A blog for online film critics to talk about movies and review writing. Anyone with a movie review blog or website is welcome to join, post links to their writing, and write movie-related posts. Those interested in participating should e-mail David at DavidSwindle_AT_gmail.com for an invitation.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Anthony Reviews "Milk" and "Gran Torino"
I have seen and reviewed the Sean Penn movie Milk and the Clint Eastwood movie Gran Torino. Both are good, though I like the latter a little more.
Anthony, I don't want to be critical, but hey, I guess I'm a critic, right?
My issue with your "Milk" and "Gran Torino" reviews is one that I've mentioned before. I know we come from different approaches to film criticism, but in reading these reviews I get a general plot summary and a few basic thoughts about how much you liked both films but what I don't get is some kind of original comment or contribution to understanding the film.
Usually with each review I write I try and pick some kind of original angle to talk about the film. For "Gran Torino" I discussed the Badass persona and Eastwood's contribution to it. With each of my reviews you can usually pick up some thread that makes my review stand out. What makes your reviews stand out? How do you distinguish yourself from other critics? Since everyone has limited time to spending reading film reviews, the question to confront is this: Why should someone read your reviews instead of another critic's?
I appreciate your feedback, David. I'm still in the process of trying to find my voice. In other words, I have yet to figure out a way I could be unique with my reviews each time. Hopefully, with time, I'll figure it out.
Perhaps the reason behind this is the fact that I'm writing reviews for fun, not with any professional goal in mind. Of course, that shouldn't stop me from writing the best I can. I learn to review movies through practice and reading reviews by others, like you and Roger Ebert. For me, there are lots of slow steps involved, but at least they're headed up. :-)
2 comments:
Anthony, I don't want to be critical, but hey, I guess I'm a critic, right?
My issue with your "Milk" and "Gran Torino" reviews is one that I've mentioned before. I know we come from different approaches to film criticism, but in reading these reviews I get a general plot summary and a few basic thoughts about how much you liked both films but what I don't get is some kind of original comment or contribution to understanding the film.
Usually with each review I write I try and pick some kind of original angle to talk about the film. For "Gran Torino" I discussed the Badass persona and Eastwood's contribution to it. With each of my reviews you can usually pick up some thread that makes my review stand out. What makes your reviews stand out? How do you distinguish yourself from other critics? Since everyone has limited time to spending reading film reviews, the question to confront is this: Why should someone read your reviews instead of another critic's?
I appreciate your feedback, David. I'm still in the process of trying to find my voice. In other words, I have yet to figure out a way I could be unique with my reviews each time. Hopefully, with time, I'll figure it out.
Perhaps the reason behind this is the fact that I'm writing reviews for fun, not with any professional goal in mind. Of course, that shouldn't stop me from writing the best I can. I learn to review movies through practice and reading reviews by others, like you and Roger Ebert. For me, there are lots of slow steps involved, but at least they're headed up. :-)
Post a Comment