Yes, those two reviewers need a lesson in brevity; they make some excellent points, but I would be more enamoured to them if they concisely offered their opines - otherwise, it just looks like a waffle. I think what pissed me of more was the fact that one of them stated that 'The regular movie-goer, unlike us'. Well, okay - but if you're genuinely offering a review for people who haven't seen it, the last thing you should do is to try an elevate your status because you have a Youtube channel.
The points they make can be seen anywhere you look - mostly all the issues/points they raised can easily be found in an hour on 4chan or Reddit.
If I were to gripe however (like they are, really)
One of the more irritating things about it was how they interwoven Glass losing his ability to speak. If you work backwards, you think that they needed a more dramatic motivation for his survival - hence his boy. Now, obviously Fitzgerald killed him, but had the bear not had the foresight to miss his larynx, jugular but hit his voicebox. Because one of the mitigating hole-fillers in this film is that, if he could talk, the film would be very short. If his arms and hands could work, he could have wrote...
Never let the truth get in the way of a good story should have been the tagline to this film. Whilst beautifully shot and Tom Hardy could easily have played either role (whereas LDV couldn't), it lacked something. That was that, it felt like an ensemble cast AND LDC. As oppose to a ensemble cast of actors telling a tale of a group of people intertwined by an event.
