i don't see how it's a ridiculous comparison. ok, the "he who remains doesn't appear of the blue, unlike the architect" aspect is different, but they're both the exact same kind of "a character dumps a ton of exposition on the protagonist (actually the audience)" situations. again, this episode totally reminded me of the architect scene when i was watching it.
It's kinda an LMSlike comparison. Parts of it work but at the same time it's completely missing the point.
Like yes they are similar in the sense they drop a lot of exposition. The differences are key. The first as everyone has already explained, there is a very important distinction between the entire focus of the plot being "find who is behind all this" having a reveal like this vs a thing where he sorta just comes out of nowhere. He is indeed a lot more like Oz
But the second, the one that people aren't touching on as much, is that He Who Remains has an in-story reason to want to drop that exposition on them-- he has to convince them to go along with his plan. This makes the exposition feel a lot more natural-- almost like normal dialogue to people who aren't out to pick nits about the show. The Architect in contrast doesn't attempt to convince Neo of anything-- he just randomly drops a bunch of information on him in a bad WWE heel promo for the next Pay-Per-View.
But yeah the key here is that information delivered through character dialogue isn't always a bad thing. The nuance of why they're saying this, does it make sense to say this now, is it being delivered in a way that feels more like conversation than a monologue-- these things are all important and why comparing He Who Remains to the Architect is ridiculous and just really reaching.
---
No problem! This is a cute and pop genocide of love!