This movie's FAQ section is awesome!

Late post but thanks for the heads up and I quite agree, a real hoot. Thanks nostalgiste, that is excellent and a lot of fun.

I disagree completely. It sounds more like an overblown review, loaded with adjectives that are opinions of the writer (commentary on the cheapness of the balloon props, as one glaring example of many which could be made.) Some of the observations are so obvious, they only seem included as an excuse to point out more opinions.

Sentences being with "Well, ...", "Hey, ...", and other such earmarks of bad form. One example is an Editor note that was clearly added by the writer himself as part of his jovial flow. Even the grammar has issues (ie, "You mean, like, it don't make sense?") It read to my eyes like a catalog of viewpoints were created by the writer, then rearranged into Q&A form so that it could be inserted into an FAQ. Further, there are even pointless self-referential nameschecks (your FAQmeister), cringe-worthy at best.

The opening scene a non sequitur? It was a perfectly reasonable setup that lets the audience know beautiful girls are destroying themselves seemingly for no reason. I found the sequence unique and creative, but it never came off as enigmatic.

The section on HypnoMagic strays off into explanations of William Castle techniques which really have nothing to do with "The Hypnotic Eye" outside of the fact that each film uses gimmicks. That is followed by conjecture attempting to explain the "lack of clarity" of HypnoMagic. Conjecture? In an FAQ?!? The paragraph that follows that theory accepts it was true rather than assumption. Overall, entirely too much verbiage in a section that should be lean.

It's hard to image that any of these Frequently Asked Questions were ever asked by anyone. And it's all presented in an attempt to appear witty and snappy, never feeling like an FAQ at all, just a grandstand. A small amount of the FAQ page would have been sufficient, but it's elongated and reads like an entry from a film buff's blog, a forum where it would be better suited.

I'm not necessarily criticizing the body of work that is in the FAQ section at this writing, just that in my opinion, it does not belong in that section. It may very well be entertaining to some people, but I feel that the entire FAQ section for this film was hijacked and was used to showboat an excessive review to an unsuspecting FAQ audience.

Actually it sucks.

That's not a FAQ, it's some user writing a puff piece designed to get people thinking how clever they are.

They're not.

-------------------------
"It's better not to know so much about what things mean." David Lynch

I agree with the two responses above mine. It's annoying. And in some cases inaccurate.