I think you unintentionally won this thread.
Steve Buscemi (middle aged) portraying a teenager, at 29 seconds:
I tried, in vain, to wiggle “sharp knees” into this post, but it is not a description (insult?) with which I am familiar…
Old 4chan meme.
I looked up that same link earlier, this was my first time coming across this meme. That said, this one from your link is a real banger:
I’ll never forget watching 1935’s Mutiny on the Bounty for the first time and seeing a 30-year-old (Franchot Tone) portraying a 15-year-old. And it wasn’t just that I knew the character was only 15, it was that they went out of their way to introduce him just before joining the Navy as a bubbly child in his mother’s home, being introduced to another character (and, by extension, the audience). I just about turned it off right then (and still wish I had—an utterly awful adaptation).
I guess this is the place to drop this.
Why the fuck would any poster think they have something useful to contribute about a film they have never seen? The threadshitting in the “You Can See Everything” thread is about 50% of the thread and the offenders are numerous.
To see or not to see, that is the question… not being asked by those (specifically, one) poster(s).
Yeah if the OP had wanted only people who had seen it to comment they would have entitled it “You Have Seen Everything”, since being able to see something doesn’t necessarily mean that you will 
Your moviegoers were so busy thinking about whether or not they could see everything that they didn’t stop to think about whether or not they should see everything.
Ehhh, my posts in the thread were about whether I want to go out of my way to see it in the theater. I don’t see why asking what the attraction is would be a threadshit. I like documentaries, especially Errol Morris’ movies. The attraction of this film escapes me, and the descriptions provided by the reviews I had read didn’t seem to explain it at all.
Maybe it’ll become clear to me when I see it at home, but even the more detailed descriptions provided in that thread don’t convince me I need to set aside time and drive to a theater to see it. Your mileage obviously varies.
Same. It was really unclear to me why anyone would want to see it, and i found the thread very helpful in explaining that.
Although now that I’ve seen it, i posted about that, too.
But… Some of the posts in the thread went beyond “should i see it?” and refused to read the answers to those questions.
Yeah, my anticipated reaction is about what yours is in that thread. Thanks for taking the bullet.
It is a longstanding tradition discussed some here:
It is of course very fair and necessary to decide if something is likely to be something you’d appreciate/enjoy or not before you see it. I haven’t read the You Can See Everything thread yet precisely because my wife and I plan on seeing it this weekend and I have heard enough to know that it’s better to go in not knowing too much ahead of time. And we heard enough to know we want to see it. But posters shitting on movies sight unseen, usually sure that their opinion is more valid than those who have actually seen it, is not uncommon here.
If you have firm plans to see it, you are right to avoid the thread. I think the film would have been better going into it cold. But if you don’t have plans to see it, and if you aren’t the sort of person who sees a lot of movies, i think, “why do you want spoilers, just see it” is a condescending and rude reply to someone saying, “i have no idea what this film is, please tell me why i should see it.” And i think that’s an especially likely question about this film, because the official description doesn’t answer that question at all.
FWIW, I thought your questions (and @scabpicker’s) in the thread were fine. You were genuinely asking what happens, what’s the appeal, is it just about her being guilty or not, etc. All legit discussion for someone who hasn’t seen it!
It crosses into more threadshit territory when people who haven’t seen it start arguing why it’s a bad movie based on their own misconceptions, or continue to ask “but why” while ignoring all the posts that addressed exactly that. You guys weren’t doing that. Some people were.
I wasn’t really bothered FWIW. What bothered me was worry about coming off like I’m arguing with people that they should see the film. Because that’s not really my jam. But I don’t want people to have misconceptions about it either.
It’s just @puzzlegal you were the first one who’s actually seen it to give it mixed reviews… And that’s a sort of balance that is good. So I’m hoping at least some people were convinced to see it and maybe don’t think it’s the best thing ever but still have something to contribute.
I do think it’s one of the best films I’ve ever seen, but I’ve also noticed I have seen nothing but rave reviews, which probably sets it up for failure by people unimpressed by the hype or less inclined to like it.
The only criticism that really bothered me (not shown in that thread) is by people who really didn’t seem to understand the point, like the guy in my theater who complained it wasn’t that funny, or the person on YouTube who thought Fielder was trying to make Holmes sympathetic. I guess any take is valid but it makes me twitchy.
This article might interest you. Sadly, he hasn’t seen the film yet, but the article is entertaining. I haven’t seen Morris’ documentaries but he sounds fun.
(Drive-by)
There’s a funny clip I saw of Steve Buscemi where he talks about coming to terms with his unconventional looks. Paraphrased:
"Yeah, so I was reading the script, and it said the guy I was playing was funny looking. I came to the director and said “hey, so how are we going to do this? I could have a weird mustache or something, you know maybe a prosthetic…”
“No, I think we’re good.”
He seemed to have a good sense of humor about it.
A few Halloweens ago, there were photos circulating of Buscemi handing out Halloween candy at his home in Brooklyn while dressed as the “How do you do, fellow kids?” guy.
Heheh, thanks. That was a great article. If you get a chance to see his documentary The Thin Blue Line, I highly recommend it.
I bet that was for Fargo. The two prostitutes that Madge interviews called him “funny looking” when asked to describe him.
Yes I think it was probably a YouTube video about Fargo. I like to watch videos about how movies are made.