Having watched several of Confused Matthew's reviews, I think the guy's main problem is that he thinks he's much more intelligent and objective than he actually is.
Oh, he's certainly not unintelligent. He's a good speaker, he can argue well for a movie's virtues or flaws, and he frequently makes very good points — the problem is that for an "analytical" reviewer his analysis is frequently very shallow and reveals a rather close-minded attitude. He doesn't seem quite capable of grasping that a movie, or any kind of work, can be viewed in more than one way; at least not more than one valid way. In this, he's a lot like John Kricfalusi with his utter refusal to consider that any viewpoint other than his has any sort of value. It's best summed up by his opinion of Mel Brooks's Robin Hood Men In Tights: "Nobody likes this movie. Even if you think you do, you don't."
Confused Matthew knows exactly what he wants and expects out of a movie, and if a movie fails to deliver he considers it to be "objectively" without value. If anyone claims to like said movie despite of this; well, they must be wrong, or delusional, or lying, because it doesn't make sense that people would like something that objectively has no value. (At times I think he's confused —see what I did there? — Opinion Myopia for objectivity, and his videos on objectivity haven't really convinced me otherwise.) Now, wanting certain things in your entertainment or having opinions that are contrary to everyone else is fine. Insisting that yours is the only valid opinion is not.
Another problem is, sometimes Matthew's wants and expectations are so removed from what the movie is actually trying to do that it feels like the equivalent of him trying to describe why a chair is poorly-made by listing all the ways it fails to be a table.
It is often interesting to hear his thoughts and opinions on popular movies and why he doesn't like them. Occasionally he will have good points that writers could do well in taking to heart. But no, on the whole his words will not get you further than the film will ever go. Sometimes they don't even get you as far.
Hmmm.
Having watched several of Confused Matthew's reviews, I think the guy's main problem is that he thinks he's much more intelligent and objective than he actually is.
Oh, he's certainly not unintelligent. He's a good speaker, he can argue well for a movie's virtues or flaws, and he frequently makes very good points — the problem is that for an "analytical" reviewer his analysis is frequently very shallow and reveals a rather close-minded attitude. He doesn't seem quite capable of grasping that a movie, or any kind of work, can be viewed in more than one way; at least not more than one valid way. In this, he's a lot like John Kricfalusi with his utter refusal to consider that any viewpoint other than his has any sort of value. It's best summed up by his opinion of Mel Brooks's Robin Hood Men In Tights: "Nobody likes this movie. Even if you think you do, you don't."
Confused Matthew knows exactly what he wants and expects out of a movie, and if a movie fails to deliver he considers it to be "objectively" without value. If anyone claims to like said movie despite of this; well, they must be wrong, or delusional, or lying, because it doesn't make sense that people would like something that objectively has no value. (At times I think he's confused —see what I did there? — Opinion Myopia for objectivity, and his videos on objectivity haven't really convinced me otherwise.) Now, wanting certain things in your entertainment or having opinions that are contrary to everyone else is fine. Insisting that yours is the only valid opinion is not.
Another problem is, sometimes Matthew's wants and expectations are so removed from what the movie is actually trying to do that it feels like the equivalent of him trying to describe why a chair is poorly-made by listing all the ways it fails to be a table.
It is often interesting to hear his thoughts and opinions on popular movies and why he doesn't like them. Occasionally he will have good points that writers could do well in taking to heart. But no, on the whole his words will not get you further than the film will ever go. Sometimes they don't even get you as far.