evan1975 said:
twooffour said:
Because seriously... Confused Matthew's reviews, while fun, kinda do suck...
Interesting you mention that because I finally checked his site out yesterday after hearing so much about it. I tried watching his 2001 video, but the first two parts I viewed was basically him just shouting "This is boring!" over and over and muted video footage. I admit I didn't finish it, but from what I saw, he seemed unable to examine the movie in a historical context.
Yea, he said in the review he was going to purposefully neglect the, uh, "historical context" and the whole interpretations thing, and just review it as a film.
Why not. I mean, I admit I haven't seen 2001 entirely so I kinda don't wanna talk about it deeply, but the approach is both interesting and refreshing, and kinda necessary in the sea of profound interpretations.
He also kinda had only positive things to say for the direction and production of the movie...
The problem I have with his Matrix reviews, is that he mostly just doesn't think things through. It's interesting to follow his though process as being that of your average critical viewer who has second thoughts about what he's seeing and starts ranting at the screen with something that makes sense to him at the moment... but then you're quickly past that, the point's fallacies become apparent, and the whole things just gets stupid.
But his points are pretty hit-and-miss, so often, he'll manage to correctly point out a real turd and tear it down by every trick in the book.
He made a giant sloppy mistake in his Revolutions review, where, after mentioning something in relation to Bane committing the EMP sabotage, he then keeps wondering several times "where all the ships are". Ummm.... guess he just edited those parts together and didn't really check?
One example would be how he takes on an in-movie discussion about control, and how the industrial Machines in Zion indirectly control the humans by providing for their needs... then he proceeds to explain how that's not really "control", but rather dependence on one's needs that are dependent on the robots... um yea Matthew, that's kinda the whole point, you have "control" over someone by controlling their needs. At least, that's one of the meanings of "control", the other being "controlling where your car drives".
But on the other hand, he always aims at the right direction because, at the end of the day, all of that stuff is just pretentious babble thrown at the script, and the plot is a disjointed mess, so thinking that discussion about control to the end almost seems unnecessary in order to tear down that scene - in that sense, watching his reviews still provides one with the pleasure of being pointed out some major turds in the film, even if the actual commentary on them isn't always pure brilliance. If you take it with a grain of salt, in the sense of "ah whatever, this hairsplitting ain't gonna save the damn movie", it kinda works :)
PS: Sorry for my chaotic writing style right now, I kinda need to get to sleep badly...