Insomniac wrote:Jake Cole loved The Dark Knight and Inception and put them both on his Top 10's for their respective years. He even gave The Dark Knight Rises a 4/5.

But then he realized that it's painfully uncool to like Nolan in some highbrow critic circles, and began to claim he had reevaluated Nolan. He does nothing but trash him nowadays.

I don't trust his opinion on anything after that.

This is a foolish thing to say because people can change their opinions as they grow up and interact with people of different opinions.

The Nolan circlejerk was extremely strong after TDK and everyone thought he was this flawless director. The hate became more popular and caused people to re think Nolans filmography after that.

A ton of critics flip flopped on TDKR like a week after once all the contrivances, corny dialogue and plot holes were noted. Hype is a dangerous thing

I'm friends with a critic who writes for some major publications. He has admiration for it, but felt the structure was so subtle most audiences won't even notice it. I don't know how this can co-exist with Peter Scrietta saying the structure was so confusing he couldn't even get into it.


-Vader

He gave The Mummy a higher rating than Dunkirk.

Agendas can be funny sometimes.

Vader182 wrote:I'm friends with a critic who writes for some major publications. He has admiration for it, but felt the structure was so subtle most audiences won't even notice it. I don't know how this can co-exist with Peter Scrietta saying the structure was so confusing he couldn't even get into it.


-Vader

Simple. Scrietta is a moron.

MyCocaine wrote:He gave The Mummy a higher rating than Dunkirk.

Agendas can be funny sometimes.

It's just so dumb it makes me laugh

HorrorBiz wrote:

redfirebird2008 wrote:After the fact. What did he say about it during initial release? That movie didn't receive rave reviews by any means in 2006.

I have no idea. I've just seen him mention how much he loves it on Twitter.

Found this. Avatar is identical to what he has on Slant website.

http://armchairc.blogspot.com/2010/07/prestige.html?m=1

He did not love The Prestige until years later after multiple viewings. Also says it's unfair for critics to review a movie after a single viewing. Wonder if he applied that same logic to Dunkirk.

And now I eagerly await another great couple of reviews to get the taste of this rotten one out of my mouth...

The criticism about plotholes etc are acceptable if the standards are enforced uniformly for all the films they review. Marvel fare gets a pass because of being "light-hearted and funny". What a joke.

tommyjon400 wrote:

Vader182 wrote:I'm friends with a critic who writes for some major publications. He has admiration for it, but felt the structure was so subtle most audiences won't even notice it. I don't know how this can co-exist with Peter Scrietta saying the structure was so confusing he couldn't even get into it.


-Vader

Simple. Scrietta is a moron.

He's not though. I think his opinions on movies have a Stuckmann "i'm just a guy who likes movies" quality to them, but that's different from being stupid. To reach his level of success, that's pretty much impossible.


-Vader

GamingFreak wrote:The criticism about plotholes etc are acceptable if the standards are enforced uniformly for all the films they review. Marvel fare gets a pass because of being "light-hearted and funny". What a joke.

I think when Marvel goes with the silly and nonsensical approach, it makes people care less about plot holes cuz the film is so focused on being summer entertainment

Films like TDKR want to be taken as very serious drama films disguised as a superhero film and so it becomes open to more criticism in terms of plot