I'm doing these as shorter and more casually than what I used to to do for Bond. The first movie:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6etrbZ7lQd0

So all these videos are all you right? I'm just curious since looking back through your best movies of the 2000's you list The Dark Knight as one of your top 10. Did you change your mind over time? And do you still feel strongly about Memento?

Yeah, I was a big fan at that time. Did a 180.

I enjoyed your Dark Knight review and left some comments(my Youtube username is darkrage6), i'm surprised at how many assholes there were on there insulting you.

P.S. I'd also like to see you review Batman Begins and Inception.

Cool. Yeah I have a habit of changing my opinions of movies over time. When I was 15, Fight Club was my favorite movie of all time. I watched it recently, and though I still find it impeccably made, thematically it was disappointing. The anger and nihilistic energy which felt so new and edgy at the time now feels (I guess appropriately) rather immature to me. And it was much more obvious how awkwardly the moral back-flipping in the final third of the film fits with everything else that had preceded it.

I guess I'm also starting to feel like that with Nolan too. Although I think much more highly of him than you do, there's always been something about him that I could never quite work out. And I think I may be starting to figured it out. You see, I feel that every one of Nolan's films (excluding Memento, and maybe Following which I haven't seen) are weaker upon subsequent viewings. On my first viewings of his Batman trilogy and Inception, I thought they were masterpieces. Deep, complex, masterfully imagined films. But having watched Inception again recently, frankly I felt kind of bored. And I realized that the reason was because there was nothing really new to take in, no hidden thematic depth or intricacies to the composition that I hadn't noticed before. I had absorbed almost everything the film had to offer upon the first viewing. And having heard some other criticisms of Nolan's style, it's often pointed out that his shots are flatly composed, with little interaction between people in the same shot, and his themes are often explicitly stated by the characters, as opposed to being presented purely through their actions and motivations. So whilst his ideas may be interesting and individual shots may look impressive, there's not much depth to the execution, which is why I've found repeat viewings underwhelming. But I still remember how awed I was the first time I saw TDK and Inception, and those were genuine, well earned reactions from me (I don't tend to get too hyped up over things), so I still don't really know how I stand with Nolan.

Anyways, sorry for waffling. Having watched your Resident Evil video, it has made me curious to check the series out. I will say you've improved your speaking voices a lot from some of the earlier videos, though maybe a little more variation in your tone may make them more entertaining to listen too (although certainly not bad by any means, you almost start to sound a little monotonous). And though you pointed out that it was your intention to make these videos shorter, I'd love to hear a little more detail about why you love B-movies and why you feel they're important. But overall I found your videos solid, and much better than a lot of other similar style clips on youtube.

I've heard at least two dozen people say something to this effect. I was always bored by Inception, but I really loved The Dark Knight when it came out, it took me the better part of a year to start reconsidering things. And I have to admit, that long term let down is probably a huge part of why I single his films out to deride so much. But I do know I wasn't the only one who went through a downward spiral in regards to opinion on that movie.

Part of the issue with subsequent viewings is just the simple problem of how long those movies are. 2.5 hours is a lot to sit through, and it should be reserved for stories with more epic scope. Nolan's films don't always feel as though he's even trying for an epic scope; I think he just wants to entertain for 2.5 hours. His films always have an immediate urgency about them, they always seem to exist in the moment. It may give some the impression that his movies are free of exposition, but on a scene by scene basis that just isn't the case. Still, I think it's that feeling that makes them gripping the first time; 2.5 hours of urgency that you've never seen before. But urgency can only go so far, and it finally becomes tedious and out of place. The more you watch The Dark Knight, the more it seems like mountains are being made out of molehills. It's like each scene tries to be more dramatic than the previous one; that's a tough wavelength for a viewer to stay on, especially after you've already seen it. That was also one of the problems with Avatar: too many dramatic scenes to the point where the drama was completely forced. There isn't enough room in any movie for that many "epic" moments. Destruction of the tree, the final battle, it just got very repetitive. And Avengers...well, every scene was just too damn excited about all the superheroes onscreen. It's okay to have one scene like that, but eventually the hype should wear off and a story with plot beats should sprout up somewhere. The entire film can be summarized by the pump music of the opening minute; might as well just shut the movie off right after, 'cause it's just more of the same.

Basically, I think the problem is this: The Dark Knight doesn't have anything to offer in its latter 90 minutes that we didn't already see in the first hour. With Inception, it's the first 10 minutes; I mean think about it, isn't the main heist of the movie just a longer version of the first 10 minutes?