Unrelated to the topic of the student debt bubble, the opening paragraph left a bad taste in my mouth:
> I hated the film adaptation of The Big Short. The acting was good and it did have a surprising amount of energy for a story that centers around men in suits doing math. But I felt condescended to. Maybe director Adam McKay tested an original cut—one minus Margot Robbie—and realized a good amount of the audience couldn't follow the plot without having a sexy lady in a bathtub break the fourth wall to explain subprime mortgages and the financial crisis.
Sounds awfully pompous, like it came from r/iamverysmart. Much of the impetus behind The Big Short certainly was to break down the 2008 financial crisis to those that aren't economics/finance wonks, or for whom a narrative holds more weight than a several-hundred page non-fiction book about it.
It's not that I want journalists to coddle their audience, I just think it's a bad look to completely dump on other creators to inflate one's ego while trying to make a point.
How about this, which still includes a bit of criticism of the director (but milder):
"While the film adaptation of The Big Short had good acting and a surprising amount of energy for a story that centers around men in suits doing math, it wasn't exactly my cup of tea. Perhaps it's because I felt Adam McKay didn't trust his audience quite enough to understand the ins-and-outs of complex subprime mortgages and the financial crisis, instead falling back on gimmicks like having Margot Robbie in a bathtub break the fourth wall to explain it all.
"In some ways, America's student-debt crisis is a lot simpler than all that."
I don't know, maybe that's not any better: and maybe by criticizing the author I've become the thing I set out to...criticize. Whatever.
> I hated the film adaptation of The Big Short. The acting was good and it did have a surprising amount of energy for a story that centers around men in suits doing math. But I felt condescended to. Maybe director Adam McKay tested an original cut—one minus Margot Robbie—and realized a good amount of the audience couldn't follow the plot without having a sexy lady in a bathtub break the fourth wall to explain subprime mortgages and the financial crisis.
Sounds awfully pompous, like it came from r/iamverysmart. Much of the impetus behind The Big Short certainly was to break down the 2008 financial crisis to those that aren't economics/finance wonks, or for whom a narrative holds more weight than a several-hundred page non-fiction book about it.
It's not that I want journalists to coddle their audience, I just think it's a bad look to completely dump on other creators to inflate one's ego while trying to make a point.
How about this, which still includes a bit of criticism of the director (but milder):
"While the film adaptation of The Big Short had good acting and a surprising amount of energy for a story that centers around men in suits doing math, it wasn't exactly my cup of tea. Perhaps it's because I felt Adam McKay didn't trust his audience quite enough to understand the ins-and-outs of complex subprime mortgages and the financial crisis, instead falling back on gimmicks like having Margot Robbie in a bathtub break the fourth wall to explain it all.
"In some ways, America's student-debt crisis is a lot simpler than all that."
I don't know, maybe that's not any better: and maybe by criticizing the author I've become the thing I set out to...criticize. Whatever.