
- Share this article on Facebook
- Share this article on Twitter
- Share this article on Email
- Show additional share options
- Share this article on Print
- Share this article on Comment
- Share this article on Whatsapp
- Share this article on Linkedin
- Share this article on Reddit
- Share this article on Pinit
- Share this article on Tumblr
In the past, it hasn’t been hard to find people on Twitter arguing against CinemaSins, a popular series of YouTube videos that point out apparent errors and other “sins” in movies.
But on Tuesday, a more notable critic spoke out: Jordan Vogt-Roberts, director of Kong: Skull Island. The filmmaker was inspired to comment after the latest CinemaSins video took aim at his revival of the King Kong franchise from earlier this spring. In doing so, Vogt-Roberts pinpointed what has made CinemaSins, and videos like Honest Trailers, so popular as well as — in the videos’ vernacular — what’s wrong with them.
“Mystery Science Theatre [sic] built something artful, endearing and comedic on top of the foundation [of] other people’s work,” Vogt-Roberts began. From there, the filmmaker went through a series of so-called “sins” that the video’s creators call out from Kong: Skull Island, rebutting each one with clear evidence that prove the “sins” aren’t mistakes at all. In one example, the CinemaSins subtitle identifies a character in a screenshot as Shea Whigham’s Cole, when in reality, as Vogt-Roberts notes, “That’s not Shea Whigham’s character. Try actually watching the movie.” In another example, the CinemaSins video asks, “[I]f a land mass has this much of a reputation, why is it just now being discovered?” Vogt-Roberts’ reply was simple: “Because it’s inaccessible by boat and thus only discovered when we launched satellites in the ‘70s with cameras looking down at the earth.”
Related Stories
Check out the video below.
The director’s following tweets encapsulate the problem with CinemaSins videos: “They’re often just wrong or think they’re smarter than you.” Defenders would argue, and have done so Tuesday, that they function as a parody of film criticism. However, examples like what Vogt-Roberts points out prove that intent aside, these videos feel like they’re meant to “solve” a movie, as if spotting mistakes (actual or imagined) proves the viewer to be craftier than the filmmaker. As Vogt-Roberts pointed out later in the thread, there’s nothing wrong with film criticism making compelling arguments, even if it’s criticizing a film of his. The problem is less the target of criticism and more the manner and execution of that criticism.
What is the purpose, for example, of mocking an establishing shot in Kong: Skull Island for depicting a rainy night in Saigon? As Vogt-Roberts notes, it’s the last time in the film when there’s any rain. But even if that wasn’t true, who cares? The subtitle in the screenshot from CinemaSins could lead to the argument that the film’s FX budget was too low to handle the various creatures depicted in Skull Island. That, however, would be substantive criticism, as opposed to a random suggestion that there’s too much rain in a film with very little of it to begin with. CinemaSins is popular because it boils down a two-hour film into a brief video highlighting a handful of seemingly silly things without digging too deep, but masquerading as something more insightful.
What Vogt-Roberts said isn’t new, but it’s certainly the most notable example of someone within Hollywood pushing back against the popularity of YouTube videos that list “mistakes” in movies. It’s hard to imagine people no longer watching CinemaSins because of filmmakers speaking out against them, but Vogt-Roberts’ final conclusion is apt and correct: “Go watch a movie you’ve never seen before & actually discuss it with someone instead of focusing on reductive crap.”
Here are his statements, in part:
Mystery Science Theatre built something artful, endearing and comedic on top of the foundation other people’s work. It had merit to itself.
— Jordan Vogt-Roberts (@VogtRoberts) August 15, 2017
Things like Cinema Sins simply suck the life blood of other people and are often just wrong about intent or how cinema works. It’s terrible.
— Jordan Vogt-Roberts (@VogtRoberts) August 15, 2017
Things like this drive me crazy. This is meant to be absurd. Cinema Sins would ding pulp fiction for Jules and Vincent not getting shot… pic.twitter.com/Zzer9HpRM4
— Jordan Vogt-Roberts (@VogtRoberts) August 15, 2017
Literally not another scene in the film has rain in it after this. Literally two scenes in the whole film. The writing lacks Anh integrity. pic.twitter.com/AejCDrOKot
— Jordan Vogt-Roberts (@VogtRoberts) August 15, 2017
Are you paying attention? That’s not Shea Wigham’s character. Try actually watching the movie. pic.twitter.com/VgN9Nfhft4
— Jordan Vogt-Roberts (@VogtRoberts) August 15, 2017
There are songs in this movie like https://t.co/pnQ31bH3XW that have never been licensed in a film before. You can’t just say shit out loud. pic.twitter.com/lV11Nbj8Wb
— Jordan Vogt-Roberts (@VogtRoberts) August 15, 2017
It’s called a match cut or graphic rhyming. So yes. I could have shown it. This is a choice that has nothing to do with a graphic shot later pic.twitter.com/aFv0k5WYoG
— Jordan Vogt-Roberts (@VogtRoberts) August 15, 2017
This “cheap laugh” got no reaction prior to the election. It gets a reaction because the black mirror of the 70’s we’re living in. pic.twitter.com/LB9NFf5qna
— Jordan Vogt-Roberts (@VogtRoberts) August 15, 2017
Because it’s inaccessible by boat and thus only discovered when we launched satellites in the 70’s with cameras looking down at the earth. pic.twitter.com/VY54NIeO7F
— Jordan Vogt-Roberts (@VogtRoberts) August 15, 2017
The last one really gets me as it’s basically the entire reason the film takes place in the 70’s. This guy just says shit like trump.
— Jordan Vogt-Roberts (@VogtRoberts) August 15, 2017
Anyhow. I just wanted to point out why these videos are infuriating. They’re often just wrong or think they’re smarter than you.
— Jordan Vogt-Roberts (@VogtRoberts) August 15, 2017
I love film criticism and I love reading negative reviews if the author makes compelling and well written arguments.
— Jordan Vogt-Roberts (@VogtRoberts) August 15, 2017
To anyone who thinks this video makes me mad or hurts me. It doesn’t. I just wanted to point out a few obvious examples that are just wrong.
— Jordan Vogt-Roberts (@VogtRoberts) August 15, 2017
It just makes me sad they get so many views / contribute to the dumbing down of cinema as they syphon other people’s work for their own gain
— Jordan Vogt-Roberts (@VogtRoberts) August 15, 2017
It’s like when trump lies on camera just because he can. It’s infuriating and there are people out there who listen to him & cinema sins.
— Jordan Vogt-Roberts (@VogtRoberts) August 15, 2017
Anyhow, have a good day. Go watch a movie you’ve never seen before & actually discuss it with someone instead of focusing on reductive crap
— Jordan Vogt-Roberts (@VogtRoberts) August 15, 2017
Maybe I’ll return to this and watch their entire video if it doesn’t make me hammer a nail through my dick and point out more errors.
— Jordan Vogt-Roberts (@VogtRoberts) August 15, 2017
It just gets me that a lot of things get critique seem to have a lack of understanding of cinematic lincense / has an odd disdain of film…
— Jordan Vogt-Roberts (@VogtRoberts) August 15, 2017
I make movies because I love film. These guys are just trolling the art form we love and profiting from it while dumbing the conversation.
— Jordan Vogt-Roberts (@VogtRoberts) August 15, 2017
And here’s CinemaSins‘ good natured way of addressing the controversy:
Hey, everyone! I stepped away from the computer for a few hours to run errands and stuff. Did I miss anything?
— cinemasins (@cinemasins) August 15, 2017
THR Newsletters
Sign up for THR news straight to your inbox every day