The review I have chosen to analyse is Timeout: London. When looking at this review the first thing I noticed was it was very short and did not go into much detail about the film.
This review focuses mainly on the narrative and the cast/actors in the film and also mentions the book which the film was based on. The cast is a USP of the film therefore the casts names are written in the review “DiCaprio”,“(Wahlberg)”,“(Madio”. Only their last names are mentioned therefore it shows that the actors are well known that they do not even have to write their first name. The reviewer focuses on the narrative when it says “writes about his life in an exercise book” and “he gets into heroin”.
Another thing mentioned is how the film director came across to the reviewer when the reviewer writes “Kalvert's adaptation faithfully tracks Carroll's descent into the realms of addiction, but fails to shed much light on the impulses which take him there” and also states “fails to translate the highs to the screen, but dwells long and hard on the lows.” Which suggests the good and negative points about Kalvert’s vision.
There is no mention about the use of editing, camera or sound. Mise en scene is briefly mentioned in terms of location as the review states that the film is set in “NY” (New York).
Beside the review there is a text box which gives us information on the director, producer and cast. This is very easy and straight forward to read and gets straight to the point. This will appeal to people who do not want to waste a lot of time and may just want to find out the basic information on the film.
The next review I am going to analyse is The New York Times by Janet Maslin.
From the first sentence I can already tell that the language used in this review is slightly more complex than the other two reviews I have looked at so far as the writer, Maslin uses phrases such as “labyrinth of abasement” and also uses language techniques like alliteration- “malicious mischief” (to emphasise her points). Although Maslin’s language can be quite complex, another example being “parochial schoolboy” She has also made up her own words for instance “youthquake” and uses words from other languages (Latin to be exact) when she writes “ad nauseam”-which means “to the point of nausea”-something happening so often that you become sick. The made up words makes it seem informal and as if the target audience is young as it feels like it is a friend talking to you and making up words, however due to the publication being a Newspaper, the complex words and the inclusion of quotes from another language- Latin, which I find to be a hard language to learn- may suggest that the target audience is for a more higher educated audience and an older audience (25-30).
The review starts off by telling their storyline/narrative about Jim Carrols life revolving around stealing, basketball, drugs and his diary. In the second paragraph, Maslin writes about the context of the book when she writes: “Mr. Carroll wrote this underground classic in the mid-1960's” and “first appeared in book form, the author had also taken on a downtown punk cachet” and then goes on to compare the book with Kalvert’s vision- the film.
Similarly to the other reviews, this one also mentions the names of most of the main cast “Dicaprio”, “Mark Wahlberg, a k a Marky Mark” “Juliette Lewis” and “Lorraine Bracco”. Quoting “Mr. DiCaprio may harden into a practiced Hollywood actor someday” shows that she has positive things to say about the cast. When referring to the cast, the reviewer refers to specific scenes throughout the film for for instance “a drugged-out Jim paying a desperate visit to his mother” and gives her opinion when she writes “The confrontation is worth the whole film”
Finally, the use of camera is mentioned (briefly) unlike the other reviews I have analysed. Maslin comments that the films “showy camera tricks (a heavy emphasis on wide angles) would detract from any performance.” There is not much mentioned on this however Maslin does acknowledge the use of camera in her review. Further more, she mentions the director, producer and gives more information such as the “written by Bryan Goluboff, based on the memoir by Jim Carroll; director of photography, David Phillips; edited by Dana Congdon; music by Graeme Revell; production designer, Christopher Nowak; produced by Liz Heller and John Bard Manulis; released by New Line Cinema. Running time: 102 minutes” This tells me that this is for an audience who may be studying/working and who have a lot of interest within the film industry. This may imply that the audience could be middleclass/university educated.
http://movies.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=990CE1DC1F39F932A15757C0A963958260&partner=Rotten Tomatoes
In the Rolling Stones Review of The Basketball Diaries, Peter Travers writes in an informal way for a general reader and when reading it, it feels as if he is talking directly to us when he uses rhetorical questions such as “Can an acting tour de force redeem a muddled movie?” and writes things like “In Diaries, he gets his first starring role and slam-dunks the sucker to victory”. Throughout the review Travers shortens the film to just “Diaries” instead of “The Basketball Diaries” I found this review interesting and quite funny to read because of the informal tone.
From the beginning of the review, in the first sentence, Travers mentions the lead role Leonardo DiCaprio (who was also the Unique Selling Point) “Can an acting tour de force redeem a muddled movie? Check out Leonardo DiCaprio in The Basketball Diaries for a lesson in how it's done” He praises Dicaprio on his acting and writes that the script and direction threatened “ to turn a stinging true story into a TV-ish I Was a Teen-age Junkie.” Focusing on narrative/plot.
After writing about Dicaprio he then focuses on Dicaprio’s Character Jim. He writes not just about Dicaprio’s character in the film, he also writes about the actual real life character of Jim Carroll – “Carroll went on to shake his drug habit and to write poetry (Living at the Movies, The Book of Nods), form a rock band (Catholic Boy, Dry Dreams, I Write Your Name) and release a sequel diary (Forced Entries)” In the film it does not state what rock bands he was in or the titles of the poems he wrote therefore the reviewer knows about the actual true story that inspired the film and puts this extra knowledge into the review proving that the informal tone of this review does not mean that it is unreliable or rubbish.
Travers focuses on Dicaprio again but this time about his movement during the film (mise en scene) when he writes “DiCaprio may lack the athleticism of an all-city hotshot on court, he makes all the right moves dramatically.” He also writes about the non diegetic sound (voice over) which was a diary entry "Time sure flies when you're young and jerking off." Which lightens the mood and lowers tension. The narrative and other actors are focussed on next : “Neutron (Patrick McGaw), Pedro (James Madio) and Mickey (Mark Wahlberg)” and mentions how all of these characters dream to be in the NBA and are on their high school basketball team.
Further more in the next paragraph Travers also focuses on narrative however more specifically on the convention of “sex”. He lists all of the characters linked to this theme “Swifty (Bruno Kirby), the team's crotch-grabbing coach, and Diane (Juliette Lewis), a junkie slut” and “two rich daddy's girls”. The next thing mentioned is drugs which is another theme.
After this Travers focuses on the structure of the film and the chronological order in which things happen for example “Everything happens in lock step. Jim robs old ladies, fights, stumbles onto the court in a stoned daze, gets expelled” etc. The directors name “Scott Kalvert” is used to mention Dicaprio’s name once again during the review. This gives the impression that without Dicaprio (USP) the film would not be as good as it is.
In this review, The location (New York) is mentioned however there is no further detail telling us it is set in the poorer part of it. Moreover the use of camera or editing is not mentioned at all during this review which once again tells us that this targeted at a lower/ working class audience.
“You leave The Basketball Diaries believing that Leonardo DiCaprio can do anything.”
No comments:
Post a Comment