Try getting a clue before you make an ass out of yourself. OOPS … too late. You already did.

Where do any of you get off talking about the Coens’ repertoire? You appear to have no credibility whatsoever as film critics or as writers. There isn’t a single post that offers a compelling comparative upon which to base your criticisms, nor do any evince valid arguments. They amount to trolling and hollow banter. For example, what is an example of good pacing? How might the Coens’ cinematography be judged against the work of similar cinematographers? Why, perhaps, did the Coens choose to elongate and stagnate the plot of Fargo? The filmmaking process is primarily about choice, so it is the responsibility of the critic not only to find fault with cinema but to dissect and consider the choices made by the filmmakers.

Further, movies involve many, many people. The directors play a relatively small (but important) role. The production designer, editor, cinematographer, and – of course – actors are all very involved in the process, too. What about them? Do you know who they are in these movies? What were the contexts of production for various films? What ideologies underlie the films? If the films are going for style over substance, WHY? How? What does that say about them (other than, “they suck”)?

Honestly. Reading stuff like this is almost as bad as watching that Attack! Attack! music video, or listening to The Sean Hannity show, or watching a dog shit. What’s wrong with the human race?