Well, personally I must admit that there is something interesting about what he does.
It's a funny thing because I tend to make a clear distinction about what I find interesting and what I like. And both often don't agree.
Style wise, I too tend to find the images overly constructed and overly worked.
On the other hand I find the way he works to be interesting on many levels. First is that he actually is there working the camera for all this time and seems to have a pretty small crew. Then I tend to like the idea of splitting time in very clear-cut segments instead of using a continuum like a long exposure does.
For one, just the fact that he actually touches the camera gives me a better feeling of him as a photographer as opposed to Gregory Crewdson who says he's a photographer but never touches the camera and comes down with a crew of hundreds to make his images. For me, the later tends to dilute talent in a way.
There are two things I would really love to see though.
First, I would love to see how Wilkes would handle the same technique using an analog medium. I know that a good part of what he does could be done either in the darkroom or in camera with multiple exposures and masking... though not with the same number of images.
Second, I'd really love to get a chance to see one of his PSD files just to see how the layers are cut and constructed...
Oh yeah, the graphic he used to illustrate his view of time is actually the graphical representation of what a wormhole would actually do... and it has nothing to do with time in itself but more with the actual fabric of space and a way to circumvent the problems posed by general relativity...
