Another element to the idea of film criticism is that it's not really there to serve the storyteller, to tell him or her how they messed up or how they got it right, it's there to inform the wider audience of the merits and flaws of the entertainment so that they can make an informed decision about whether to spend money on it. How that's communicated, a body gesture or a long tirade, is ultimately irrelevant.

I love Confused Matthew's review of No Country for Old Men, because it very effectively demonstrates why that movie is a complete and utter waste of your time. I wish someone had told me before I wasted mine.

I wish to emphasise this because an interesting development has recently occurred in the games industry with the release of Aliens: Colonial Marines. There was a review embargo on the game before it went on sale, which meant that no-one could post their review of the game before it was released (to have done so would have meant career suicide). Worse, no-one could also voice their concerns in previews due to NDAs. It has now received universal panning from critics, with scores far below what would be expected from a AAA title with 6 years of development time. It's a crap game really. And yet none of the critics could mention a word of it before it was released, before thousands of people pre-ordered the game or went out to buy it on its first day (based on PR and gameplay trailers which now appear to have been a lie). The entire review process failed.

We weren't too bad. I listened back myself.

You get the same type of embargo with movies. In the future, if the game industry goes farther in that direction, reviewers won't be sent copies of probable duds but will be forced to buy them and then write their reviews. Game buyers will just have to learn NOT to pre-order these games. It's the fact the companies know they can get all the money up front that's the problem.

If your primary goal is to make people laugh, I'm gonna have to give you guys 5 gold stars or a thumbs up or whatever for this Intermission. I was highly entertained! 

Now, as a frequent listener of Confused Matthew, I had to overlook much of what you guys said about him specifically, since you admitted to knowing very little about him before placing him at the nadir of your film criticism spectrum. But I loved that idea that sometimes people have this gut feeling that something is wrong with a movie yet lack the tools and expertise to explain exactly what that something wrong is. Like fireproof78, I love the No Country for Old Men review by Confused Matthew because he perfectly articulates my own gut feeling that something about that movie was just off. And now, knowing what I know about where Confused Matthew is coming from with his reviews, I perfectly understand his rants against Cloud Atlas and the Avengers (and I agree heartily - Avengers was bo~ring). Those are not his most shining moments, however and make poor introductions for an unfamiliar listener.

Certainly, Confused Matthew can be a total asshat at times, and despite his fervent desire not to, he does box himself in quite a bit with his choices. But he's still capable of being very thoughtful and intelligent with regards to those aspects of a film that he's most interested in.

And since my intense rage over his review of Spirited Away (a film I don't even like) is directly responsible for me discovering DiF, I've learned to temper my feelings and accept the good with the bad.