On October 23rd, 2014, we updated our
By continuing to use LinkedIn’s SlideShare service, you agree to the revised terms, so please take a few minutes to review them.
The title is key to the review, it is The main photo, this is key to selling theobvious for every review for the film review to the reader. itself. This isthe small tagline The closer which look gives gives the some audienceinference a few to the small film pointers to what may Key happen in information the film.is key for theunderstandin The verdict is g of the film key for the review as this These are the snippets The article is obviously is what from the review which key for the review determines the magazine would like why peopleI have a transcribed version of the to highlight for the want to seereview on the next two slides. reader. the film
Fuck You You Fucking Fucker." The T-shirt (briefly) worn by Rooney Mara’s Lisbeth Salander in David Fincher’sadaptation of Stieg Larsson’s bestselling novel speaks volumes. First of all, it addresses the nay-sayers who thoughtNiels Arden Oplev’s 2009 original should be left alone — not because it was any kind of cinematic masterpiece, butbecause the previously unknown Noomi Rapace’s centrepiece performance was deemed definitive. But it also deftlyrepresents The Social Network director’s personality. While aspects of the media disparaged his awards-seasonchances against The King’s Speech last year, Fincher was already disengaged from the beauty contest and hard atwork on this excellent, often pitch-dark but otherwise almost note-perfect thriller.It was, it must be said, a weird thing to want to do: remake a European hit so soon after its original release. ButFincher’s effort is perhaps the film Larsson’s book deserved all along; it may largely be faithful to the main story, butSteven Zaillian’s economic, witty script compacts and tidies up the minor details that make the difference between avery good literary adaptation and a gripping cinematic thriller. And while Blomkvist’s labyrinthine travails reappear inthe last half hour, Fincher’s film sensibly concentrates on the whodunnit element — most smartly of all, dispensingwith the strange quirk of Swedish justice that allowed Blomkvist to go to jail at the very end of the original.Instead, Blomkvist is a ruined man, and Craig is the perfect foil to the eventual, explosive arrival of The Girl. Eventhough everyone else seems to have a Swedish accent, however slight, Craig plays it with his own, but surprisingly theeffect doesn’t jar. Bleary-eyed, stubbled and often seen in disturbingly unfashionable winceyette pyjama bottoms,Blomkvist is a low-key, effective everyman in what could easily be an overplayed, hokey story. The wonderfulChristopher Plummer — excellent in Mike Mills’ Beginners too, and looking at an Oscar nomination either way — isespecially delicious in this regard, inviting the writer into a story that involves “thieves, misers, bullies — the mostdetestable collection of people you will ever meet”. Then he adds the clincher: “My family.”The Girl herself takes her time, and Lisbeth’s story takes a good while to bed down as Blomkvist gets to grips with thedysfunctional Vangers. And without wishing to get too caught up in comparisons with the other movie, Mara’sperformance completely holds its own here. Where Rapace was aloof and flinty, Mara is more childlike and mercurial.Her actual age (withheld, for good reason, for most of the film’s running
time) is hard to fathom. When she flips her hoodie she could be a 14 year-old boy; when being raped(rather graphically) by her legal guardianshe could be any underage girl. But when she’s in control — which is much more satisfyingly shownhere, given the age gap between herself and Blomkvist — she is most definitely a woman.The main thing, however, is perhaps how much Fincher has grown into the role of auteur, withoutapparently trying or even wanting to. While it appears to be another one of Fincher’s five-fingerexercises — like Panic Room or The Game — this is a film that could prove to be a key work when thebig study book is written. The oily, exhilarating credit sequence suggests a knowing, Fight Club-stylesubversion of Craig’s 007 persona; the awkward parental bond between Blomkvist and his daughterrecalls the wistful poetry of Benjamin Button; Vanger’s need for closure echoes that of RobertGraysmith in Zodiac; the film’s casual, slyly funny cyberpunk heroism makes a great counterpoint to thedry, sceptical satire of The Social Network, and the whole film is suffused with the harsh brutality ofSeven.Are there flaws? Well, arguably, in the decompressing final stretch, which relates back to the book andopens the door to the possibility/inevitability of a trilogy. But that also enables an ostensibly hard filmto wind down to a surprisingly tender climax. Though Fincher professes to be a hard-ass bothprofessionally and aesthetically — and with its not-to-be-underestimated moments of anal rape andtorture, his film is not for the faint-hearted — The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo says more about brokenhearts than broken people. Which, to address the nay-sayers, is where Fincher went right.VerdictA tough, post-punk Tintin-meets-Klute for the Occupy Wall Street set, this kinetic, hard-edged thriller isthe perfect festive comedown for Fincher fans and dysfunctional families everywhere.Reviewed by Damon Wise
Analysis of the review : The girl with thedragon tattoo in Empire •The tagline for the film could be counted as controversial “Rape, chrome dildos, emotional scars – Merry Christmas! “, the use of these hits the reader straight away from the point, also it could be considered as an understanding what the film is actually like. • Throughout the review there are a number of references to other films and how the director has used them elements, films which are named are The social network, The kings speech, James bond and Fight club, this is another way for the film to sell with a number of different films which are very high grossing films. •The use of a highlighted quote allows parts of the review to stand out for the reader and they are points which are selling points of the film like “An excellent, pitch-dark, almost note perfect thriller” this is an incite into the way the film is set up for the viewer to really like the film .
These are films The photo which are veryagain is key to similar ones which the review the reader may have giving the seen them and reader an wanted to see theincite into the muppets aswell film. This is a talking point which isThe title is also helpful for giving key to the points for the review to tell reader to go and the reader see the film. what the film This is a is. highlighted part The article is of the article also key for which the the reviewing magazine want of the film. to be seen.This is a graph The verdict is a of how the clear view offilms has high how thepoints and low I have a transcribed version of the review on experts see points the next two slides. the film.
Sensational, inspirational, celebrational… pretty good.Its been over a decade since the Muppets last graced the big screen, yet Kermit, Fozzie andthe gang are still remembered with fond reverence by grown-up fans of The MuppetShow, The Muppet Movie or any of their other filmic outings.It’s not the grown-ups, however, that this film needs to impress if it’s to be considered asuccess. Will under-10s look at the Muppets and see just a bunch of lame, low-tech puppets?Rising to the challenge is Jason Segel. The man who shoehorned a puppet musical into theclimactic scene of Forgetting Sarah Marshall.Segel’s well-documented Muppet mania was the catalyst that got this movie into production,seven years after Disney acquired the rights from The Jim Henson Company.He co-wrote the script with Nicholas Stoller and co-stars as Gary, an ordinary guy fromSmalltown who takes his fiancée Mary (Amy Adams, adorable) and younger brother Walter (a3ft chap who happens to be made out of orange felt) on an exciting trip to The MuppetStudios in Hollywood.When Walter discovers his heroes have disbanded and an evil billionaire named Tex Richman(Chris Cooper) is planning to take over the Muppets Theatre, he realises the only way to savethem is to get the old gang back together and put on a fundraiser.Thus swings into motion a textbook on-with-the-show musical comedy, celebrating thevirtues of teamwork, being kind to each other and impromptu song-and-dance numbers – thekind of thing the Muppets do best.
This update’s great strength is that it marries classic Muppet antics with the mostMuppety aspects of modern culture. You couldn’t find two more apt human sidekicksthan duo Segel and Adams, while bringing Flight Of The Conchords’ Bret McKenzie into write the songs is inspired.Perhaps there are one too many hip celebrity cameos (Dave Grohl, Zak Galifianakis,Kirsten Schaal, Leslie Feist…). But those who accuse the movie of pandering too muchto thirtysomething nostalgia-hounds forget that the Muppets always were about badpuns, fourth-wall-breaking gags and broaching the silly-sophisticated divide betweenadult and kid humour.In an age when the R-rated comedy has become mainstream, that’s rare enough tobe refreshing. Fox News may call them commies; to the rest of us, the Muppets arejust plain, loveable and nice.Verdict:The sunniest, happiest film in the world – and if the under-10 in your life can’tappreciate that, it might be time to put them up for adoption.
Analysis of the review : The Muppets inTotal Film• The tagline which is used in this case is very bold for explainingthe type of film it is “sensational, inspirational, celebrational…pretty good! “ these explanation of the film are all selling thefilm to the reader of the review.• The review again likened to a number of films because thewriters of the songs which have been featured in the film and thedirectors other films. Films such as “Forgetting Sarah Marshall”and “Flight of the Conchords”•The use of the highlighted text is good for selling the film “In anage where R-rated comedy is mainstream this is a refreshing” thisis good for the reader as many parents may see the review andthen want to see the film
Short films are less likely to bereviewed in magazines becauseof the niche target audiencesthey are aimed at. So I havefound a short film review onthe internet.
The video/ picture give an idea of what The title again a the film is about. point to giving averdict on why the audience should watch the film. The review has The review again is posed a question key for the reader on the audience to see what people asking them feel about the film. question allows them to be drawn into the review.http://www.shortoftheweek. I have a transcribedcom/2007/08/05/black- version of the review onbutton/ the next slide.
Black Button (Review From http://www.shortoftheweek.com)Would you press this button for a million dollars? What happens when you press it? A classic moraldilemma unfolds.I found this week’s film, Black Button, on YouTube where it has become rather popular. That makes sense since itis a good film, but more so than that it is also emblematic of the uniqueness of YouTube and the possibilities forfilmmakers there.Black Button is minimalistic in design and execution, but is the kind of tautly paced, well-written film that reallyshines in the short format. The film centers around a classic hypothetical and moral quandary; lost and confusedin a stark white room the main character, Mr. Roberts, is offered ten million dollars by a mysterious oldergentleman to push a black button. The catch? If he does, someone, somewhere will die. This premise sets thestage for a provocative conversation between the two as they discuss the implications of such a choice.There is a lot to like about the film, the visual aesthetic is stylish; stark and ultra-exposed in order to create thedepth-less white set. As mentioned, the pacing is excellent, sucking in your attention and never letting it flag andthe shot selection wrings the most dynamism possible out of the limited set. The two strongest aspects thoughare the excellent sound work and superb acting. Fantastically creepy, disorienting sounds emanate during thepayoff that heighten the affect nicely, and quite simply Robert Grubb steals the show with his turn as the elderlygentlemen.As accomplished a film as it is, especially for a $200 first time effort, Black Button likely would have found successon the festival circuit, but instead on YouTube it has become a phenomena, garnering a half a million views andover 6000 comments. It’s hard to imagine garnering as much exposure or feedback from any other means thanthe online video giant. But also because of the community-nature of the site, the feedback is often a lot moresubstantial than other sites. Thirteen video responses have been posted already by fans of the film, andquestions generated by the short prompted the filmmakers to post two new “making of” segments to YouTube aswell, extending the level of interactions possible between independent filmmakers and their audiences. Now ifonly YouTube can perfect some revenue sharing…
Analysis of the Review : Black Button• The use of a question at the start is a good thing for a reviewbecause the reader will want to read on with the review. “Wouldyou press this button for a million dollars? What happens whenyou press it? A classic moral dilemma unfolds.” this question islinked to the film itself and is a reasonable and good questionwhich could be considered as rhetorical.•The review looks at the visual style and the way the film has beenmade and this is a big thing in the film industry.•The use of an explanation about the way the film has done onviews and the number of people actually watching the film.
• The feature films all have the highlighted part of the review.•The reviews also involve some sort of tagline which sell the film.• They all have some sort of screenshot for the film giving an incite to the film.•They all have verdict with either a star rating or 10/10 and an explanation ofthe review and a summary of the film and there opinion.• They also have used a number of references to other films and there visualstyle which have been placed in the film.•The use of a question can be good to engage the reader to the review itself.•The short film review could also involve the number of views on the websiteit was originally uploaded to.•The use of information about the film and the style which has been used inthe film.