Logan Lucky Film Review Analysis

fullsizeoutput_2547.jpeg

The film review covers an A4 page with an even image to text ratio and has three columns with flush left to break up the text and make it easier for the audience to read. The image is a screenshot from the film, giving the audience a clearer visual insight into the narrative. The image shows two men with very serious facial expressions and dressed like cowboys, conveying the setting. The male on the right has a prosthetic arm, raising questions to the audience such as: “what happened to him?” and enticing them to watch the film to find out. The characters seem to be in a family environment and don’t blend in at all, also creating questions such as “are they meant to be there?” and this is reinforces by the small text in the bottom right corner of the image to add comedy “this didn’t look like cross stitch for beginners”.

Underneath the bold, black, sans-serif typography with tight tracking title (making it stand out from the bright yellow border surrounding the article) there is a section of information about the film, including: the ‘good’ four star rating which suggests that the film will mostly be positive, the released date, certificate rating, film duration, director, cast and the plot. Moreover, it is written in sans-serif typography to make it seem more factual and to get it to stand out from the main review.

The review itself is written in serif typography making it seem more important and creative. The first three words of the review are written in capitalisation to make it seem to the reader that they are being shouted at and grab their attention before the review has even started as well as using a rhetorical question. The writer instantly begins to praise the director with his “welcome return” with the “well-acted” and “slickly directed” film which already begins to persuade the audience to watch the film. Alliteration is used when praising the actors as well for their “cracking chemistry”  as well as “surprisingly convincing accents” and the “standout performance” from Daniel Craig. Furthermore, the film is described as “hilarious” and a “rarity” connoting that the reader will enjoy the film, especially since it’s unique.

However, the writer does say that the film was only “one draft away from something special” and that the director’s “frenetic working pace” has put that at jeopardy as well as it “not having the impactful ending the build up deserves”. But, the writer leaves the review on a positive that it was “enjoyable”and that the cast is “a pleasure to spend time with” leaving the reader wanting to go watch the film.

Eat Locals Film Review Analysis

fullsizeoutput_254d

This page has a total of three film reviews, and one of the reviews received a ‘awful’ star rating, which the review reflects. ‘Eat Locals’ doesn’t even have a quarter of the A4 page, possibly due to its star rating and its IMDb rating of 5.1 out of 10. The page has a bright yellow border around it to capture the reader’s eye. Furthermore, the review for ‘Eat Locals’ has only one short column with flush left making it easy for the reader to read.

Before the review, there is some information about the film, written in black sans-serif typography to make it stand out from the bright yellow border and to make the text seem more informative. It includes the star rating, release date, certificate rating, film duration, director and cast but, it hasn’t given the audience a basic summary of the plot, unlike the large review for The Hitman’s Bodyguard. However, the reader can depict what the film is about due to the title of the film and the image that the writer has selected as it is very dark and gloomy, connoting that the storyline is based around vampires.

Capitalisation is used at the beginning of the article, as the writer has intended to make the reader feel as if they are being shouted at and encapture their attention. The reader immediately gets put off from watching the film by the writer as it is insinuated that the director wasn’t very good and should remain an actor as he’s “unlikely to make a career change”. The writer also explains that the script “awkwardly quotes everything” from different films – ones that the director was in – which conveys to the reader that it is unoriginal. Furthermore, by using the adverb ‘awkwardly’ it suggests that the reader would have a hard time watching the film.

The disappointment of the film is highlighted as it has failed to live up to both the comedy and horror genre as “it neglects to include either laughs or scares”. The negative review continues by connoting that it is an amateur and unprofessional film as the cast seemed that they were “just doing a favour for a friend” and not taking the roles seriously. Finally, the writer directly tells the reader to not watch the film with a sense of humour as “vampires live forever, but you won’t. Spend your time watching something else”.

Overall, I definitely wouldn’t want to watch this film as the review is negative throughout, from the amateur cast, to the awful directing and even an unoriginal script which quotes from other films throughout.

 

Dunkirk Film Review Analysis

fullsizeoutput_254f.jpeg

Dunkirk is one of the very few films from Empire Magazine to be rated the ‘Excellent’ 5 stars, which is probably why the film has a two-page spread with four screenshot images and six columns. The orange star rating stands out from the black typography and this will result in capturing the reader’s attention and get them to read it in order to find out why it has been rated five stars. Furthermore, the reader will expect the review to be completely positive.

In the main picture (which takes up the majority of the page) the war theme is established straight away, the men are isolated, with the ocean surrounding them and every person but one, is looking forward or at the floor in terror and nervousness whilst one male is looking up in the sky and central, suggesting that he is the main character. They are all ready to fight, with their armour and guns equipped, creating a sense of danger. Furthermore in the background, there is another ship but is this an enemy ship? On the right there are three equally sized pictures which are snapshots from the film. The pictures all illustrate fear in the facial expressions of the characters.

The title of the film is written in bold, black, sans-serif typography with tight tracking to make it stand out. The information section is also written in black sans-serif typography making it seem more factual. It includes the star rating, release date, certificate rating, film duration, director, cast and the overall plot of the film so the audience can decide whether it is a type of film that they would like to watch.

Capitalisation is used for the first three words in the article to engage the reader immediately. The review is written in black serif typography with tight tracking, the serif typography makes the article seem more important and creative. The ‘excellent’ review begins immediately with the writer praising how the film is made and the use of adjectives reinforce this: ” stunningly rendered and thunderously intense”. The writer also talks about the director and how he “doesn’t bombard us with information” and tells the story through “simple image” and making it a “mood-piece” conveying that when watching the film, the audience will experience many emotions. Later on, the writer also states that the film is “meticulous and mesmerising” highlighting the amount of detail the director has gone into.

The writer constantly emphasises how unique, “different” and “incredible” the film is as well as having the “wow factor”. Because the writer keeps praising the film throughout and using pull quotes to reinforce it, most readers would go watch the film afterwards (me included), especially since he keeps comparing it to other films such as the iconic “Titanic” and more.

Finally, in the overall verdict is highly positive, calling it the “highly intensifying combat thriller” and even compares it to “Jaws” conveying that this film will go down in history as a classic that everyone needs to watch.

Atomic Blonde Film Review Analysis

fullsizeoutput_254b.jpeg

This film review fills an A4 page with an even image to text ratio. It has a three column layout with flush left, making it easier for the audience to read as it breaks up the bulk of text. The image identifies the action thriller genre as well as giving the reader a visual insight into the narrative. Centralised in the picture there is a very fierce-looking woman, beating the stereotypical expectations of women being weak and vulnerable and even that women should be a homemaker and in the kitchen. Yes she is in a kitchen, however, she is fighting two men simultaneously and winning which is highlighted by the male on the left crouched over and in pain while the other male seems to be surrendering. Moreover, her power and authority is illustrated by her looking down upon them.

The information section is written just beneath the bold, black san-serif title which makes it stand out from the bright yellow border. It is also written in black sans-serif typography making it seem more informative. It includes key details about the film: the ‘okay’ star rating. suggesting that the review is going to be more positive than negative, release date, certificate rating, film duration, director, cast and the overall plot to give the reader an idea of whether they would enjoy the film.

The review is written in serif typography making it seem more important and creative. Capitalisation is used for the first three words to grab the reader’s attention as they will believe that they are being shouted at by the writer. The writer connects to the reader automatically due to direct address by using the word “we” and rhetorical questions. Furthermore, a sense of humour is created by the writer suggesting that the directors may know about “growing political tension” as this kind of film is becoming increasingly popular to make. Immediately the writer starts with a positive review as the film is unique and stands out from films similar to it due to it being about “style not substance”.

The writer then begins to review the main character in the film, giving the reader an insight into her character being cold who doesn’t “invite empathy” and even describes her as an “ice queen” whilst her partner is “charmingly unreliable and operating his own agenda”, these two characters seem like the would clash, or will they become close?

The action then becomes the main part to review, with “breathtaking stunts”, “brutal fights” and “car chases” with great camera work. This will entice the reader to watch the film in order to see these amazing action scenes. Furthermore, the writer describes that the film is “unusual” in the sense that you see a “woman get battered to this extent on-screen” and with no one holding back. However, the writer highlights how fierce her character is with “badassitute” and the use of the colloquial language keeps the review friendly and informal for the reader.

Finally, the film is compared against some iconic films including the Bond, Hunt and Bourne films and the writer believes that this film earns a place among them, making the audience decide to go watch the film for themselves (including me).

 

Hitman’s Bodyguard Film Review Analysis

fullsizeoutput_254d.jpeg

The reader can identify the action comedy genre immediately due to the screenshot image from the film, directly giving the reader a visual insight into the narrative. They are both carrying guns however, the male on the right (the very famous actor Ryan Gosling) facial expression conveys his worry as well as both characters holding each other giving a sense of humour already.

The page has three different film reviews on it, however due to ‘The Hitman’s Bodyguard” having the highest IMDb rating of 7.2 out of 10 and also being the one that many people have been excited to see, especially because of the very famous actors in the film (drawing in their fan base) it has the biggest review as it can then be in more detail. The page has a bright yellow border, which captures the reader’s eye and makes the black writing and images stand out as well.

The sans-serif information section includes all the key details about the film, including the ‘poor’ star rating which suggests that the film will be negative, certificate rating, length of film, release date, director, cast and the overall plot for the reader to read before the review so they can understand the basis of the film.

The review itself is written in serif typography making it seem more important and creative. The review starts with capitalisation of the first few words, as the writer has intended for the reader to feel as if they are being shouted at which results in the reader being engaged. It is insinuated that the film is predictable as the audience knew “exactly” what was going to happen due to this type of film being ” a Hollywood Staple in the 80s and 90s” from this the reader can depict that the film is unoriginal and ‘out of date’. The italics are used to add emphasis on the word ‘exactly’. Furthermore, the reader will feel “apathy” (a lack of interest) in this film.

However, the writer states that bringing back a film like this is “refreshing” in its simplicity and feels “nostalgic”, this would entice the audience to watch the film, especially people who enjoyed these types of films in the 80s and 90s to bring back memories. However, it seems that the reader may be disappointed by the film because the director never finds the “energy” despite the film looking good on paper.

A pull quote is used when describing the characters in order to not only give the reader an insight into the character but also the relationship between them, “triple A-rated security guard” this suggests that their personalities clash, but still have a sense of humour between them. furthermore, this is reinforced by another pull quote later on “Eat my ass!” “That’s what she said”.

It’s clear to the reader that the film has lived up to the action genre expectations as the violence is “brutal” as well as there being a “high body count” and so if they enjoy the action genre then this is still a film that will interest them. At then end of the review, the writer leaves the reader asking questions as to what happens next with a cliff hanger, which can only be answered by them watching the film.

 

47 Meters Down Film Review Analysis

fullsizeoutput_2551.jpeg

This page has a total of three different film reviews on it, but to ensure the audience knows where each review starts and ends they are separated using images and the bright yellow line and border which ensures that it captures the audience’s eye. They also have the title of each film written in bold black sans-serif typography which stands out from the border, just in case the audience cannot identify the film using the image above.

47 Meters Down only has an IMDb rating of 5.8 out of 10, and this is why the review is only small as it’s not a popular film.

It has a very dark snapshot image from the film, giving the audience a clear visual insight into the narrative of the film. Furthermore, the dark colours in the image are associated with the thriller genre. The image is taken with a tight frame, implying to the reader that they are isolated and trapped. Furthermore, this is reinforced by nothing else being seen in the background, just the dark blue ocean highlighting how secluded and alone the characters are and fear is show due to the character’s body language. They are in diving clothing and have oxygen tanks, however, will the oxygen run out soon if they can’t get back to the surface? This creates a sense of urgency immediately.

The key information about the film is shown at the beginning, before the review has started in order to give the reader the information that they couldn’t have gathered from the image and to also give the reader a chance to find out if this is the type of film that they’d be interested in watching. It includes the ‘okay’ three star rating, release date, certificate rating, film length, director and cast. However, it hasn’t given a summary of the plot.

Capitalisation is used at the beginning of the review to grab the reader’s attention as they feel as if they are being shouted at. The writer uses alliteration to explain that the story revolves around a “hellish-holiday” as well as comedy through a play on words by calling it a “slaycation”, this results in the audience being drawn in as the writer uses colloquial language. The writer also states similar films so that the audience can decide whether they will enjoy this film depending on what they thought about the others.

The writer uses binary opposition to highlight how what has happened to the characters is both a gift and a curse as the cage is both a “prison” and their “salvation” from the danger that lurks in the water. This raises questions in the reader’s mind such as ‘how are they going to get to the surface safely?’ and entices the audience to watch the film. A pull quote from the film is used to highlight the irony of one of the characters saying how they “wanna stay down here forever” but will she? However, the writer states the negative about the film as it isn’t “character crafting” and that the director wasn’t “aiming for the high art”.

Gifted Film Review Analysis

IMG_7696

The article has a 25:75 image to text ratio. The image is a screenshot from the film, giving the audience an insight into the narrative of the film. The audience can depict that the characters are in a secluded place and therefore isolated due to the background of a beach with no other person in sight, but are they just isolated physically or emotionally too? Furthermore, this will raise questions about why they have distanced themselves from other people. In the foreground of the image, a young girl is sitting happily on her father figure’s lap, connoting a strong bond between them. Therefore, the audience has immediately gained information about the film, without having to read anything.

The page has three different film review on the page with a bright yellow border around it, ensuring that it captures the reader’s eye. Furthermore, the review itself is written in serif typography making it seem more important and creative, with a two column layout and flush left, breaking up the chunk of text and making it easier for the audience to read. Whereas, the information section is clearly separated from the main body of text using a bold black line, it is written in sans-serif typography, making it seem more informative. Within the section it includes the key details about the film, including: the ‘okay’ star rating, release date, certificate rating, length of film, director, cast and an overall summary of the plot.

The first three words of the article are in capitalisation which the writer has done to intend the reader feel as if they are being shouted at and grabs their attention immediately. The writer first begins to talk about the star in the film, Chris Evans and talks about him being “no stranger to superheroes” and reinforces this with a list of three to establish his previous work, as well as sarcasm to create a sense of humour in the review by stating Chris Evan’s most famous role isn’t recognised and sarcastically says, “and someone called Captain America (no, us neither)”. He then uses the actor’s previous work to create a comparison between his old ‘superhero’ roles and his character Frank who “demonstrates an everyday heroism by raising his niece” and from this the reader can depict that the little girl in the image above is in fact his niece and he is now her father figure following “the suicide of her mother”. Later on, a pun is used due to the double meaning, of the word ‘shield’ in the sentence “wants to shield Mary from a familiar fate” because Chris Evan’s most famous role of Captain America had the iconic shield to protect him, whereas now, Frank is trying to shield his niece from pain and hurt.

The writer reviews the character’s in the film as well as how the actor’s execute them. The reader get’s a clearer insight into the characters, Chris Evan’s character (Frank) “broods a lot”, suggesting that something in his past has affected him immensely whilst Grace’s character (Mary) is the “soulful centre” of the movie due to her “naturalness”. Furthermore, a negative point is stated as the writer believes that one of the character’s is “underused”, conveying that the character being used more would’ve resulted in the audience being able to engage more with “Frank’s love interest” and “Mary’s grade school teacher” and therefore get the audience more attached to the character. The writer also introduces the readers to the “one-dimensional ice queen who could probably reign in Narnia”… Frank’s mother who threatens to destroy Frank and Mary’s peaceful life. By comparing her character to an evil, and very well-known character from the film ‘Narnia’ it gives the reader a very clear insight into her character’s personality, making the reader instantly pass judgement of dislike, without even watching the film due to the biased opinion of the writer.

Later on, the writer also compares the film to ‘Good Will Hunting’ and ‘Kramer vs Kramer’  due to the predictable storyline.  However, the writer gives away a spoiler about the film which the audience wouldn’t have predicted, which resulted in them being in suspense due to “counting down” until the characters “tearfully” get reunited which highlights the audience has built up a strong emotional connection with the character and this is reinforced by the “tear jerking turning saccharine” scene, meaning that it is excessively sweet and sentimental.

Finally, the writer reviews the director and how he has “slipped into obvious pitfalls”, failing to live up to his previous work from ‘The Amazing Spiderman’ and ‘500 Days of Summer’ which highlights to the reader that they may well be disappointed as they know he can do better.

The overall verdict results in the readers most likely going to see the “Warm and heartfelt” story even though it gives away the ending too early and that the audience may be disappointed about the director’s work as in previous films it was ‘better’.