Posted by sean at threshold6n.jpmorgan.com on May 23, 2002 at 14:40:44:
In Reply to: Worst Audio Commentery Ever? posted by brodiebruce_405 on May 23, 2002 at 14:20:43:
I really loved this movie both times I saw it, but watching the commentary was painful. [Except one feature I liked, which was Nancy Wilson accompanying the commentary with music, which was very very pleasant.]
Seriously, though, at different points, he's interrupted by his kids, his dog, and the phone ringing. And it's not like they're kept on the commentary for a reason, just (I suppose) to give us a sense of what else is going on. Those aren't the problem with the commentary, which was basically him justifying how good the movie really is by saying all the things that each scene is trying to do. The problem is, either the scene works or it doesn't, but all the explaining of how it fits in and what it's there for doesn't matter ... if the movie works for you, you'll get that, and if it doesn't -- or if the individual scene doesn't work -- then all the explaining in the world won't make it so. It was like any of a thousand memories I have of a film student trying to justify all the things they did in their movie, right after the class has watched in and not liked it ... but it's packaged as a commentary on a DVD which, assumably, means that the person listening to it *does* like the film quite a bit and *does*, therefore, 'get' at least the majority of it.