What can I say about this series? They can be fun, but most importantly, don't take them seriously. At all. The point of a long list of nitpicks in a film is... well... nitpicking. That implies they paid attention and noticed details that weren't right.
This is not the case with Cinema Sins.
Their nitpicks are more like the things you bring up with your friends discussing the movie while half-drunk, 5 hours later at 2 AM. Some things you actually remembered about the movie were actually wrong, some things seem wrong because you remembered them wrong, some things seem weird because you're drunk and you forgot how to logic.
So, like a drunken discussion, it can be entertaining. However, do not mistake it for detailed or accurate analysis in any way.
Yes, maybe a 1/10th of their "sins" are actually pointing out a poorly used trope, or a continuity error.
About half of their "sins" are basically the creators pointing out that they noticed a trope. Not that it was poorly used or there's a plot error associated with it. Just that they're proud of themselves for identifying a trope, and that earns the movie a "sin."
And the remainder of the "sins" are not failings of the movie itself, but failings of the creators' attention spans. For example, they'll add a "sin" for, say, "unexplained event." It's only unexplained because they edited a 2-second clip of the event, and deliberately ended the clip just before the explanation is shown 3 seconds later. Or the creators literally not understanding the explanation, and calling it a "sin" instead of consulting a dictionary.
In short, watch this while drunk, preferably after you've already watched the movie in question. The sins they find have no correlation to the quality of the movie itself. Don't use them as a review or rating for a movie, and consider it like a list of silly things you'd bring up informally with friends if you half-remembered the movie. Then you might have fun with it.
If you want to know why it's like this, the reason is simple: Youtube monetization. Their first few videos, which were made for fun, are decent and last maybe 30 seconds. But Youtube demands a minimum video length for monetization. It's not that movies have been getting worse - Hollywood is still Hollywood. So they've been stretching their videos longer and longer, to 15-20 minutes, all while still having only 30 seconds worth of legitimate content. Even worse, they want to "sin" movies that are popular (that is, blockbusters - generally higher quality productions) which means they often have even less legitimate material to work with.
About as accurate as a drunken discussion, and as entertaining as one
What can I say about this series? They can be fun, but most importantly, don't take them seriously. At all. The point of a long list of nitpicks in a film is... well... nitpicking. That implies they paid attention and noticed details that weren't right.
This is not the case with Cinema Sins.
Their nitpicks are more like the things you bring up with your friends discussing the movie while half-drunk, 5 hours later at 2 AM. Some things you actually remembered about the movie were actually wrong, some things seem wrong because you remembered them wrong, some things seem weird because you're drunk and you forgot how to logic.
So, like a drunken discussion, it can be entertaining. However, do not mistake it for detailed or accurate analysis in any way.
Yes, maybe a 1/10th of their "sins" are actually pointing out a poorly used trope, or a continuity error.
About half of their "sins" are basically the creators pointing out that they noticed a trope. Not that it was poorly used or there's a plot error associated with it. Just that they're proud of themselves for identifying a trope, and that earns the movie a "sin."
And the remainder of the "sins" are not failings of the movie itself, but failings of the creators' attention spans. For example, they'll add a "sin" for, say, "unexplained event." It's only unexplained because they edited a 2-second clip of the event, and deliberately ended the clip just before the explanation is shown 3 seconds later. Or the creators literally not understanding the explanation, and calling it a "sin" instead of consulting a dictionary.
In short, watch this while drunk, preferably after you've already watched the movie in question. The sins they find have no correlation to the quality of the movie itself. Don't use them as a review or rating for a movie, and consider it like a list of silly things you'd bring up informally with friends if you half-remembered the movie. Then you might have fun with it.
If you want to know why it's like this, the reason is simple: Youtube monetization. Their first few videos, which were made for fun, are decent and last maybe 30 seconds. But Youtube demands a minimum video length for monetization. It's not that movies have been getting worse - Hollywood is still Hollywood. So they've been stretching their videos longer and longer, to 15-20 minutes, all while still having only 30 seconds worth of legitimate content. Even worse, they want to "sin" movies that are popular (that is, blockbusters - generally higher quality productions) which means they often have even less legitimate material to work with.