Millions of people watch shit like this

yeah but he basically invented this youtube genre. It would be like criticizing Pewds for weird voice inflections and his brand of editing

He probably means other shite too

What's wrong with this vid? Unironically watched it last night and thought it was pretty good.

>Screenprism
>"Actually..."
>"We can learn from"
>"People should be more like"

>mfw the only reason JK Rowling gay was because Ian McKellen

Attached: 1461802741762.jpg (500x322, 16K)

These videos consistently assault my recommended feed. Their target audience is teenage Redditors whose favourite films are Pulp Fiction and Fight Club.

Attached: cringe.png (877x158, 68K)

even if the points are valid, there's a pretentious aspect to the analysis which essentially is a subtle gatekeeping of enjoying films.

>Thinks every movie is secretly pro-feminism

I didn't mind the video that much personally, and nothing in it is wrong but it's super basic. Stuff that the most casual moviegoer would pick up on. He gets wide eyes when he's scared? He looks to the side when he's remembering something? That's just... acting. All non-garbage actors do this. I liked being reminded of that council shot because it is very good, but there was like no fresh or even interesting info in this whole video.

Really? I don't really see it that way, videos like this just make me appreciate subtle things actors do that I never actually took the time to notice before. To be fair the last time I watched any lotr movies was on a shitty vhs so picking up the subtle eye twitches and shit wasn't exactly easy.

That's not the problem though. The problem is when they interpret films in an (for lack of a better word) authoritarian way, and present their statements as factual, and basically encourage a tunnel vision way of enjoying films.

it's great you aren't taking it like that, but it does have that theme.

soieo essays are never good
every person who makes this sort of content is a failed filmmaker
they don't know how to create or, more likely, they are too cowardly to create
that's why they resort to critique for a portion of validation

I'm assuming you've seen other videos by this guy so what did you think of a similar video he did for Anthony Hopkins? Do you think he's just pulling the explanations for why the actor does a certain thing out of his ass because it somewhat fits or do you think the actor actually put as much thought into the role as these videos imply?

I could see people making videos like this for lots of subpar actors and just be bullshitting but when it comes to classically trained actors like Ian Mckellen/Anthony Hopkins/Charles Dance etc I fully believe all of it was intentional even if the video comes across slightly pretentious.

acting interpretations aren't nearly as bad when they, like you said, open a new route of enjoying the films. Some are stretching and being semi pretentious with weak evidence, but whether it's true or not isn't the problem.

The real kickers are essays which analyse the film itself, since they don't present it as an interpretative theme, but rather the point of the film and the point and role of characters. these basically limit the ways in which people can enjoy film, even if they don't know it, because they only view them in the avenue of those themes.

>favourite films are Pulp Fiction and Fight Club
*Raises paw*

What's wrong with that?

>How X Tells a Story
>The Art of Y
>Z is Deep: Here's Why

At least Kaptain Kristian is a good editor.

>The art of Y
I swear this is the most infuriating and unimaginative shit i've ever seen. Just seeing titles with that template in my feed makes me angry

This is why the only kino film reviewer approved by Yea Forums is our one and only gal, LINDSAY ELLIS!

Attached: who-lindsay-ellis-husband-with-who-she-enjoying-her-after-wedding-life-1547202905.jpg (728x455, 41K)

Here here!

I like the one he did on Anthony Hopkins.

Tolkien is a hack and only dicklet virgins think otherwise