Tarantino has no idea what he's talking about here really. If you turn on a random episode of CSI do you "want" the killer of that episode to kill someone? Sure but only because there would be no story or suspense if there wasn't a murder. So is that subversion on a massive level that happens week after week? He's deliberately conflating different things to seem smart. He was annoyed that he didn't like the movie at first then ended up liking this scene and had to explain it away with nonsense. Nothing profound here.
Wait, so the "shot in less than 24 hours" thing is just a lie to get people to click on the article? Or you're saying you shot a feature with 20 cast members and 40 locations in less than 24 hours? This is so confusing. Zero interest in signing up for your email list if you're just going to lie or misdirect. Good luck with your career.
It's the motivated reasoning that he's a "genius" that's allowed him to survive for so long. Go watch Kafka and King of the Hill and Bubble and Haywire and see if your genius label survives.
The answer is that the movie will be absolutely unwatchable, just like almost every other Soderbergh movie. Not that complicated.
The camera rigs on blockbusters matter very little and the visual style of blockbusters will hardly change. 99.99% of all major movies from now until the end of time will have pretty much the same style. But that isn't a bad thing in the slightest.
This comment is correct. This article is total clickbait crap.