Southland Tales review 27 of 52.

jGQqi8DcwecpA.jpg

I have to admit this up top, I felt very uninspired by this week’s viewing of Southland Tales.

I’m still out of town working on this movie and though I’m having fun, learning a lot, and love the people I’m working with, I’m beginning to get a little home sick and worn out.

I had my first two day weekend in about a month and I was torn between doing nothing and spending an entire day to come up with a whopper of a review for this week.

I initially planned to watch the movie at 11:30 in the pm on Saturday the 17th but ended up passing out instead.

When I woke up the next day and fired up Southland Tales at 11:30 in the am on Sunday the 17th and watched it in bed as I tried to wake up. Yeah, I was still struggling after sleeping for 12 hours. DON'T JUDGE.

Though I enjoyed the movie as always I still felt uninspired by the time it was over.

I decided to hit the YouTube once again, and once again I was disappointed.

I found this video.

 

Though it had descent production value, and had focus, it left me missing the Sri Yantra video.

Here is my review of the review.

At first I was excited because it felt like this was going to be a fun review.

From the get go it seemed like a group of outside of the box thinkers reviewing an outside of the box written movie.

I figured they had to like it.

Nope.

It turned out to be just a group of assholes picking apart the movie in a very lazy way.

A majority of this review is made up of different people summarizing the movie while making a stupid voice when it got to points that they didn’t understand.

Rather than applaud Richard Kelly for trying something new in his attempt to make this a multimedia experience, they slam him by saying if you need supplemental material to understand the movie, then it’s not a good movie.

I get that, but in a world of nothing but sequels, prequels and reboots, which I’m sure these idiots love, I appreciate anyone’s attempt to shake things up when it comes to structure in storytelling. I think this is why I’m disappointed with this review.

I can see a traditional movie reviewer not liking the movie, but these people put in the effort to try something new, only to pan someone else’s attempt to try something new.

Plus they were just out and out wrong about certain points they made. I'll go into more details next week as to where they are wrong because this is a two part video and I want to give them a chance to see if maybe their "Characters" were just wrong at the time.  

Again they do a scene by scene summary so they could potentially make a few corrections. 

Though I can tell you now that I’m pretty sure I’m not going to agree with their conclusion.

I can wait to get home to dig into some of the more involved reviews that I’ve come up with over the past several weeks.

See you next week.

Thanks as always for the read!

 

Matt Bunker

I started out with a goal of becoming a paid screenwriter. I had no interest in any other aspect of filmmaking. I received and scholarship to The Vancouver Film School's Writing for Film and Television program where I graduated in 2005. I fell in love with being on set during my first non-school produced short, . I loved being around all the creative people, seeing people having fun while working. The whole liking your job was a new world to me, so I decided to give it a shot. I volunteered for any project I could, doing what ever was needed. The set was my Film School this time. While working as a PA on a feature I was informed that the DP wanted the three tallest PAs to help out in the grip and electric department. That is when I found the department that felt like the best fit for me while I continued to write.