 |  |
Here we have one movie I had no clue about, but now I need to see, and another movie that I was looking forward to seeing, but now I'm not so sure anymore. The reviews for these two movies, 12 Years a Slave and Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2, were good at hooking the reader on their respective's films' premises. The summaries were short, sweet and concise, and as a plus they didn't spoil the movie, which is something I’m wary of when I’m reading a film review.
The reviewer of 12 Years a Slave, Paul MacInnes, was impressed by the performances of Paul Giomatti, Michael Fassbender and Benedict Cumberbatch. He compares this Toronto film festival movie with last year’s Oscar-nominated blockbuster of a similar theme, Django Unchained. I think it’s a smart move to compare the Quentin Tarantino directed film with this one because it gives the reader something to refer back to, especially considering the success the Tarantino film garnered last Christmas. I can’t say whether or not I agree with the reviewer because I haven’t seen the film, but my interest has been piqued, and I'm curious to see if the film will live up to its glowing review.
On the other hand, the review of Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2 wasn't as glowing. From what I can take from Tom Russo's review, he's basically calling the movie a rehash of concepts found in other successful animated films like The Croods, The Lorax and Wreck-It Ralph. He also points out that there's no reason for this sequel, since for him there was no reason for the characters to go to that island in the first place; in other words, he's saying this movie was unnecessary. I'm not sure if I believe him, since there are times critics destroy movies in their reviews and they turn out to be classics or cult-favorites. I'm not saying this is a Citizen Kane or a Ghostbusters, but we can't take every word the reviewers say to heart. I'll judge the movie when I see it, but I'm not going to go see it in theaters; I'll just wait for it to be on Netflix, no rush.
My reviews are similar to these two, however my Les Misérables review has more information in it than a regular spectator would get out of watching the movie one time. I think I could have delved into talking more about the actor's specific performances instead of talking about them as an ensemble. My Chronicle review was shorter than the first one, but it's probably because I didn't like it, so I didn't have too much to say.
The reviewer of 12 Years a Slave, Paul MacInnes, was impressed by the performances of Paul Giomatti, Michael Fassbender and Benedict Cumberbatch. He compares this Toronto film festival movie with last year’s Oscar-nominated blockbuster of a similar theme, Django Unchained. I think it’s a smart move to compare the Quentin Tarantino directed film with this one because it gives the reader something to refer back to, especially considering the success the Tarantino film garnered last Christmas. I can’t say whether or not I agree with the reviewer because I haven’t seen the film, but my interest has been piqued, and I'm curious to see if the film will live up to its glowing review.
On the other hand, the review of Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2 wasn't as glowing. From what I can take from Tom Russo's review, he's basically calling the movie a rehash of concepts found in other successful animated films like The Croods, The Lorax and Wreck-It Ralph. He also points out that there's no reason for this sequel, since for him there was no reason for the characters to go to that island in the first place; in other words, he's saying this movie was unnecessary. I'm not sure if I believe him, since there are times critics destroy movies in their reviews and they turn out to be classics or cult-favorites. I'm not saying this is a Citizen Kane or a Ghostbusters, but we can't take every word the reviewers say to heart. I'll judge the movie when I see it, but I'm not going to go see it in theaters; I'll just wait for it to be on Netflix, no rush.
My reviews are similar to these two, however my Les Misérables review has more information in it than a regular spectator would get out of watching the movie one time. I think I could have delved into talking more about the actor's specific performances instead of talking about them as an ensemble. My Chronicle review was shorter than the first one, but it's probably because I didn't like it, so I didn't have too much to say.
RSS Feed