I’m trying out different ways of doing film criticism. In addition to writing articles, I think it makes sense to record commentaries (like the one I just did for Drive) and make critical videos. (My inspirations here are Mike Stoklasa and Jim Emerson.)
So here’s my own foray into the latter:
My M.O.: I looped the opening scenes of Inception four times, then commented on different aspects of the filmmaking. This follows certain articles I’ve written:
- “Seventeen Ways of Criticizing Inception“
- “Art as Device, and Device (When it Works) as Miracle (or, The Princess Bride vs. Inception)”
- “Scott Pilgrim vs. Inception for the Future of the Cinematic Imagination”
- “More on Inception: Shot Economy and 1 + 1 = 1″
My M.O., annotated: I persist in writing and talking about Inception because it’s useful. Millions of people have seen it, and many have called it “more sophisticated,” somehow, than the usual Hollywood fare—when in fact it really isn’t.
But my primary goal here, as in all of my film writing, is to bring a heightened awareness to how films are actually made. I DON’T CARE WHETHER YOU LIKE THE FILM OR NOT; LIKING SOMETHING HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH STUDYING ITS FORM AND MANUFACTURE. I suppose I myself “like” Inception in some way, since I keep going on about it.
Regardless of your own thoughts on the movie, I hope you find the video edifying. I’d encourage watching it sooner than later as, sadly, I don’t know whether YouTube will leave it be.
And I’d love to know what you think of it, as I’m already busily making more. What worked? What didn’t? How can I make these better? (By which I of course mean more annoying, more pretentious?) … Thanks!