A bad review of "The Green Hornet, " (Directed by Michel Gondry, 2011)
http://www.denverpost.com/movies/ci_17098062
This review by Lisa Kennedy in the Denver Post fails to form a solid opinion. Most of the review is simply summary delivered with sarcasm, a tactic that the reviewer believes will get across her point. What she should have done was say her point: She did not like this movie. While subtlety and wit can be worthwhile tactics to make a review entertaining and may allow the reviewer to pinpoint his or her own style, it is not useful throughout an entire review where no point is made as in Lisa Kennedy's review. There is no supporting evidence throughout the language of the rest of the article that she is trying to provide insightful commentary on the film.
As the reader, I am still left with a desire to see this film and make up my own mind because there is nothing solid for me to walk away from. A good reviewer, if they truly disliked the movie, would leave the reader with no doubt in their mind they should absolutely not go see this film. The vague message given in this review leaves no solid conviction one way or the other and is basically leaving it up to the reader to decide.
A good review of "The Green Hornet, " (Directed by Michel Gondry, 2011)
http://movies.nytimes.com/2011/01/14/movies/14green.html?ref=aoscott
A.O. Scott of the New York Times tackles the same film as Lisa Kennedy, but manages to vocalize his concerns about the movie better than she. By not focusing only on the bad, he provides a well-rounded analysis of the reasons he didn't enjoy some parts of the film but then offers up reasons that a normal movie-goer would enjoy it.
In contrast to the bad review, Scott provides a solid statement about his thoughts on the movie and then uses the rest of his space to support that statement: "'The Green Hornet' is not terrible, just pointless, and it offers further proof that superheroism is, at least for now, pretty well tapped out as a vein of lucrative pop-cultural bounty." Connecting the problems with the movie to an overall problem in the movie world gives the review context. The landscape of super hero films contributed to his review, not just the film itself. This is a much needed explanation of the thought process of the reviewer that the bad review given by Lisa Kennedy fails to address.
While Scott does use summary, he doesn't use it for summaries sake. Every plot point or character explanation supports his overall review and comes with a critical eye and thoughtful statement along with it. It gives the reader enough information to land on a solid idea at the end of the review of whether or not they want to see the film based on the insightful pros and cons given by the review.
