead horse so I'll stop.

Can you please explain what you mean by this? I'm not exactly sure what you're referencing here :wtf:

http://indepthbants.com/topic575.html
It's here on IDB, if you go down to the question on a "second v-day video"

[anathema]

[TW=][/TW]

[offtopic]So I just showed V-video to my friend (so sue me) and finally, FINALLY someone agrees with me at it looks very obviously scripted. I used to be so conflicted before because literally even the hardcoredest demon antiphannies I know would claim the video is an example of great performance from Phil and go on to dismantle it from there and at least one other person agrees it looks like a very technical acting job

I_am_not_alone_no_more.jpg[/offtopic]

Not to completely dismiss this, because I can totally see why you'd think this and sometimes I think about the "scripted" thing too. But one thing that recently kind of changed my perception on it was when people found proof of people commenting on other "leaked" videos on Phil's channel or a similar sort of content. While no other proof of them exist other than the tweets, this kind of changed my mind about what I originally felt sceptic about "the holes" in the possibility of it being real. Then again, then videos could have been "embellishment" or others may completely dismiss it. But I find it a neat thing to sort of think about, to expand what we already know about voldy into a possible broader connection of videos-whether real or fake, based upon interpretation. While it's good to get a reaction to the video outside of the phandom-bias, context is important. Nevertheless, talking about voldy is like beating a dead horse so I'll stop.

Can you please explain what you mean by this? I'm not exactly sure what you're referencing here :wtf:

http://indepthbants.com/topic575.html
It's here on IDB, if you go down to the question on a "second v-day video"

I thought the "second vday vid" has been proven not real? At least the sign video. There's basically no proof of it, and those tweets could be talking about any video that was unprivated. There was more than one of Phil's videos unprivated that day, but nothing points to a video besides the vday vid being romantic or even for Dan in general.
(Also question: were those screenshots of the tweets taken by someone here or just found on the internet?)

[oqua]

[TW=][/TW]

[offtopic]So I just showed V-video to my friend (so sue me) and finally, FINALLY someone agrees with me at it looks very obviously scripted. I used to be so conflicted before because literally even the hardcoredest demon antiphannies I know would claim the video is an example of great performance from Phil and go on to dismantle it from there and at least one other person agrees it looks like a very technical acting job

I_am_not_alone_no_more.jpg[/offtopic]

Not to completely dismiss this, because I can totally see why you'd think this and sometimes I think about the "scripted" thing too. But one thing that recently kind of changed my perception on it was when people found proof of people commenting on other "leaked" videos on Phil's channel or a similar sort of content. While no other proof of them exist other than the tweets, this kind of changed my mind about what I originally felt sceptic about "the holes" in the possibility of it being real. Then again, then videos could have been "embellishment" or others may completely dismiss it. But I find it a neat thing to sort of think about, to expand what we already know about voldy into a possible broader connection of videos-whether real or fake, based upon interpretation. While it's good to get a reaction to the video outside of the phandom-bias, context is important. Nevertheless, talking about voldy is like beating a dead horse so I'll stop.

Can you please explain what you mean by this? I'm not exactly sure what you're referencing here :wtf:

http://indepthbants.com/topic575.html
It's here on IDB, if you go down to the question on a "second v-day video"

I thought the "second vday vid" has been proven not real? At least the sign video. There's basically no proof of it, and those tweets could be talking about any video that was unprivated. There was more than one of Phil's videos unprivated that day, but nothing points to a video besides the vday vid being romantic or even for Dan in general.
(Also question: were those screenshots of the tweets taken by someone here or just found on the internet?)

I took the screenshots.
And yeah, there is no proof that there was another romantic video, necessarily.