The highly anticipated movie turns out to be another typical Hollywood movie.What is even more frustrating is to see all the promotions they made months in advance. I mean, who didn’t see a bus covered up with Ange’s face? The marketing was sure good but the movie itself was just disappointing…
The article review (1), written by Darren Bevan and published in tvnz.co.nz on the 17th of August 2010, briefly explains why. I choose this article because it was bizarrely a mix of good points as well as bad points.
The first good point is the correlation the author makes with Salt and James Bond. Not that Salt is like James Bond but the fact that Salt is something to see when there’s an absence of James Bond movie.
Another good point relies in the middle of the article. The author gives (in a single sentence) a very fine foretaste of the movie: “Salt is a thriller which doesn't thrill as much as it could”(2). That says it all!
Unfortunately, those are the only two positive points I could found. The rest of the article (when you have a global look at it) seems to be a basic summary of the movie. Which, I found sad because when you read a review, you expect something a little more detailed and subtler than a simple summary. You want to be convinced whetter the movie will be good or bad.
Movies, in contradiction with books, can’t be rated just by the quality of the script; it’s also the image, the sound, the music and the actor’s performance.
To conclude, I think that the author is a good writer but he doesn’t give the readers what they want. He concentrates himself too much on the content while he should also talk about the form.
Another good point relies in the middle of the article. The author gives (in a single sentence) a very fine foretaste of the movie: “Salt is a thriller which doesn't thrill as much as it could”(2). That says it all!
Unfortunately, those are the only two positive points I could found. The rest of the article (when you have a global look at it) seems to be a basic summary of the movie. Which, I found sad because when you read a review, you expect something a little more detailed and subtler than a simple summary. You want to be convinced whetter the movie will be good or bad.
Movies, in contradiction with books, can’t be rated just by the quality of the script; it’s also the image, the sound, the music and the actor’s performance.
To conclude, I think that the author is a good writer but he doesn’t give the readers what they want. He concentrates himself too much on the content while he should also talk about the form.
(1) and (2): http://tvnz.co.nz/entertainment-news/salt-movie-review-3709380
Review writing really should be like essay writing (albiet wayyy more creative). The point you make is that they need to have a central argument and support that with a thorough discussion. Movie reviewing seems more often than not to be a lazy art, particularly when they are just summarizing (really, what's the point, that really destroys our suspense as viewers, doesn't it?)?
ReplyDeleteGood job. Love this movie. It will be nice more interesting angle to movie goers.. a cool movie indeed
ReplyDeleteI like you view about the article..even the movie itself got little bit disappointing..but if you take a look to other articles..it probably got different point of view..but its look well..
ReplyDelete