CM pretty obviously doesn't pay close enough attention when he watches movies in general. You bring that shit into CLOUD ATLAS' house and you're gonna have a bad time.

I'd be the first one to agree with him if he were talking about the MATRIX sequels, though.

Last edited by Dorkman (2013-02-02 19:36:03)

Sorry, I didn't realize you felt that way about Kevin Smith in general (I merely assumed you did regarding Confused Matthew). I don't link this stuff with the express intention of pissing off you or anyone else. I'm interested in the discussion of film criticism and how it's changed, good and bad. I'm curious about the different methods and criteria people have when perceiving art and any sort of value to be pulled from it, even from the "obnoxious" ones, through a point/counter-point exchange.

Let me be clear, I strongly disagree with Confused Matthew a majority of the time, but I'll at least hear him out, as he's only asking for a few minutes out of my day and I would want someone to show me the same courtesy. Besides, even if I don't agree with his opinions, I can usually be entertained by them (or laugh hysterically at how angry he gets, to the point where he's not even reviewing something, like The Avengers). I'm open to a different opinion and hope to find, between all the yelling, something I had not considered before or even noticed.

So far, the only review of his I can't seem to bring myself to watch is his episode on "No Country For Old Men". Apparently, he considers it "objectively bad", similar to Brian Finifter's feelings on "Spider-Man 2". I hope to one day get to a place where I can hear him out without weeping for humanity.

He has a point though, NCFOM is objectively bad. Roger Deakins' cinematography is the only good thing about that film.

You make a good point there, Trey.

Actually, John - you linked CM because of what he was saying about criticism in a larger sense, so I'll touch on that.   He seems to be saying - I'm paraphrasing -  "If you don't like my movie, it's only because you didn't understand it" is not a get-out-of-criticism-free card.

I actually agree that can be used as an attempt to deflect criticism of a thing that's genuinely bad.   But it can also be true.   

CM's argument falls apart because he doesn't offer any criticism - he doesn't cite any specific reason why he thought Cloud Atlas was bad, other than the one I mentioned earlier which is provably wrong.   

So he's right to say that "if you criticize my movie, that means you didn't get it" is a lame defense.  But "your movie was stupid and I didn't like it" isn't criticism.  He really didn't understand it, and didn't even watch the whole thing to attempt to try.

And I just started to think we were getting somewhere.

My reaction to Cloud Atlas is the same as Ebert's - I think I said almost exactly the same thing in our Best/Worst episode.  And I'm more often the nitpicky "hey, this doesn't make sense" guy than not.  For example, obviously I have issues with Looper for "not making sense" - so what the hell, right?   

From what little I knew about Cloud Atlas going in, I assumed I wouldn't like it.  And on first viewing I was right.  I was expecting it to "make sense" and it doesn't.   By which I mean, not everything fits together into a neat little completed puzzle by the end.    I think I assumed it would be like Memento - at the end there would be a grand "a-HA!" that pulled everything together.   Except... that never happens.

But once I knew that... on my second viewing (just like Ebert) I didn't try to "figure out" all the story connections, and I just watched the movie.    And then it did make sense - it's a movie about how our lives are connected in all sorts of ways we may never realize, and what we do can have unexpected and profound repercussions.   

Turns out Cloud Atlas tells that story beautifully - it was my fault for expecting it to hard-connect all the dots for me the first time.   Instead, it's full of echoes and loops and connections that go all over the place in all sorts of ways.   It's not linear, and if you expect it to be, then no - it doesn't "make sense".

I absolutely understand why that's not everyone's cup of tea - hell, it's usually not mine - and yet Cloud Atlas falls into that rare category of "I should hate this, but somehow I don't".   So I'm not surprised it bombed.  It was just luck that I had it on DVD, so I was able to say "meh, maybe I'll watch that again" when I'd never have made the effort to see it in a theater twice.

So- sorry Matthew, but my advice is to be like Ebert and me.   If you haven't seen Cloud Atlas yet, or are willing to give it another shot - don't try to "figure it out" as you watch it.   Just roll with what's actually happening onscreen from minute to minute.  You still might hate it, but at least you won't be distracted by looking for something the movie isn't trying to deliver.