I was requested. Here I am!
Film reviews are a tricky thing.
As Swahbir explained, always start off a review with a spoiler-free alert. Only announce that you will include spoilers if there are just minor little details that you found interesting and have no major effect on the plot - rather than simply retelling what happens in the film and what the characters do and that.
I would also agree with Swahbir that there is no compact, informing blueprint to writing a film review. Not to say it cannot be done at all, yet there is not really a ‘framework’ to refer to when typing out your thoughts.
However, here is what I have to say, so I hope you are paying attention.
My earliest film reviews were for the early MCU Phase 1 films. They are god-awful.
They have subheadings which give them a sense of structure, but they are informal and pathetically prosed.
Granted, they were written over a year ago, when I was still a fledgling Quoran. I’m most likely still a fledgling Quoran now. Even so, I reckon this following list could highlight what I was doing wrong and what you can hope to avoid.
Firstly, tone.
This is the greatest thing I believe every film review should consistently employ to a high standard.
There should be as frequent low-frequency lexis (little to no informal language in other words); as few, if none, contractions as possible; considering effective employment of tenses, voices and syntax which would leave your reader believing your reviews carry eloquence (and can expect to see more); no ‘silly’ writing (emojis, abbreviations, vulgar language, excessive use of punctuation, cap locks or bold font).
This would hopefully make your review more ‘professional’ to the eye of the reader. Mine is still amateurish, and not every film reviewer on Quora is a licensed critic paid to do their job, but it is still important for other lovers of television and cinema to feel enlightened about a film they are hoping to watch, or have done already.
Secondly, structure.
Your review can start off basic: a beginning, middle and end. There should be a direction with your review. You make a thesis (an opening statement) about the film that hooks the reader into wanting to learn more, then you proceed in that vector.
You could then conclude with a passage that summarises why you thought the film was good, bad, mediocre and end with a rating and/or recommendation.
Notice how I have - and will - use pictures in this piece. Typically, if you’re going to use a picture, it should be ones with intent. Anything irrelevant and you will lessen the tonal quality. Use pictures with precision: don’t use them consecutively after the other, but also don’t have blocks and blocks of text.
It feels empty.
My approach is always focusing on the story first. How do I summarise it succinctly? How would it inform the audience that this is a film they should wholeheartedly witness, pass or go in with nothing to lose?
This would then typically lead into things which you liked and disliked about the story. Things like pacing, structure, escalation, climaxing and resolving. If your film is two hours long, does the time fly by in a good or bad way? Does it feel rushed, or slow? Why?
Does every scene feel as though they are purposeful to the story, or can some identified padded material be cut out?
How about the genre of the story itself? The setting, the tone (or combination of them)? How does that inform your personal expectations with all you know of films and how might that information appeal to a casual or dedicated audience?
Does the story subvert expectations? Are there any twists or surprises in store for the audience to perk their eyes at?
Around this point, I would talk about the characters.
You don’t have to go into extensive detail behind the writing of every character, but a summary would suffice. Were all the characters one-dimensional pieces of cardboard, or three-dimensional, developed and humanised people?
It doesn’t matter if they are a talking raccoon, a dictator who wants to take over the world or a sympathetic madman broken by society. If the audience cannot find anything to like - or, most importantly, remember - about the characters, then there is no reason to connect with them, no reason to feel invested in overcoming their struggles or progressing through their journeys.
You should say whether or not this seems to be the case. If you cannot quite say whether a character was entertaining enough for you, then just go with a generic ‘hit-or-miss’ remark.
Then I would talk about the performances - and casting if it is noteworthy - that can inform the audience about who is in the film and whether they are worth their place.
Again, details are more for analyses, but it would not hurt to say whether the actor/actress seemed to perform better (or worse) than you expected.
I would then move onto the themes and more technical aspects of the film. Does the film have themes of shallow or impactful substance? Are they simple attempts to passively entertain the audience, or do they provoke thought and encourage revisits to discuss and debate it further?
The technical aspects include things like costumes, set designs, cinematography, editing, choreography and the soundtrack. Are they exceptional, or underwhelming? Does anything stand out to you, or is nothing commendable that would inform how an audience might react in a certain way?
Then I would end with a summation - typically like I’m writing an essay - rate it, and recommend.
Thirdly, style.
Are you bold, emotional or passionate? Are you monotonous, meticulous or precise? Do you treat every word as if they are your carefully cultivated pixels of articulation that would gain you recognition for your efforts into providing the review in the first place?
Do your sentences run on and on or do they just anti-climactically stop in their tracks? Do you have variation in your sentences and paragraphing, making sure they are the appropriate length for the point you are focusing on?
Is your language simple, or nonsensical? Try to use an expanded vocabulary, yet keeping it straightforward where it is necessary. Is there an idiosyncrasy to your writing? Do you do something that telegraphs to the reader “Yep, that’s a solid review written by ________.”
When people see enough of your reviews, they will expect to see more of it, and may be (un)/pleasantly surprised if the quality dips or exceeds their opinion of it.
Every writer - let alone a film reviewer - must stand out, even if they largely agree, disagree and analyse the same things. What counts is doing it in your own words.
That brings me to my final tip: originality.
Films can be objectively labelled as good or bad; that’s why film critics exist in the first place.
What is more personable is the subjectivity of a person’s opinion about a film. What did it mean to them? What kind of personal attachment do they have with it? If you have an opinion about the film, share it.
However, you should try and do it in a way that is illuminating to a potential audience. If they are interested, they will want to learn more about how and why you arrived at your conclusions. That should be reflected in your ensuing writing.
Me? I’m an idiot. I say that lightly.
Sometimes, I just cannot find the right words or the right means of expressing my thoughts, hence why some of my posts about films take longer than other authors to get to the point, and in less pristinely articulated language.
But I am learning and trying to improve, which is the only thing I can do.
Ultimately, you want to make your audience care about your reviews. Even if it is controversial, or pessimistic, or unflinchingly corrosive, you want your audience to feel humoured, challenged or thinking after they have read what you have to say.
Everyone’s a critic in the end. The trick is doing it in a way that most people cannot.
Remember, these are just tips.
They are not necessarily proven to be factually correct, but I believe they are helpful things to consider when reviewing films.
Overall, what you must achieve with a film review is review it. Give an audience what they should expect or discuss about it without giving away major plot details, without being too ugly to read and having your own voice.
Picture Source Wikipedia
Thanks for Reading
0 Comments