Well in fairness, he concluded the movie was okay if you pay next to nothing for it. He was saying the movie was weird but also impressive, which is pretty hard to miss when he uses those words to describe the movie like 3 times apiece (and a pretty glaring flaw). I'm not sure where you draw the comparison to British media from unless you're saying British news writers contradict themselves a lot, which I'm sure they do, but I tend not to notice because any time I read the shit, not being British myself, I'm too preoccupied seething at the blatant sensationalism, classism, and what often times reads to me like the author was trying harder to sound clever than actually be smart.
Well in fairness, he concluded the movie was okay if you pay next to nothing for it. He was saying the movie was weird but also impressive, which is pretty hard to miss when he uses those words to describe the movie like 3 times apiece (and a pretty glaring flaw). I'm not sure where you draw the comparison to British media from unless you're saying British news writers contradict themselves a lot, which I'm sure they do, but I tend not to notice because any time I read the shit, not being British myself, I'm too preoccupied seething at the blatant sensationalism, classism, and what often times reads to me like the author was trying harder to sound clever than actually be smart.