DudeDazz's Movie Reviews

[Ashley]

Haven't read any of your new reviews :p

 

Will give one a look over after work.

 

Maybe. If I remember.

 

Okay quickly:

 

After a horrifying PredAlien crash-lands near a small Colorado town, killing everyone it encounters and producing countless Alien offspring, a lone Predator arrives to "clean up" the infestation. Soon it’s an all-out battle to the death with no rules, no mercy – and hundreds of innocent people caught in the crossfire. As the creature carnage continues, a handful of human survivors attempt a daring escape, but the U.S. government may be hatching a deadly plan of its own…

 

Blah blah blah plot plot plot. Its like reading a DVD box. People who read reviews are likely to know the basic plot so you don't need to spell it out. Scatter it amongst a review and make it relevant to a point ("the film is a sci-fi horror, which is so obviously smacked in the audience's face with the clichéd plot of alien infestation, that it almost insults your intelligence" etc). Furthermore this is the first paragraph! This should hook the reader. Hell the first line should hook you! Get your opinion in there RIGHT AWAY. People read reviews for the reviewer as much as the review itself, hence why people like Kobode are known but whoever reviews for Heat isn't.

 

From the very mediocre Alien vs. Predator comes Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem which is not only probably one of the worst sequels to a movie yet but also one of the worst sci-fi horror movies. The story is not interesting in the slightest and it doesn’t really develop or grip you. There was nothing about the story that kept your attention or stuck out in your mind. Excusing a few scenes, the acting was just very bad and they didn’t make me believe the characters they were portraying whatsoever. The characters were one-dimensional and you didn’t care at all for any of them and they became more annoying as the movie went on. The writing was terrible and just felt like random things were happening and the direction wasn’t good either. There were some okay fight scenes but that’s all Requiem really had going for it.

 

Essentially the same point repeated over and over again. It sucked. We get it (apparently 'we' too, as it seems we watched the film with you :p). Make it more succinct. "Everything about this film wreaked of poor quality; from the acting to the plot and even right down to the CGI".

 

Bits in bold are wishy washy flimsy language. Almost like you have just copied and pasted popular expressions and such. Be specific, use examples, elaborate on what you mean, avoid clichéd expressions.

 

Aliens vs. Predator 2: Requiem has nothing going for it (then why did you watch it? Why should others? SHOULD others? What about hardcore Aliens/Predator fans, is there anything redeeming in it?). It has a couple of good action scenes (examples?) but there’s nothing else. Everything in the movie could have been improved; from the bland story to the tedious characters (why was it bland/tedious, how could it be improved, was there any part/any one who was stand out?). Also, Alien vs. Predator didn’t need a sequel at all so the movie is just even more pointless and doesn’t add anything to the first story whatsoever (films rarely need a sequel for one, two this is Hollywood so...at least turn it into a critique of Hollywood. Even if its overplayed it would still be better than saying "I think that this didn't deserve a sequel, bad movie!"). The only thing that this movie has improved on is the blood and gore and even then, it still doesn’t really add anything to the movie. The acting is absolutely dire, I just hated how they portrayed their characters because they all looked so bored. I could say that it’s almost Kristen Stewart-like as Bella in New Moon (I know you like Twilight and that's great but a) they're not comparible b) you're limiting your audience knowledge here and c) you can discredit yourself by comparing it to teen pop) but I don’t think it’s that bad, there was at least some emotion shown (Where? When? By whom? What effect did it have on you?). However, I’ve seen better acting at a Year 1 Nativity play. No doubt the writing is probably the worst thing about this movie, it’s just so uninspiring and plain and it didn’t really feel like any time was spent thinking about it because it just felt random and completely pointless (Haven't you said this about 12 times?). I personally thought that Alien vs. Predator was okay, it wasn’t really good or bad but this sequel (how wishy washy) is just a disaster from start to finish. There’s more fun to be had watching paint dry for ten hours than here (CLICHÉ!). I can’t speak for the fans but if you are a massive fan of Alien or Predator or both, you may enjoy this but I can’t really see anybody else enjoying this monstrosity.

 

Get my drift?

Edited July 11, 2010 by Ashley

[Ashley]

Another go with a film I've actually seen (numerous times), Battle Royale.

 

At the dawn of the new millennium, Japan is in a a state of near-collapse. Unemployment is at an all-time high, and violence among the nation’s youth is spiraling out of control. With schoolchildren boycotting their classes and physically abusing their teachers, a beleaguered and near-defeated government decides to introduce a radical new measure: the Battle Royale Act Overseen by their former teacher Kitano and requiring that a randomly chosen school class is taken to a deserted island and forced to fight each other to the death, the Act dictates that only one pupil is allowed to survive the punishment. He or she will return, not as the victor, but as the ultimate proof of the lengths to which the government is prepared to go to curb the tide of juvenile disobedience.

 

Again, don't need a whole paragraph (particularly the first) completely dedicated to the plot outline. And did you just C&P this from somewhere (or copy it word to word from the film?) as it sounds very familiar.

 

Cult classic thriller Battle Royale is based on a book by Koushun Takami (and there's a manga too, can't be bothered to check which came first) of the same name and both the book and the movie has caused controversy (What? Where? Why?). It’s well-known (is it, by whom?) for it’s gory violence and on lists and surveys (1 - which? 2 - what real relevance is this to a review? Its gory yes but you should explain how, why, give examples etc rather than just saying "lists say it is" to prove the point), remains to be one of the top 20 horror-thriller movies of the decade. So is Battle Royale really this good (you've yet to say its "good" as such, just gory)? The answer to that question is yes, it really is (personal point, I hate lame setups like this). The story is simple yet brilliant and it keeps you hooked for the duration of the movie (the story is 'Lord of the Flies'...but it does it well). The characters were brilliantly written and the actors who starred in the movie did an amazing job playing their parts (this sounds like a middle of the road student's report card when the teacher becomes lazy. Its completely impersonal. Who in particular excelled? Which characters excelled and why? Who didn't? Yes you mention it following but...). Tatsuya Fujiwara did a brilliant job playing as Shuya and Aki Maeda was great as Noriko, the rest of the cast gave out a solid performance as well (how, why? What did they do to merit this praise? You've just listed the two leads and said they did well...taking the easy route much? What about Machiko (I think her name was) and her backstory of being raped, which her mother turned a blind eye to and how this all affected her relationships with males, her mental state etc*). The direction and the writing were all brilliant and the script was done very well (The cast was good, the story was good, the directing was good, the sound effects were good, the grass was a good green colour...learn some new adjectives and elaborate on points). A movie like this was bound to cause controversy but the movie was brilliantly done. The cast and crew should be proud of this! (I'm sure they don't need your approval :p)

 

I saw the movie before reading the book and again after and the book is better than the movie (how so?), which was to be expected (why? the whole 'the book is always better' is such a tired argument unless you really plan to get to grips with it don't bother). However, the movie does capture what it is supposed to capture (I mean this politely but that is such a silly thing to say. "It does what its supposed to/what it intended to" well if it didn't it would be a radio drama, not a film...). The acting was brilliant as they captured the emotions of their characters perfectly and you could feel their emotions (repeating yourself): Fright, panic, stress, love, hate, delight, etc (this is filler, readers don't need a list of emotions, they know what emotions are. You could scatter it throughout (discuss the main character's panic and fear, the first guy who kill's someone's panic and realisation he's killed, the teacher's love for Noriko), and that’s what I love in a movie because it makes you feel connected (another flimsy non-phrase). The violence and blood shed in the movie is very high (so you keep saying) and yet it didn’t really feel unnecessary for the movie (it is a movie about mass murder...). The book was violent so I expected as much from the movie (and again, the basic plot outline...). The book makes you feel more attached to the characters than the movie (how? why? it makes you (singular) more attached but not necessarily everyone, nobody likes to be told what they think) does but you still feel attached to them in the movie as well. Overall, I would seriously recommend this to anybody who loves a good thriller and don’t mind subtitles or violence but if you do mind subtitles and you don’t like gory violence, give this a miss (saying "watch this if you like x" and then following it up with "don't watch it if you don't like x" is a bit redundant). I really recommend you watch this subbed though, dubbed usually isn’t very good in a foreign movie (be more willing to be critical. Go for the jugular. "If you don't like reading subtitles you probably wouldn't enjoy this movies psycho-sociological themes anyway" Furthermore my DVD doesn't even have a dub option so check your facts).

 

9/10

One of my favourite movies and one of my favourite books, Battle Royale is cool, gripping, original and violent.

 

* I did an assignment once in which I argued that Battle Royale is a horror because it is about "the monster inside you" (using a more academic term I can't recall at present) and I think this needs to be explored for a good review. Its an analysis of the human spirit, its un/willingness to adapt to extreme circumstances, a reflection of the increasing violence/teenage rebellion (particularly relevant when the film was made in Japan, remember films are not made in a bubble, they are made within a context!), an exploration of different approaches to the situation, an exploration of whether we are innately violent, a commentary on how society is making us violent yet criticisng us for it etc etc etc.

 

It can be read in a deep level but honestly if I'd never seen the film and read your review all I'd get from it is "its good, gory but good, and its about some Japanese school kids who kill each other". That's it. That's your review in 16 words. People don't tend to read reviews to find out what happens but to engage with responses to the film. I'd imagine (but have no proof) that people either read reviews about films they're unsure about or afterwards and they want to try and see how other people responded, how it matches their responses etc. Yours neither does the first (as the plot that is outlined could be gathered from a press released blurb/the trailer) nor the second as your whole analysis is summed up in the last sentence (post score, which again is what most people look at) and the rest is filler.

 

Other general points about your site:

 

1) I know you like Twilight but you need to be aware what a meh-photoshopped image of Twilight at the top of a reviewing site is going to appear like to the majority of people, and I can't imagine its what you want it to be. By all means engage with these public debates; is Twilight more than just softcore porn for teen girls and horny mothers? is there any depth or is it all surface? can males enjoy it? is Robert Pattinson actually more than just a weirdly-shaped face? Following on from that don't be afraid to have self debates/analysis of popular rhetoric/whatever you want to call it about films. Doesn't just need to be reviews, in fact doing these will show an engagement with film as a medium and art form more than just reviews would. For example, you've just watched all the Predators and such so you could analyse how the franchise has (d)evolved, how it has changed to reflect cultural issues of the time the particular films were made, how it is an example of flogging a cash cow, whether audiences give a fuck any more etc.

 

2) Get someone whose more skilled with photoshop (no offence, yours is fine but if you want to appear professional ask someone who lives on photoshop to help, there's plenty of people on the forum who would be willing to) to make up a generic header with a space for an image of choice and some text, kind of like what our site has. Then ask for the PSD file and edit as you wish. This way it can be consistent, can look good and you could use that bit of text in the header to explore a current issue that your reviews discuss: "Can a male like Twilight?" "Is Toy Story 3 a Children's Movie Still?" etc

 

I hope you understand this is all intended to be constructive critcism, not me being a bitch ^_^ You said your friends aren't being very helpful so I've tried to really hammer home some points. You're still in your professional infancy so it's fine, I'm not trying to discourage you from continuing but just wanted to give you some help (hopefully).

 

I'll leave you be now :p

Edited July 11, 2010 by Ashley

[Beast]

I will read your posts but I just have to tell you that the first paragraphs of my reviews are C+P, I'll stop doing it but I just thought it might have been a good idea...

[Ashley]

No. It appears lazy, cheap and unprofessional.

[Dan_Dare]

and it's horrendous to read.

 

Your reviews are too long, I think. You need to be really, really strict with your words. Unless you're saying something original and purposeful, you're just wasting everyone's time. Try limiting yourself to 300 words max as an exercise and see how you go. Give your language some ballsb and ditch the rest. If you want people to take you seriously, you need to write seriously and with gravitas. I recommend buying The Guardian on Fridays for their Film & Music section- It's a masterclass in succinct, authoritative reviewing and you could do worse than to study their stylebook with regards to structure and flow.

[Beast]

I will read your posts but I just have to tell you that the first paragraphs of my reviews are C+P, I'll stop doing it but I just thought it might have been a good idea...

 

Okay, just read your posts and they were very helpful so thank you. I'll try to improve in the areas you've explained to me and I appreciate your honesty and the time it's taken you to write this up. The thing is, I would go more in-depth with my reviews but I'm afraid that I'd spoil the movie (such as mentioning Mitsuko's past and Kitano's obsessive love for Noriko) and I'm afraid of spoiling movies in general so I didn't know whether I should or shouldn't or whether it was safe to do so.

 

Reading back before, I thought it looked okay but reading back now, it's too simplistic so I will try harder. Also, the banners aren't for my tastes, they're there because of the latest movie that's out. I'm trying to make a Toy Story 3 banner at the moment because that would be the biggest thing out. I thought of Predators but Toy Story 3 has been more anticipated.

 

I thought about doing articles and such but I didn't know what to talk about. I mean, the whole "Can guys like Twilight?" and "Can adults love Toy Story 3?" thing is good and would probably be a great discussion so I might start doing them. But yeah, I didn't see any of that as being bitchy at all, it's actually the thing that I was looking for because I knew there was improvement somewhere but I didn't know whether I could do things or couldn't but you've put 80% of my questions to rest so thanks.

 

No. It appears lazy, cheap and unprofessional.

 

I'll just get rid of the first paragraph then and just skip to the review from now on!

 

and it's horrendous to read.

 

Your reviews are too long, I think. You need to be really, really strict with your words. Unless you're saying something original and purposeful, you're just wasting everyone's time. Try limiting yourself to 300 words max as an exercise and see how you go. Give your language some ballsb and ditch the rest. If you want people to take you seriously, you need to write seriously and with gravitas. I recommend buying The Guardian on Fridays for their Film & Music section- It's a masterclass in succinct, authoritative reviewing and you could do worse than to study their stylebook with regards to structure and flow.

 

My reviews used to be 300 words but the website I'm writing for, Blueprint, needed the reviews to be longer. So I made them longer, lol. Also, do you think it's possible to write a review that's 300 words using what Ashley has given me such as going more in-depth about the characters and such?

 

Thanks for this!

[Paj!]

Just do some in 300 words, some longer and more in-depth etc, just to work at it in general.

[Ashley]

I am obviously not trying to suggest that this is 'perfect', or anywhere approaching it, but if you want some comparison my (500 word) review on Benjamin Button for that class I mentioned earlier.

 

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

 

Fincher’s The Curious Case of Benjamin Button tells the story of a baby born with the appearance of an old man who progresses through life backwards; while his mind grows naturally his body ages retrogressively. However considering the film’s focus upon the preciousness of time it’s a shame that during Benjamin Button it seems you are wasting yours.

 

The story of the star-crossed Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett forms the emotional backbone that ultimately failed to strike a chord. The notion that two lovers are destined for each other but can’t be together until they’ve faced certain life experiences is certainly nothing new but in Benjamin Button it becomes hard to care when both characters seem to constantly be making mistakes simply for the sake of stretching out their increasingly tiring relationship. If you are then to consider how their story starts with Benjamin (Pitt) as an old man and Daisy (Fanning) at the age of seven and ends with Daisy (Blanchett) as a woman in her eighties and Benjamin as a baby the supposedly romantic story takes an unsettling and almost paedophilic twist.

 

Benjamin himself claims that all he has to give is his story but the film fails to tell the story of a life, but rather the story of a bizarre ageing process. Benjamin has little motive or purpose during the whole film and at times it seems like a grand attempt at showing off some, granted fantastic, visual effects. It is the special effects and art direction that really makes this film as the numerous eras that are portrayed, from the 1920’s through to 2005, are presented beautifully.

 

Benjamin Button does have suprisingly humorous moments, from the recurring joke as one man recalls each of the seven times he was struck by lightening to the amusing one-liners that add a lightness to a film that could have otherwise been bought down by its own melancholy. However these moments are sporadic, particularly once Benjamin moves out of the old people’s home and we’re no longer treated to the comedic antics of cranky elderly people.

 

One particularly striking scene takes place on a tugboat that Benjamin was working on during World War II. In what is the film’s most action-packed sequence their tugboat is attacked by an enemy submarine and through an impressive combination of direction and sound the sequence becomes genuinely frightening but unfortunately this sequence gets lost in the melodrama that surrounds it.

 

While Benjamin Buttons’ storyline may not be the most engaging credit must go to the film’s special effects and make-up team. This benefits Pitt’s performance as he spends a lot of time as an elderly man, an ambitious appearance for an actor whose looks are normally the first factor associated with him. Similarly Blanchett’s appearances look genuine throughout the many stages of Daisy’s life; from a woman in her twenties through to her deathbed. While their characters may be stale both actors’ nuanced performances are certainly commendable in a film that otherwise failed to resonate.

 

 

 

And what I meant with TS3 is more; yes its what many would call a children's film and yes lots of children will go see it but are adults more excited about it? Let's not forget the first one came out in 1997, before a lot of the kids who will see it were even born. And when you consider stuff like this.

 

Personally it feels kind of like the end of my childhood. I am, as I believe its known within the fandom canon, "an Andy child". I am about the same age as Andy (actually a bit older) is so I have literally grown up with these films. In fact to retweet (but paraphrase) something that was tweeted to the director; "I was driven to the first, drove myself to the second and will drive my kids to the third." Its certainly the most interesting Disney/Pixar film in a long time in that regards.

Edited July 12, 2010 by Ashley

[Beast]

I am obviously not trying to suggest that this is 'perfect', or anywhere approaching it, but if you want some comparison my (500 word) review on Benjamin Button for that class I mentioned earlier.

 

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

 

Fincher’s The Curious Case of Benjamin Button tells the story of a baby born with the appearance of an old man who progresses through life backwards; while his mind grows naturally his body ages retrogressively. However considering the film’s focus upon the preciousness of time it’s a shame that during Benjamin Button it seems you are wasting yours.

 

The story of the star-crossed Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett forms the emotional backbone that ultimately failed to strike a chord. The notion that two lovers are destined for each other but can’t be together until they’ve faced certain life experiences is certainly nothing new but in Benjamin Button it becomes hard to care when both characters seem to constantly be making mistakes simply for the sake of stretching out their increasingly tiring relationship. If you are then to consider how their story starts with Benjamin (Pitt) as an old man and Daisy (Fanning) at the age of seven and ends with Daisy (Blanchett) as a woman in her eighties and Benjamin as a baby the supposedly romantic story takes an unsettling and almost paedophilic twist.

 

Benjamin himself claims that all he has to give is his story but the film fails to tell the story of a life, but rather the story of a bizarre ageing process. Benjamin has little motive or purpose during the whole film and at times it seems like a grand attempt at showing off some, granted fantastic, visual effects. It is the special effects and art direction that really makes this film as the numerous eras that are portrayed, from the 1920’s through to 2005, are presented beautifully.

 

Benjamin Button does have suprisingly humorous moments, from the recurring joke as one man recalls each of the seven times he was struck by lightening to the amusing one-liners that add a lightness to a film that could have otherwise been bought down by its own melancholy. However these moments are sporadic, particularly once Benjamin moves out of the old people’s home and we’re no longer treated to the comedic antics of cranky elderly people.

 

One particularly striking scene takes place on a tugboat that Benjamin was working on during World War II. In what is the film’s most action-packed sequence their tugboat is attacked by an enemy submarine and through an impressive combination of direction and sound the sequence becomes genuinely frightening but unfortunately this sequence gets lost in the melodrama that surrounds it.

 

While Benjamin Buttons’ storyline may not be the most engaging credit must go to the film’s special effects and make-up team. This benefits Pitt’s performance as he spends a lot of time as an elderly man, an ambitious appearance for an actor whose looks are normally the first factor associated with him. Similarly Blanchett’s appearances look genuine throughout the many stages of Daisy’s life; from a woman in her twenties through to her deathbed. While their characters may be stale both actors’ nuanced performances are certainly commendable in a film that otherwise failed to resonate.

 

 

 

And what I meant with TS3 is more; yes its what many would call a children's film and yes lots of children will go see it but are adults more excited about it? Let's not forget the first one came out in 1997, before a lot of the kids who will see it were even born. And when you consider stuff like this.

 

Personally it feels kind of like the end of my childhood. I am, as I believe its known within the fandom canon, "an Andy child". I am about the same age as Andy (actually a bit older) is so I have literally grown up with these films. In fact to retweet (but paraphrase) something that was tweeted to the director; "I was driven to the first, drove myself to the second and will drive my kids to the third." Its certainly the most interesting Disney/Pixar film in a long time in that regards.

 

Thanks for the review, Ash. I think I get what I have to write and what not to write but I'm just afraid of spoiling so I try not to go in-depth too much. I'll try though!

 

Also I feel exactly the same as you with Toy Story. I was Andy's age and I used to watch the films like there would be no tomorrow so when I watch the third, it's going to feel like part of my childhood is going to end. I might write up a piece about it...

[Ashley]

Worse comes to worse have a giant SPOILER WARNING sign. And can't Wordpress do a "highlight to read" thing anyway?

[Beast]

Hey guys,

 

I've taken all of your tips on board and I have written a new movie review for Titanic. Tell me what you think, am I on the right track?

 

Thank you all so much for the help and tips.

[Ashley]

The greatest thing Cameron has done was not only the cinematography, the direction, the special effects or the hard work that had been put into making the movie but the way he took his time to tell us the story and that made it all the more phenomenal and magnificent.

 

Tense fail.

 

And I think there is a greater love story than The Titanic, your review of it. Seriously gushing from start to finish and even if you like the film it seems extreme.

 

But made me realise part of the problem; it reads like a list rather than prose. And 11 of the sentences start with the word "the" which makes it dull to read (and adds to the list-like effect), five in a row in the first paragraph!

[Beast]

Tense fail.

 

And I think there is a greater love story than The Titanic, your review of it. Seriously gushing from start to finish and even if you like the film it seems extreme.

 

But made me realise part of the problem; it reads like a list rather than prose. And 11 of the sentences start with the word "the" which makes it dull to read (and adds to the list-like effect), five in a row in the first paragraph!

 

Yeah, I kind of written a load of notes whilst watching it for a second time and I actually realised that I didn't write anything negative down. There was only one negative I could find and that was that it was too long, but it was okay considering one half was about Rose and Jack and the other about Titanic sinking. I did actually try to think of cons but I couldn't except for the runtime and even that became a positive, haha.

 

I'll try to improve on the list thing since I think I generally have that problem with my reviews. I'll try and edit it to try and make it not sound like a list, haha.

[Ashley]

Perhaps a good way would be to take your notes and sectionise them so things go together, then work around those. Its okay to have a list such as "I felt that the acting, directing and cinematography were all excellent and really showcased Cameron's ability to keep control of these vital aspects of a film" but not "The cinematography was good. The directing was also well done. The acting was great as well." It reads like someone whose just learning English :p

[Beast]

Thanks for this, many people have commented on my new style of writing and they love it so I'm doing something right at least, haha. Okay Ashley, I had taken your advice and had written the review of Predators. Have I improved?

[Daft]

I'm going to be harsh because harsh criticisim is usually the most helpful. Just from reading the first paragraph your prose are clumsy and repetitive. Here goes...

 

If you readers (Obviously they're readers) have been following, last week I had (Unnecessary) watched all of the Predator movies and the movies (Repetition) Predator is involved in (Clumsy) such as Alien vs. Predator for the arrival of the latest offering to the widely-popular horror action movie series, Predators.(Repetition, you need to reword the sentence.) However, Predators (Italicise) doesn’t live up to the first movie and it doesn’t live up to the second either (Slightly clumsy). It has the most simplistic and most tedious storylines I’ve ever encountered (1. This probably isn't true. 2. Try not to bring yourself into your criticisms.) in a movie as it’s simply (Repetition) a game of violent cat-and-mouse thrown in with some people who are either careless maniacs or just plain and uninteresting and the subplot they added to the movie (Completely unnecessary) with Nolad’s character didn’t help matters either (Repetition).

 

I rewrote it. Might help. Might not.

 

If you have been following, last week I made my way through all of the Predator movies, including Alien vs. Predator and the like, in anticipation of Predators, the latest addition to the widely-popular horror action movie franchise. Unfortunately, Predators doesn’t live up to the first movie and worse still, it doesn’t live up to the second either. Its storyline is overly simplistic and tedious - it's a bloody game of cat-and-mouse with people thrown in who are either careless and maniacal or just plain bland, the subplot involving Nolad’s character didn’t help matters.

 

Advice? Read through it and just get rid of any unnecessary words. This is an incredibly important skill any good writer must learn. Get rid of some words, then get rid of more - keep the meaning.

 

Hope that's helpful. I know it sounds quite cruel but it's the quickest way to learn. (I'll read the rest later. I'm actually at work. )

 

You've inspired me to start using my TV/FILM blog again. Here's my Inception review, if you like. http://flamingscript.wordpress.com/2010/07/17/inception/

 

Edit: Reading through the rest now and repetition is a major problem ('just', 'simply', 'unfortunately'). Also, like I mentioned, don't bother with saying 'I just', 'I also', 'I was' etc. It's your review, it's obviously your view. Example,

 

Unfortunately, (Repetition.) it felt like Brody was trying to copy Christian Bale’s Batman voice as he hardly moved his jaw and he (Unnecessary.) spoke as if he was gasping for water or like he had a sore throat so he could sound tough (Really clumsy.). I just (Repetition) had the urge to suddenly (Unnecessary. Repetition, I think.) try to give him a Strepsil or a Locket (You're trying to be humorous. Keep it short and snappy. If the reader doesn't take it in in one glance, you've failed.) so he could stop talking like he was trying to clear his throat. I also hated how his character was the only (Not clear. You're annoyed he's the only character with Godly detective skills or that he's the only one who has any awareness at all?) character (Repetition) to suddenly work things out just (Repetition) by doing the littlest (Horribly clumsy word.) of things, I was half-expecting him to tell us the entire history of the planet when he brushed an eyelash or scratched his head (Again, not snappy enough.), it became annoying very fast (Clumsy).

 

Could read something like,

 

It felt like Brody was trying to copy Bale’s subsonic Batman voice as he hardly moved his jaw and spoke as if in desperate need of water; talking like gravel does not make you sound tough. All it did was give you the urge to jam a Strepsil down his throat in an attempt to free the poor goat that was quite clearly lodged there. Also, another irk was how his character was able to work things out by doing the smallest of things, you began to worry he'd pull out a powerpoint presentation on soil PH every time he brushed past the foliage, it quickly became annoying.

 

Edit 2: Just on an aside,

 

Laurence Fishburne wasn’t too bad as Nolad but I’ve certainly seen him do a lot better in movies such as The Matrix and the fantastic Akeelah and the Bee so the acting lets the movie down even more.

 

It's hard to act when you are in a shit movie.

 

One could even go so far to say that it’s possibly ruined the Predator series for me, as it was just unnecessary and just daft.

 

If AVP1/2 didn't ruin the franchise for you, you genuinely need to be much more critical about films if you want to take this any further. Just, in case.

Edited July 19, 2010 by Daft
You can always make things better.

[Paj!]

I agree with Daft that it's the unnecessary words and phrases, as well as the lack of definition and determination in the writing that lets it down for me. Until it's condensed to essential words and punchy phrases, it'll remain a bit flaccid and clumsy.

[Beast]

I'm going to be harsh because harsh criticisim is usually the most helpful. Just from reading the first paragraph your prose are clumsy and repetitive. Here goes...

 

 

 

I rewrote it. Might help. Might not.

 

 

 

Advice? Read through it and just get rid of any unnecessary words. This is an incredibly important skill any good writer must learn. Get rid of some words, then get rid of more - keep the meaning.

 

Hope that's helpful. I know it sounds quite cruel but it's the quickest way to learn. (I'll read the rest later. I'm actually at work. )

 

You've inspired me to start using my TV/FILM blog again. Here's my Inception review, if you like. http://flamingscript.wordpress.com/2010/07/17/inception/

 

Edit: Reading through the rest now and repetition is a major problem ('just', 'simply', 'unfortunately'). Also, like I mentioned, don't bother with saying 'I just', 'I also', 'I was' etc. It's your review, it's obviously your view. Example,

 

 

 

Could read something like,

 

 

 

Edit 2: Just on an aside,

 

 

 

It's hard to act when you are in a shit movie.

 

 

 

If AVP1/2 didn't ruin the franchise for you, you genuinely need to be much more critical about films if you want to take this any further. Just, in case.

 

Thanks for the advice, any harsh criticism is welcome in my book and I will definitely take your criticisms on board.

 

Oh and to the notes, I've seen some good actors in crap movies and still act well. I just thought he could have been a little better.

 

Also, I don't really count the Versus movies as part of the series, hence why I said "and everything Predator was in".

 

I can see the flaws now so I'll do an edit and see how it sounds.

[Daft]

Fair enough. AVP2 killed any love I had for Predator, although I think they're pretty dumb anyway which probably didn't help. Also, the series is a franchise - which includes everything the IP is used in, afaik. All the films have the same continuity, i.e. none.

 

When I look at acting I always come at it from a writing perspective (not that you should, it's just how I do it), you can't polish a turd.

 

Anyways, the two key points are efficiency in writing (Which is probably the hardest. A lot of people never learn to do this.) and avoidance of repetition (After you've finished something, leave it for a bit and then come back to it. Read it out loud if you need to. You'll see what needs fixing).

 

Edit: Also in your bizarrely named 'To, The Reader' page the opening sentence of the penultimate paragraph reads;

 

I try to keep mutual in my reviews and I try to tell everyone the facts with a little hint of my opinion as well.

 

Two things, 1) I think you mean 'neutral' not 'mutual' and 2) your opinion is your job. Films, acting, writing - it's all subjective (The issue is usually the subject and (normally their) lack of cultural code but there's nothing you can do about that and it's a whole different conversation.).

 

 

 

Edit 2 (This is VERY important.): If you are serious about writing, about being a good writer, forget about films. Read. Read books, good books. Hell, even shit books. You will become a better writer, and much much quicker. This is the problem with most the hack writers out there at the moment - idiots who go to college and do courses for screenwriting but don't know who the fuck J.D. Salinger is.

Edited July 19, 2010 by Daft

[Beast]

Fair enough. AVP2 killed any love I had for Predator, although I think they're pretty dumb anyway which probably didn't help. Also, the series is a franchise - which includes everything the IP is used in, afaik. All the films have the same continuity, i.e. none.

 

When I look at acting I always come at it from a writing perspective (not that you should, it's just how I do it), you can't polish a turd.

 

Anyways, the two key points are efficiency in writing (Which is probably the hardest. A lot of people never learn to do this.) and avoidance of repetition (After you've finished something, leave it for a bit and then come back to it. Read it out loud if you need to. You'll see what needs fixing).

 

Edit: Also in your bizarrely named 'To, The Reader' page the opening sentence of the penultimate paragraph reads;

 

 

 

Two things, 1) I think you mean 'neutral' not 'mutual' and 2) your opinion is your job. Films, acting, writing - it's all subjective (The issue is usually the subject and (normally their) lack of cultural code but there's nothing you can do about that and it's a whole different conversation.).

 

 

 

Edit 2 (This is VERY important.): If you are serious about writing, about being a good writer, forget about films. Read. Read books, good books. Hell, even shit books. You will become a better writer, and much much quicker. This is the problem with most the hack writers out there at the moment - idiots who go to college and do courses for screenwriting but don't know who the fuck J.D. Salinger is.

 

Okay, I'll change that now, thanks. Also, I read loads of books. My teachers used to nickname me Bookworm because I was often borrowing their books. In my room right now, I have about 40 Stephen King books, James Herberts, Virginia Andrews, Dan Browns, Thomas Harris, Christopher Paolini, J.R.R Tolkien, Dean Kootz, Eoin Colfer, C.S Lewis, Stephenie Meyers (not really going to count her...) and J.K Rowling (all in all, about 90-100 and I have more under my bed, haha).

[Ashley]

I wouldn't really count Rowling either :p

 

Remembered something I meant to say a while back; the easiest type of reviews should be when you either hate or love the film passionately. Its "meh" films that are difficult to review. Yet your reviews of Titanic and whichever Predator one you didn't like (I forget) read pretty much the same. There's no passion either way.

[Daft]

Okay, I'll change that now, thanks. Also, I read loads of books. My teachers used to nickname me Bookworm because I was often borrowing their books. In my room right now, I have about 40 Stephen King books, James Herberts, Virginia Andrews, Dan Browns, Thomas Harris, Christopher Paolini, J.R.R Tolkien, Dean Kootz, Eoin Colfer, C.S Lewis, Stephenie Meyers (not really going to count her...) and J.K Rowling (all in all, about 90-100 and I have more under my bed, haha).

 

Okay, now I'm going to sound like an utter prude/cunt (I promise you, this is good advice ). I wouldn't count any of them, bar Tolkien (and yes, I think C.S.Lewis is shit). Those are all trash. Had you listed David Gemmell I would have died (When I was librarian I banished all his books from the library). I mean good books;

 

J.D. Salinger - Catcher in the Rye

Norman Lewis - Naples 44'

Bret Easton Ellis - American Psycho, Less than Zero (He wrote this when he was 19, think about that.)

George MacDonald Fraser - Quartered Safe Out Here

Joseph Heller - Catch 22

Frank Herbert - Dune (Don't bother with any of his other books, this one is seminal though.)

Mikhail Bulgakov - The Master and Margarita

Stefen Zweig - Chess

F. Scott Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby

William Golding - Lord of the Flies (I think everyone's read this.)

George Orwell - Homage to Catalonia

Hunter S Thompson - ANYTHING HE'S WRITTEN (Hells Angels)

Alan Moore and David Gibbson - Watchmen (No joke)

Art Spiegelman - Maus (Another stunning graphic novel.)

Nikolai Gogol - Diary of a Madman

Richard Matherson - I Am Legend (Please don't let the abysmal film put you off. This book is a beautiful study of isolation and hope.)

Joseph Conrad - Heart of Darkness (I am not a fan, it's like wading through treacle. It's definitely an experience.)

 

That's a start. Really what you have to do is up the quality. Your mind is just like your body, if you eat chocolate and sweets all the time you're going to be fat and unfit. You eat good food and exercise and you'll go far. It may not seem like it is that important but it really is; it is how you learn - they will teach you and influence you. They will mentor your writing.

 

I started highlighting ones you should definitely read but that turned out to be all of them (Except Catcher in the Rye. I know! I have four copies, no jokes, and just can't be arsed. I'm bad.)

 

If I were to recommend one of those to start reading it would be Hunter S Thompson's Hells Angels. I Am Legend is also quite short, I think under 200 pages, so maybe start there.

Edited July 19, 2010 by Daft

[Paj!]

(You have four copies of Catcher in the Rye and haven't read them? It's so short... :p)

[Daft]

In fairness, I only bought two of them. My sister bought another, and didn't read it other and my other sister got hers from the school library about 20 years ago.

[Paj!]

I have a love/hate relationship with it. Spent almost 2 years dong and redoing and refining my big A-level essay on it, which drove me insane. But then I felt proud, as it was because my teacher felt it was hard to actually say anything new or interesting about the book, and so to get an A/prove him wrong in the end made me happy.

 

At the end of the school year people were burning things on the fancy lawn (classy) and I gave them my copy of it.