You are responding in a discussion about a lengthy article about the unexpected deepness of a movie, written by a professional author. Your response is that the

You are responding in a discussion about a lengthy article about the unexpected deepness of a movie, written by a professional author. Your response is that the movie is "bland, very shallow" etc, without evidence, and without discussing or refuting any of the points of the article. I wonder if: 1. You simply didn't read the article. Your decision to comment in a discussion about this article without even reading it suggests that you might be someone who finds things boring and shallow because you simply don't engage with the material deeply (in this case not at all). So the problem might be you. 2. You did read the article fully, but yet don't have any counter points, or couldn't be bothered to share them. The article provides significant and convincing arguments that the movie is rich, deep and funny, yet you have no rebuttals. It may be that things seem shallow to you simply because you are incapable of deep thought. So the problem might be you. 3. You are just a troll. 4. Some other reason.