July 2019 in Summary: Another Arduous Month

July is usually my favorite month of the year, though these past two ones have been unusually difficult for some reason. I apologize for the sudden lack of content, though some decidedly strange circumstances ended up interfering with my writing process. For instance, my internet went down at the end of this month, resulting in this update post being delayed. I didn’t even get to see any films at home, though I personally blame that on Stranger Things.


Films watched in July 2019:

In theaters:

  • Spider-Man: Far From Home (Jon Watts, 2019)
  • Midsommar (Ari Aster, 2019)
  • The Farewell (Lulu Wang, 2019)
  • Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (Quentin Tarantino, 2019)

At home:

  • <None>

Before I went to see Midsommar, I predicted that chief Variety film critic Owen Gleiberman would somehow find a way to insult his audience, claiming they were too stupid to get Ari Aster’s vision. A lot of people like the idea of being right all the time, but like Hereditary, the ability is kind of overrated. Fun fact: One year later, he’s still not over having to see it with a mainstream audience.

“BTW, I’m still salty about having to see Hereditary with them filthy causals!” [Source]

“The divide is likely to get even more pronounced, I tells ya!”

Another fun fact: Midsommar actually has a higher audience score on Rotten Tomatoes as of this writing than The Last Jedi. This is why it never pays to underestimate your audience; you’ll just look foolish whenever you’re proven wrong. Keep on messing up, and don’t be surprised if an acclaimed filmmaker sets the record straight.

Owned. [Source]

[Side note: I’m not sure if this commenter actually is Quentin Tarantino or not. Even if they aren’t, then the fact remains that Variety’s chief film critic fell for the oldest trick in the internet book, so there is hilarity to be found either way.]

Anyway, Gleiberman-related antics aside, despite having less acclaim, I myself would dub Midsommar a superior effort to Hereditary simply because it actually sticks the landing, but there’s no getting around that it’s a pretty basic “everyone is an idiot” horror film when you look past its gimmicks and A24 branding. Also, the previous day, I ended up seeing Spider-Man: Far From Home. It will probably hold up better for me once the Marvel Cinematic Universe has run its course. As it stands, it left me wanting more.

Christmas has obviously come early this year, for the middle-of-the-road Midsommar was then followed up with the single best A24 film since The Disaster Artist: Lulu Wang’s The Farewell. I think what allows it to succeed where every other A24 film I reviewed has failed to varying degrees is that it’s one of the only films associated with the company whose creator didn’t try deliberately shooting for that stereotypical hipster standard of being lauded in critical circles while making not even a small dent in the mainstream. Instead, Ms. Wang had a great story to tell and was one of the few directors to put A24 ethos to good use, ensuring it turned out exactly as she wanted. So naturally, being one of their strongest films, they decided, in true A24 fashion, to initially give it a limited release. Keep it classy, A24, it’s what you guys do best.

Finally, after putting Owen Gleiberman in his place (?), Quentin Tarantino saw fit to release his ninth film, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, which I saw during its opening weekend. All I can say is that unless Hollywood really steps up their game in the next five months (or on the off-chance A24 drops another film of the same caliber as The Farewell), it will make my top ten list for 2019. Certain critics may have had their reservations about the ending, but I personally had no problems with it whatsoever.


Films reviewed, but not watched in July 2019:

Spider-Man: Homecoming (Jon Watts, 2017)

So Michael Keaton, having stared in a film (Birdman) whose director denounced the MCU and all it stands for, proceeded to play one of the MCU’s more memorable villains? Well played, Mr. Keaton, well played. Anyway, Bob Chipman (a.k.a. Moviebob) once said anyone who believes Homecoming to be the superior effort to Sam Raimi’s trilogy is out of their minds. Well, here’s to being insane because I feel Tom Holland’s interpretation of the character manages to bring a lot of energy the character Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield lacked. The first two films in Mr. Raimi’s trilogy were better standalone features, but Jon Watt’s take on the character works much better as a complement to the series thus far, providing an interesting slice-of-life perspective for the Marvel Cinematic Universe as a whole. Also, The Ramones.

Lady Bird (Greta Gerwig, 2017)

I’ve said it before, but it really does bear mentioning that something about A24 really seems to bring out the absolute worst in film critics. Many of my film-related editorials have, in some way, involved the studio. Between the critics’ approval of A24’s abhorrent marketing tactics for Ex Machina, a certain someone waving his superiority complex around after Hereditary failed to resonate with audiences, and implicitly agreeing with Paul Schrader’s misbegotten conclusion that the audience not flocking to see First Reformed despite having airing in an estimated forty theaters nationwide meant they’re letting filmmakers down, there’s no getting around that the company has inspired a lot of hostility between critics and their audience (albeit unintentionally more often than not).

Then of course, in the midst of these ill-conceived think pieces was Lady Bird, which caused film critics and their readers to lose their minds twice – first when one critic had the audacity to not give it a positive review…

Exhibit A

…and again when Guillermo del Toro’s The Shape of Water ended up winning “Picture of the Year”.

Exhibit B

I’d also argue Exhibit B is a sign of how little film critics/fans care about imaginative storytelling, but that’s a subject for another post.

As for the film itself, there really isn’t much more I have to say about Lady Bird I didn’t already touch upon in the review. Despite being hailed as one of the greatest films of the 2010s immediately after it debuted, I found it to be average at best. Its missteps and tendency not to think through its implications were far too numerous to get a passing grade. As it stands, the main character’s mother is far too unlikable to illicit sympathy. If you’re looking for a film that successfully depicts a flawed parent character, check out Denzel Washington’s Fences. And if you’re looking for a film that covers the same themes as Lady Bird far more gracefully, check out Kelly Fremon Craig’s The Edge of Seventeen. One could argue it was ambitious of Ms. Gerwig to cover both topics at once, but I would rather have a work do one or two things extremely well than several things only semi-competently.


Games reviewed in July 2019:

Kirby’s Dream Land (HAL Laboratory, 1992)

I try not to look too far into the future when I write these reviews, but Kirby’s Dream Land is a case in which one cannot unring the bell. Its first sequel has so much more to offer that there really isn’t much point in revisiting this game. Kirby’s Dream Land is a game fondly remembered by those who grew up with it – including myself. However, there’s no getting around that it has far too little to offer these days. Even a novice could complete it in less than an hour while veterans are going to want something a bit more challenging. As difficult as it is for me to admit, between Nintendo’s major franchise debuts, Kirby’s Dream Land is definitely among the weaker ones.

King’s Quest VII: The Princeless Bride (Sierra, 1994)

King’s Quest VII is probably the single most polarizing entry in the series. Although I remarked that the presentation leaves a lot to be desired, it honestly is fairly ambitious – especially for its time. It’s fascinating comparing this game to the one that started it all in terms of visuals and design choices. At the end of the day, however, it’s a game that has far more bad ideas than good, which is why I had no choice but to award it such a low score. If the characters were less obnoxious and if the game itself was made a little more challenging, I would be more forgiving of its flaws, but as it stands, there really isn’t anything it does that King’s Quest VI didn’t do several times better with a more simplistic presentation two years earlier. It probably has held up better than Phantasmagoria, though.

Pokémon Diamond and Pearl (Game Freak, 2006)

The fourth generation of Pokémon is the only one in which I played neither of the original versions. This is because I wasn’t really interested in continuing the series at the time, and ended up skipping the fourth generation entirely. The following generation, Black and White, ended up reeling me back into the series, and I would finally fill in the gap last year when I checked out the Platinum version. Coming off my playthrough of X, I found Platinum to be a better game; having an actual challenge to it really counted for a lot. I don’t think the fourth generation is quite as good as the third, but it managed to retain most of the momentum and deliver a solid experience in its own right.


Featured articles:

One Punch Man (Season Two) Review – Coincidentally, after I recently picked up the One Punch Man manga, The Otaku Judge had to go and review the second season of the anime adaptation. It is apparently a step down from the first, but it was interesting reading his take nonetheless.

EarthBound Beginnings – Making the latter half of his site’s namesake relevant, Matt decided to at last take a look at the first game in the Mother/Earthbound trilogy. It hasn’t held up all that well, but its ideas are remarkably forward looking – they’re things you really wouldn’t see regularly until the 2010s.

Project G-A Primer – Sticking it to the critics, Aether ended up seeing Godzilla: King of the Monsters and had a great time with it. From having seen that film, he ended up starting what appears to be a new project: a retrospective of the Godzilla franchise. With at least one Godzilla film having been released in every decade since the 1950s, he certainly has his work cut out for him, and this post was a great introduction for those unfamiliar with the franchise.

Tales From Video Game Retail – The Creepy Grandpa – Some people are really determined to be walking stereotypes. They either have no self-awareness or far too much of it. One such person patronized a store where Angie (a.k.a. The Backlog Crusader) was working at the time. Having once worked in retail, I can certainly sympathize with her plight.

My Mario Maker 2 Courses – I’ve always really liked level editors whenever they’ve been available in old-school games, and Super Mario Maker 2 looks like it has even more to offer players in that regard than the first. It is highly enjoyable seeing the various levels people come up with around these parts – including those of Nathan of Gaming Omnivore.

On physical copies, bonuses, and Google’s Stadia – With Google’s transparent attempt to violate as many antitrust laws as possible legitimate attempts at entering the games industry, many gamers have been speculating on what a digital-only future would be like. AK of Everything Is Bad For You gives his take while also offering his two cents on the ongoing physical vs. digital debate.

Samurai Museum – Tokyo Japan – Tokyo is actually the very first world capital I’ve ever visited. I sadly didn’t think to visit the Samurai Museum David & Laura Speer ended up going to, but their account of it certainly made for a great read. Should I ever visit Japan again, I’ll try to check it out.

Toy Story 4 Review – Hey, I wasn’t the only one who reviewed Toy Story 4! Scott of the Wizard Dojo, being the animation buff that he is, ended up seeing it as well. His take on the film ended up mirroring mine; we both feel that, while still a quality product, it is the weakest film in the franchise, having the most obvious flaws and somewhat cheapening the ending of Toy Story 3. Even so, I do think it was worth looking into.


Still to come:

Last month, I suspect I may have burned myself out a little attempting to get too much done at once. Therefore, this next month, I’m going to cut down on the number of posts I’ll be writing. This is a gaming site first and foremost, and while I will not give up on my film reviews, game reviews are my top priority. I will try to stick to my usual schedule of posting a new game review every Sunday morning. If my schedule allows for it, I will post two other articles on Wednesdays and Saturdays as well.

Right now, I have a review of Pilotwings ready to go, and I am currently working on a review of Kirby’s Adventure with which to follow it up. I also want to review Pokémon Black and White – the games that got me back into the series after a five-year hiatus. It won’t be easy, but I’m determined to see this retrospective of the mainline games to the end. I have also finished a review of Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, so you can look forward to reading that sometime next week as well.


Links to my articles:

Film reviews:

Game reviews:

Other posts:

33 thoughts on “July 2019 in Summary: Another Arduous Month

  1. It was a productive month for you despite of the minor issues you faced. And I am looking forward to your take on Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. From what I have read about it, I am really excited about catching it in theaters when it comes out around these parts.

    Lastly, thanks for the mention! =)

    Like

    • If Once Upon a Time in Hollywood does not make it into my top ten list, it will be a true testament to what a quality year 2019 was for the medium. See it when you get the chance.

      And you’re welcome! I think that means you’ve reviewed all of the Earthbound games, doesn’t it? Strangely, I originally reviewed them in a weird order myself, starting with the third, then moving onto the first, and finally ending with the second. I then decided my takes weren’t that good and ended up rewriting them in order.

      Liked by 1 person

      • I will see it for sure!

        And yes, I have reviewed all of them now, and also in a somewhat weird order, as I did the 3rd, then the 2nd, and then the 1st, even though that was not really the order in which I played them.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. It’s hard to believe the stuff Owen Gleiberman writes isn’t parody, it’s so ridiculous. And why even bring up the blue/red state divide? Does every god damn aspect of art have to be political now? If he were talking about a movie about abortion or immigration or some other hot political issue, then that might make sense, but he’s not.

    Sorry to hear things have been rough recently. Taking it a bit slower with the writing pace can be good sometimes, especially when life gets in the way. You’ll still be way more prolific than me. Speaking of, thanks again for the link. I didn’t even get into it in that piece, but I think Google should be broken up under our antitrust laws. Too bad it will never happen at this point.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Yeah, Mr. Gleiberman is definitely a walking embodiment of Poe’s Law at this point. He’s another one of those people who either has no self-awareness at all or far too much of it. And no, Midsommar had absolutely nothing to do with politics (there was one timely joke made, but that was a throwaway line and it wasn’t directly political) – for that matter, neither did Hereditary, though it didn’t stop him from taking at shot at the administration when he wrote that other piece detailing his discontent with having to watch the film with actual people. Ironically, when it comes to A24 directors, he probably picked the least politically charged one to talk about when he wrote this piece (and the one complaining about Hereditary’s D+ grade on CinemaScore).

      Needless to say, I was ecstatic when Quentin Tarantino put him in his place (or alternatively, Mr. Gleiberman demonstrated his extreme gullibility). Mr. Gleiberman and other film journalists seem to operate with a very hierarchical mindset with skilled creators at the top, critics in the center, unskilled creators below them, and the audience at the very bottom – possibly below even the dirt itself. He is not the kind of person who can handle having his opinions challenged, so things get interesting is when the dissenter is someone with actual clout. These kinds of critics can’t handle dissenters of any kind, so most of the time, they’ll just write think pieces as to why said dissenters are wrong and why they’re stupid for believing what they believe. When the person challenging them is a respected figure, on the other hand, they have no choice but to take it – whether they like it or not. Indeed, I could tell from the response that doing so was exceptionally difficult for Owen. [Aside: I must also remark that the excerpt of Gleiberman’s Mr. Tarantino highlighted was very poorly written; he used lavished and lavish in the same sentence. I feel that without being able to engage with anyone outside of his circle, his writing skills have deteriorated.]

      It’s honestly not as bad as it sounds, but I did try to get too much accomplished at once hence why I only ended up writing three game reviews this month. I think going at a slower pace is for the best because my goal is to get to a point where I’m writing reviews for the following week, which means I don’t have to rush editing these pieces (or better yet, I can edit more than one piece at a time). And you’re welcome. Google is definitely flaunting their power at this point. They’ve definitely gone the route of Apple in that they were considered the cool, hip tech company before becoming the very thing they were rebelling against in the first place.

      Liked by 1 person

      • As you said, that whole Tarantino response thing is great whether or not that was actually Tarantino for different reasons (if it wasn’t him, I guess Tarantino will hear about it and have a good laugh anyway.) Didn’t even notice that Gleiberman used “lavished” and “lavish” in the same sentence, but that’s the kind of awkwardness I’d edit out of one of my posts during a second pass. Maybe he just doesn’t care enough to edit his reviews anymore.

        Though you make a good point about his writing style. I’ve noticed that some critics, especially critics of what would be considered high art, have a writing style so thick and sludgy that reading their stuff feels like wading through a swamp. Those critics probably think that’s just a sign of a high intellect, but I think it’s a sign of stagnation. Good writers don’t string together 20 complex-compound sentences at a time, and they don’t sound like they have a thesaurus constantly open next to them. I like throwing flourishes into my writing as much as the guy, but when they kill your flow, it’s time to rework your style so people can read it without switching to another tab.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Same here. While editing my Pilotwings review earlier today, I was embarrassed when I realized I’d used the word “console” three times in one sentence. For similar reasons, I tend to get paranoid whenever I have a sentence go on for more than three lines. I realize I did just that in this update post, but in my defense, I don’t edit these as extensively.

          And I think you’re on to something. What really trips critics – film critics, especially – is that they lack passion. They seem to only like films insofar that they reflect their own beliefs back at them rather than giving artists credit for being daring or innovative (or, you know, actually enjoying the film). They’re kind of like certain black metal musicians in that they take things way too seriously for their own good. A lot of the time whenever I read stuff from people like Mr. Gleiberman, my usual reaction is “I have no idea what this means”. Granted, it could just be me being dense, but I feel the problem with a lot of self-styled high-minded critics is that they don’t see the need to sell audiences on ideas, rather they take the Jonathan Blow approach and wave their knowledge in their audience’s faces. In that respect, their writing kind of reminds me of Sean Penn’s turbo-awful novel Bob Honey Who Just Do Stuff, which contains some of the most impenetrable writing you’ll ever encounter.

          Liked by 1 person

  3. Hey, look at that, I STILL can’t ‘like’ your posts (but I can on NintendoBound…). Because reasons!

    Thanks again for the mention! I think you’ve included me in every month recap of 2019 so far except March.

    Sorry my posts have been slower since June, been going through a lot. Just started a new job, but hopefully I can still find time to do more posts in August. My reviews for Once upon a Time in Hollywood, Lion King (2019) and Super Mario Maker 2 should be soon, as well as my long-planned list of top 10 Nintendo systems (which I’ve flip-flopped wildly with, in regards to its lower half. Suffice to say, I’m going by a quality/test of time thing as opposed to influence, so it might look a bit different from other such lists). I have a feeling you liked Once Upon a Time in Hollywood more than I did. I felt it suffered many of the same issues as Inglourious Basterds (a film I liked the first time I saw it, when I hadn’t seen most of Tarantino’s other films, but have liked much less after seeing them and noticing how much that film uses his style at the expense of the story, in place of enhancing it). Maybe a bit better than Basterds, since the main characters didn’t come off as violent psychopaths this time, but I’m in the minority who thinks Hateful Eight is Tarantino’s best since his first four films (or five, if we’re counting Kill Bill being split in two).
    I guess I’ll be spoiling a bit of my upcoming posts, but I also didn’t care much for the Lion King remake (this coming from someone who was quite pleasantly surprised with live-action Aladdin). So my next couple of movie reviews won’t be too glowing, sadly…

    Great write-up as always. Thanks again for the mention. Also, Owen Gleiberman sounds like more of an ass each time you bring him up.

    Liked by 1 person

    • You can’t bring yourself to like my posts? Guess I’ll have to try harder next month, huh? (Kidding!)

      And I guess I did, didn’t I? You have been writing a lot of interesting stuff, I must say.

      And I totally get that. When you’re getting used to a new job, you have an entirely new schedule you have to get used to along, which impacts your hobbies as well.

      Hey, remember when indie films used to be innovative? I don’t! Anyway, I actually have to say that Inglorious Basterds, which was the first Tarantino film I saw, still ranks as my second favorite film of his behind Pulp Fiction. Yeah, the main characters being psychopaths is a bit of a point of contention, but I think he made it work (granted, it was mostly because they were going up against Nazis, but still). Once Upon a Time in Hollywood I liked a little more than Django Unchained, but not as much as Reservoir Dogs. To tip my hand a little, I actually ended up giving Once Upon a Time a 7/10. When I said it will likely make my top 10, I merely meant that it has been shortlisted. Another 7/10 film that will probably make it is Rocketman. I’ll be interested to see what you thought of it along with Lion King and Super Mario Maker 2. [Aside: Considering that the film poster for Once Upon a Time touts itself as Tarantino’s ninth film, I’m led to believe Kill Bill is counted as a single work.]

      Thanks! And you’re welcome! I don’t even try to make Owen Gleiberman look bad, but he insists on throwing a slow pitch over the plate every time. All I can say is that as troublesome of a month July ended up being for me, at least I didn’t get egg on my face. He, on the other hand, had to be an overachiever and got egg on his face twice – first when his cynical predication failed to come to pass and again when he got Tarantino’d.

      Liked by 1 person

      • I’m in the minority who thinks Jackie Brown is Pulp Fiction’s biggest competition for the title of best Tarantino film. I can understand why people like Tarantino’s other films, but for me, Tarantino is one of the best filmmakers, but the one among the best whose style can sometimes work against him.

        Obviously, given my stance on contrarianism (it’s just conformity to non-comformity…which is conformity), I don’t like to shoot down the popular opinion when mine goes against it. I can understand why people like Inglourious Basterds and such. I never want to sound like one of those people who brags about having a less popular opinion, and CERTAINLY not one of those people who only has opinions that are dictated by going against popular opinion (har har, I’m so unique because I don’t like something that became popular…even though pretty much everyone on the internet does it).

        I may have to go back and watch Inglourious Basterds so I can review it soon (I was originally going to review Tarantino’s films in chronological order, but I think I’ll just review them by what I want to review at the moment). I just feel Ingourious Basterds has too many elements that don’t go together (the two main narratives – between the Basterds and the theater owner – for example, never come together in a meaningful way. By the time we get to the ending, I can’t help but feel only one of these narratives were necessary, and Tarantino just included both because he makes his movies in weird ways. Again, that’s fine, and I like his style, but I think it worked against him here). It also seems like some characters are kind of pointless, with Michael Fassbender being introduced just to die in the next scene (though with that said, love the random Mike Myers cameo). And while I definitely understand the argument that the Basterds are fighting Nazis so their behavior towards their enemies may not be as horrible as it would be to…anyone else. But there is also the counterargument that not every Nazi soldier believed in what they were doing, and many were threatened or coerced by the Nazi party into fighting for them. And let’s say if the Basterds killed their captive quickly, I’d certainly think they were ruthless, to be sure. But the fact that they mercilessly beat him to death while laughing like a bunch of maniacal hyenas seems like something the Nazis would do… I don’t know, I guess in a film about Jewish-American soldiers killing Nazis, I kind of want to root for the heroes, instead of wincing at their violent tendencies. Though the sight of Hitler and company getting blown away is definitely a highlight. Kind of weird that Tarantino didn’t give Hitler the baseball bat death, now that I think about it…

        *Apologies ahead of time if I sound like I’m promoting myself*

        I wrote a paper for a film course a number of years ago, where I was to compare one film by two different directors discussed in the class, and I chose Schindler’s List and Ingourious Basterds. I compared Steven Spielberg and Quentin Tarantino to the two boys from Toy Story (Spielberg being Andy, and Tarantino being Sid. Both were intended as compliments, despite Sid being the antagonist. Spielberg often having a childlike sense of wonder to his movies, while Tarantino can come off as (again, I mean this as a compliment) a destructive boy with the way he makes movies. I mentioned how those two styles lead to two very different outcomes in their movies revolving around the era of WWII. Spielberg’s usual childlike wonder allowed him to mature and tell a very deep, moving story that was very much adult. While Tarantino (God love him) made a film that more felt like it took such a serious subject and brought it down to an immature level (again, not innately a bad thing, but I thought it was a decent point). The computer I had that paper saved on is old and busted, and neither did I back it up. Otherwise, I would love to post that on my site (it’s one of the few college papers I feel proud of. But I guess I was always more comfortable writing about things like movies than the “more important” stuff). Maybe I’ll try to replicate it as best I can at some point.

        Wow, sorry. Really going off-subject on a tangent… Point being, I respect that people like Inglourious Basterds, but I unfortunately think it’s one of Tarantino’s weaker efforts. At any rate, I look forward to your review of Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, and hope you look forward to my review of it, as well as Lion King and Mario Maker 2 as soon as I get the time. Though with how long it took me to write this novel of a response, I suppose I could have used this time…

        Liked by 1 person

        • Also, somehow didn’t see this the first time around, but you mentioned Stranger Things (as you know, I’m a fan of the show)! How did you like the third season? I greatly enjoyed it, myself. Although I liked the second season, I thought season 3 was overall better (there was no “THAT episode” this time around). Actually, I hope to begin my TV series reviews soon starting with Stranger Things season 1.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Okay, I just finished Stranger Things 3, and I enjoyed it immensely. I like that they took the series in a new direction; they really managed to keep things fresh. I think I actually liked it a little more than the preceding two seasons, though they were no slouches either. Looking forward to season four!

            Liked by 1 person

            • Glad to hear it! I thought it was excellent (as is the show as a whole. It actually quickly became one of my all-time favorites). I am also looking forward to season 4. It sounds like, from the original plan, four seasons was the plan for the show, but a fifth wasn’t out of the question (it seems they don’t want to go any more than that though). Wonderful show. Immensely entertaining, filled with nostalgia and references while still telling its own coherent story, great cast, great characters who are allowed to change by season (it seems weird looking back at how antagonistic Steve was in season 1, now that he’s basically the “fun uncle” character), and the Mind Flayer is my favorite current TV villain (and the best “supernatural entity that possesses people” villain since BOB from Twin Peaks). Love the show.

              Liked by 1 person

    • Ah, thanks! I am looking forward to reviewing Pokémon Black and White. I reviewed Mother 3 quite a while ago, and I have to say that most of what Mother 3 tried, I felt was done better in Pokémon Black and White. I can imagine I’ll have a lot to say when I get there, but first, I’ll be writing a series of short reviews so I have an extra week to work on it.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. I’ve marveled at the pace you write. It seems hard to me to keep up with putting out at least three posts a week while also staying active in all the other blogs you keep up with. I’m not surprised you’re feeling a bit of a pinch now. Slowing down can be healthy at times, nothing wrong with that.

    Also, outside of your blog, I barely know who Owen Gleiberman is, but the little glimpses I get are always rather hilarious. The hubris is real.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hey, thanks! It does mean that I have to comment less often, but I do still enjoy the posts I read when I get the chance.

      Owen Gleiberman is practically a salt-powered hubris machine at this point. As I said, what I found to be the most shocking thing about him is that he was 59 when he wrote the think piece that drew my attention. It came across as something a recent college graduate who is just developing their own taste in films would come up with on a bad day – not someone who has been working in the field for decades. The sad thing is that even just a year later, his writing skills have deteriorated significantly. I really hope that I don’t turn out like him in thirty years or so because he spent for more time belittling the general viewing public than selling them on the art he ostensibly enjoys. As such, he doesn’t strike me as the kind of person who can enjoy things on his own terms, and that truly is unfortunate.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Pingback: On reviews, scores, and objectivity vs. subjectivity | Everything is bad for you

Leave a Reply to 生きる塾 Cancel reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.