Waste of time

Tied for the best movie I have ever seen

Purely Joyful Movie!

One of my all time favorites.

Arrogant. Presenting eternally debated issues as objectively simple and one sided, and if you land on any other perspective than his, you're a bad person. This is propaganda for hipsters. This is the new way agendas are presented, thru comedy, where our guard is down the most. As an investigative journalist myself I care only about objectivity, I have no political leaning when I write and research and do my best to avoid the bias of human nature, and this show is shameful in that context. I also pride myself on responding to critique with an open mind and not attaching personal feelings when I'm called out and lashing out at people who stand in the way of what i want to be true with ruminations concerning what actually is true objectively(this will make sense in a moment). The amount of things Adam skips over, presents out of context, or just straight up doesn't address to get his point across is nothing short of disgraceful. Why?!?! What could the purpose of this show possibly be beyond attempting to reshape issues current or otherwise, for a generation of people who have never really lived without a screen to dive into and use to construct a reality that is better than actual reality any time a hint of discomfort pops up. This is terrifying. There is literally no reason for a show like this to exist beyond arrogantly stating things his Freemason, or whoever really runs things, overlords tell him. Go ahead and give me a "not helpful" Bc I made people face the fact that we've collectively lost the ability to critically think and need a nasally voiced, annoying, intentionally sexually ambiguous, and unintimdating puppet to shape your world view. I could show u pages upon pages of research by really rich people all the way back to the 40s and 50s; that's gone into what personality is best to present information like this, hence allowing it to sink in most efficiently. I would have no problem if he didn't act like he solved the worlds greatest problems in 21 mins every week. We're all entitled to our opinion, for sure, but when it's presented as fact and any other perspective is condescended to the whole time. That's not an opinion, that's Pure wrong. I don't care about the disclaimer at the beginning, and neither does our human natured collective subconscious. I don't care which way a show like this leans socially or politically, i care that it leans at all. Please don't get that twisted. It's the leaning itself like he on that purple drank that bothers me. It's disingenuous and it's far deeper than some guy spewing nonsense. It's a weapon. Not quite the same but kinda similar, check out Nathan For You. Much much better docudramedy, not even close.

OH ADAM RUINS EVERYTHING ALL RIGHT, Adam ruins everything, including the shows he stars in and narrates. This is the most annoying dude hosting a pointless unfunny show. I can't understate how annoying and pretentious the main dude comes off i wish he would shut up and stop ruining television for everyone in the audience

If you know exactly what a supposedly educational show is going to say before the first word is uttered, something is very wrong. In the case of Adam Ruins everything, if the topic can, in any way, be colored by one's political leanings, his is painted USSR Red. It's a shame, because it doesn't have to be this way, alas the soy is very very thick and the intellect is very very thin when Adam is around.

Education and humor is a good mix and that's what this TV show offers. It's good for all ages. I appreciate the delivery but my issue is the host is a little to confident in his research and so called facts. I can't help but question his interpretation, although he claims to have solid supporting evidence. For instance, he did a segment in which he provides information about the birth of America and Christopher Columbus that goes against what many were taught to believe. That's fine and dandy, however he delivers the message as if he was alive and witnessed the events himself which is obviously untrue. So why should I take his word for it over say a textbook. He speaks of facts but really we just have his own interpretation of these events. Why should I just take his word for it