Pinned Tweet
If you want to learn to analyze movie narratives and themes, then I can help.
I've deconstructed nearly 1,000 films, including some of the most confusing and mysterious around, like Mulholland Drive, 2001: a Space Odyssey, Primer, Donnie Darko, Under the Skin, Synecdoche, New York.
Thousands of people read my work every day, over 10 million in the lifetime of my site.
When you analyze that many movies, two things happen. You start to recognize patterns and you refine your process. I call my process the Frameshift Method.
And for the first time, I'm sharing it. The course takes around 30-60 minutes and you can start applying what you learn right away.
And, yeah, this is legitimately how I work through each movie I watch. Sometimes it's more casual, because how much analytical thought do I need to give to Cocaine Bear? But for a film like Tar or Phantom Thread or The Wailing, yeah, I go through each of these steps.
In fact, part of the course includes me analyzing The Graduate for the first time. So you get to see in "real time" how I work through a film and apply Frameshift to arrive at a thematic conclusion about the film that I feel comfortable with and strongly about.
Anyway, link below!
She stops at level 2 but the real movie is level 3, where it’s about the bias that all media has when trying to tell someone’s story, and how Fielder can’t remove his feelings and just be “accurate”. That’s as true for him as it is about every other journalist, author, etc.
That doesn’t mean the media is wrong or bad, but it’s about the awareness that both creators and the audience need to have about these works. People shouldn’t take The Dropout at face value, they shouldn’t think a glowing interview shows the real Holmes, just like they shouldn’t think a critical piece shows the real Holmes. Bad Blood tells us details about her and Theranos and is important, but it’s still inherently limited, as all work is.
That’s the level the movie is on.
And I’m not saying anyone has to love the movie. Or if they don’t understand that, they’re wrong for disliking the movie. You can not get that and dislike it. You can get it and dislike it. No one has to like any movie. If it’s not your cup of tea, it’s not your cup of tea.
It’s just funny when someone tries to say they get it but still don’t.
Chris Lambert retweeted
ik it's pretty basic but probably smth like this?
Replying to @shadowknightdk
Genuinely how else are you supposed to shoot a scene of 20 different important characters in one room. Like be for real
Chris Lambert retweeted
Hoyte van Hoytema did a masterclass today on the Universal backlot. He broke down all the new tech they’ve developed over the years that ultimately helped make THE ODYSSEY possible.
Bespoke camera systems, rigs, lights, and lenses.
I’ll have a video soon. Amazing stuff.
I’ve been critical of Clayface but that’s not a plot hole. At worst, it’s a logic gap, in the sense that it’s explainable but the movie doesn’t tell us. Even then, you can make basic assumptions about how a mobster gets access when he wants access
Clayface plot hole that bugged me: how did those gangsters get into Matt Hagen’s fancy multimillion-dollar apartment so easily? Powerful mob boss or not, did this famous actor have no security at all? #Clayface #MattHagen #DCU
Every Clayface plot question, answered filmcolossus.com/clayface-20…
Matt Hagen: “I got message for Mr Szabo. I’m coming after all of you, and hell’s coming with me.”
::kills the guy who was going to deliver the message::
Who was that dialogue for?
Every plot question answered filmcolossus.com/clayface-20…
Every Clayface plot question answered
filmcolossus.com/clayface-20…
I made the mistake of tweeting about Clayface too much and now the algorithm is showing me all the insane takes from the DC stans
Chris Lambert retweeted
Clayface was Matt Reeves' idea. He and Mike Flanagan started developing it right after The Batman as a Rogues' Gallery origin story — Reeves' own words, in the official press kit. Then Gunn and Safran took over DC Studios, heard the pitch, and decided it belonged in the DCU instead. Gunn's public reason: Clayface doesn't fit Reeves' grounded Crime Saga.
Convenient. Meanwhile, for months, every time someone asked about Batman 2's script, Gunn's answer was the same loop "Matt's slow, let him take his time, get off his nuts, the script isn't ready." Then in June 2025, Reeves posted a photo of the finished script cover page with Mattson Tomlin. Gunn read it on a plane and called it great. So the script was done. The delay wasn't Reeves.
Now flash forward to October 2026. Reeves steps away from filming Batman 2 for a family matter. Soderbergh steps in to finish. Gunn immediately posts that Reeves is still the director and always will be, which is exactly what you'd say if you were trying to kill the Snyder comparison before it starts. Same studio, same playbook, different decade. The pattern isn't subtle. Gunn controls the narrative, Reeves does the work, and every time Reeves proves himself, the story gets rewritten so the credit lands elsewhere.
@SlavsFreeTalk can frame it however he wants, but the receipts from 2025 to 2026 tell a different story
Because the false accusations weren’t what ruined his life. It was just in addition to everything else. What ruined his life was the disfigurement and his manager stealing all of his money.
Clayface review:
I left the theater and walked up to a car that looked exactly like mine and opened the door and there was an older man inside who yelled “Hey!”
I yelled back, “I’m so sorry!” Then explained, “I thought this was my car.” And he said, “There’s one that looks just like this over there.” Literally two spots over. That was mine. Both black SUVs with silver trim.
I’m in Texas, so good thing it was broad daylight.
Anyway, thought that was funny, given the whole lookalike thing.
Actual Clayface review:
Plenty of people will just enjoy the performances and generic beats that Clayface has to offer. It's inoffensive in that way. Strong cast, safe writing. If you're happy with that, Clayface will please you.
Zooming in a little more...
Clayface has a similar structure to The Crow but lacks all the things that make The Crow interesting and cool. Everything felt weightless to me. Part of that is because most of the characters are generic tropes without any real opportunity to distinguish themselves. The rest of it is because the stakes are so hollow.
For example, there's that scene from the trailer where Matt's on an airplane and his eye lids start to seal shut. He goes to the lavatory and takes out a pair of scissors and starts trying to cut the excess skin. EXCEPT, OH NO, THERE'S REAL BAD TURBULENCE!!!! THE SCISSORS ARE NEAR HIS EYE AND THERE'S TURBULENCE!!!!!! OOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!
In wrestling, there's a term called "cheap heat" where a heel can get a crowd to boo by saying some super obvious thing. Like if you're in Boston and you say "The Red Sox suck." The crowd will react. You get boos. But it's considered low effort, lazy.
The turbulence scene is the writing equivalent of cheap heat. Yeah, the turbulence "increases the stakes" but like...it doesn't matter. With the turbulence or without, the result is the same. It's only there to give viewers a momentary sense of stress.
But here's what makes it extra silly. The film just established a few minutes before this that Matt is essentially invincible due to these nanobots. Whatever damage he incurs, the nanobots heal. He cuts way down his face and heals almost instantly.
That means there are literally no stakes when his eye lids start to close. Which makes the scissors and turbulence thing all the more ridiculous because if he had hit his eyeball, it would have been fine* (for those who have seen the movie and are starting to write a comment, check the top comment, where I address exactly what you're going to say).
It feels like there's almost a meta-side to Clayface because it feels like it's sometimes imitating other movies. Like there's a quick shot where the camera pans past a factory with a flaming chimney that makes you think of the opening shot from Blade Runner. Was it a nod to Blade Runner or not? There's a red bathroom, like in The Shining. But is it a nod to The Shining or not? At times, it makes you think of The Substance, but there's no way it's referencing The Substance, is there? And then The Crow. And the whole thing feels like it's recycling aspects of The Penguin, with the whole villain prologue that involves the mob and the protagonist is an anti-hero but also too villainous to be an anti-hero so is just kind of a nascent version of their full villain self. Except The Penguin you have stakes and developed characters. Where Clayface is an amalgamation of tropes.
Oh, Max Minghella doing a Columbo bit the entire time lol.
If that meta-level was there, that's cool. But it also didn't feel coherent enough for me to be like, "The film was doing this really cool thing!"
On its own, Clayface is just fine. As the third film in James Gunn's DCU, it's puzzling.
Actual Clayface review:
Plenty of people will just enjoy the performances and generic beats that Clayface has to offer. It's inoffensive in that way. Strong cast, safe writing. If you're happy with that, Clayface will please you.
Zooming in a little more...
Clayface has a similar structure to The Crow but lacks all the things that make The Crow interesting and cool. Everything felt weightless to me. Part of that is because most of the characters are generic tropes without any real opportunity to distinguish themselves. The rest of it is because the stakes are so hollow.
For example, there's that scene from the trailer where Matt's on an airplane and his eye lids start to seal shut. He goes to the lavatory and takes out a pair of scissors and starts trying to cut the excess skin. EXCEPT, OH NO, THERE'S REAL BAD TURBULENCE!!!! THE SCISSORS ARE NEAR HIS EYE AND THERE'S TURBULENCE!!!!!! OOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!
In wrestling, there's a term called "cheap heat" where a heel can get a crowd to boo by saying some super obvious thing. Like if you're in Boston and you say "The Red Sox suck." The crowd will react. You get boos. But it's considered low effort, lazy.
The turbulence scene is the writing equivalent of cheap heat. Yeah, the turbulence "increases the stakes" but like...it doesn't matter. With the turbulence or without, the result is the same. It's only there to give viewers a momentary sense of stress.
But here's what makes it extra silly. The film just established a few minutes before this that Matt is essentially invincible due to these nanobots. Whatever damage he incurs, the nanobots heal. He cuts way down his face and heals almost instantly.
That means there are literally no stakes when his eye lids start to close. Which makes the scissors and turbulence thing all the more ridiculous because if he had hit his eyeball, it would have been fine* (for those who have seen the movie and are starting to write a comment, check the top comment, where I address exactly what you're going to say).
It feels like there's almost a meta-side to Clayface because it feels like it's sometimes imitating other movies. Like there's a quick shot where the camera pans past a factory with a flaming chimney that makes you think of the opening shot from Blade Runner. Was it a nod to Blade Runner or not? There's a red bathroom, like in The Shining. But is it a nod to The Shining or not? At times, it makes you think of The Substance, but there's no way it's referencing The Substance, is there? And then The Crow. And the whole thing feels like it's recycling aspects of The Penguin, with the whole villain prologue that involves the mob and the protagonist is an anti-hero but also too villainous to be an anti-hero so is just kind of a nascent version of their full villain self. Except The Penguin you have stakes and developed characters. Where Clayface is an amalgamation of tropes.
Oh, Max Minghella doing a Columbo bit the entire time lol.
If that meta-level was there, that's cool. But it also didn't feel coherent enough for me to be like, "The film was doing this really cool thing!"
On its own, Clayface is just fine. As the third film in James Gunn's DCU, it's puzzling.
Clayface review:
I left the theater and walked up to a car that looked exactly like mine and opened the door and there was an older man inside who yelled “Hey!”
I yelled back, “I’m so sorry!” Then explained, “I thought this was my car.” And he said, “There’s one that looks just like this over there.” Literally two spots over. That was mine. Both black SUVs with silver trim.
I’m in Texas, so good thing it was broad daylight.
Anyway, thought that was funny, given the whole lookalike thing.
SPOILERS
For the people who want to pushback on the airplane turbulence scene:
Yes, I know his healing "wasn't working". But he didn't know that at the time. And the audience also didn't know that. It's not until the next scene when he shows up at Caitlyn's place with the skin still around his eyes that he says he's not healing. And then she helps him and he immediately heals. So even if he had stabbed himself in the eye and the turbulence caused actual damage, it would have been fine 10 seconds later when Caitlyn calmed him down. As soon as you introduce "he heals all damage" the stakes go out the window, whether he heals immediately or later.
I guess I need to explain that there’s a difference between the stakes for the character and the stakes for the audience.
Saying “it would still hurt for him” has nothing to do with what I’m talking about. I wasn’t critiquing his actions but the film trying to make the audience worry about him when it just showed us that he’ll recover quickly and easily.
Obviously he still wants to be cautious. I get that. But the audience isn’t as concerned about his long term eye health.
One of these was the old guy’s car, the other is my car
Clayface review:
I left the theater and walked up to a car that looked exactly like mine and opened the door and there was an older man inside who yelled “Hey!”
I yelled back, “I’m so sorry!” Then explained, “I thought this was my car.” And he said, “There’s one that looks just like this over there.” Literally two spots over. That was mine. Both black SUVs with silver trim.
I’m in Texas, so good thing it was broad daylight.
Anyway, thought that was funny, given the whole lookalike thing.
Chris Lambert retweeted
Taking a break from retweeting sexy squid art to let you know that the Whalefall commentary by Pulitzer prize winning Daniel Kraus, two time Oscar winning GOAT Pietro Scalia and I dont know, like, WGA nominee me is now at theaterears.com/.



























