The cam has been out for over half a year, any review won't make much difference now 'cause we got enough K-r users to share their actual feelings and experiences, and personally I feel these are more useful than a review by now
What I saw was 10% review, 20% random commentaries, 70% walking around. He seems to come into reviewing with the mindset of it not being CaNikon, and the bias shows. He did reveal some genuine issues (e.g. noisy AF, AF/MF switch getting stuck, which I won't comment because I don't know how AF compares with other cams) but most of his negative comments stem from "that's not how CaNikon does it!" which is a terrible way of reviewing anything. If you feel x does something better than y you explain what x does and why it's better than y's method.
I have not watched it and I will eventually but I don't think it will affect anything I feel about the K-r.
Is it perfect? No. It certainly could be better. Same for the K-5.
Is it bad? No. It's definitely a lot superior in many ways compared to the competition.
Is it something I will use for at least the next few months (either that or the K-5)? For sure, couldn't think of any other option. So what would I feel about the video? We're all used to it by now, seeing people pass silly comments such as "you can't go wrong with Canikon" here in CS.