Review 1:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/2001/11/06/harry_potter_philosophers_
stone_2001_review.shtml
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (2001)Reviewed by
Adrian Hennigan
Updated 6 November 2001
Possibly Hollywood's first bespectacled hero since Harold Lloyd, Harry Potter
makes a debut in Chris Columbus' $125 million movie about the young boy
destined to be a great wizard.
If you've read the novel - and if you haven't, why not? - impeccable casting
means you'll feel like you've met all of these characters already. The three young
leads - Radcliffe, Grint, and especially Watson - deliver likable, natural
performances, while the film's biggest joy is watching the spot-on performances
of their peers: Maggie Smith plays Professor McGonagall like Miss Jean Brodie
with a pointy hat, while Robbie Coltrane steals the show as loose-lipped Hagrid.
Alan Rickman, meanwhile, sneers for England as Professor Snape.
Indeed, the whole film plays like an advertisement for historic old England if this doesn't get Americans buying our castles and cathedrals, or at least coming
to look at them again, nothing will. Hell, even King's Cross station looks pleasant.
The film's not flawless, though. It's half an hour too long and much of the book's
humour is jettisoned. Still, it's refreshing to witness a big-budget movie where
the impressive special effects complement the story, rather than merely
compensate for the lack of one.
"Harry Potter" may not leave you spellbound, then, but it'll definitely leave you
wanting to discover the "Chamber of Secrets".
End Credits
Director: Chris Columbus
Genre: Fantasy, Family
Writer: Steven Kloves
Length: 152 minutes
Stars: Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint,
Emma Watson, Richard Harris, Robbie
Coltrane, Maggie Smith, Alan
Rickman, Ian Hart, Richard Griffiths
Cinema: 16 November 2001
Country: USA/UK
Review 2: http://www.wikihow.com/Sample/Movie-Review
The Dark Knight Rises (2012)
Cast: Christian Bale, Tom Hardy, Anne Hathaway, and Joseph
Gordon-Levitt
Director: Christopher Nolan
Synopsis: Christian Bale stars as both the classic caped crusader and
his billionaire alter-ego, Bruce Wayne. In this third installment of
Christopher Nolan’s Batman films, Bruce Wayne no longer feels
that the City of Gotham needs a hero and goes on a secluded hiatus.
However, when a new villain, Bane (Tom Hardy), threatens
Gotham City, Wayne dons his cape and mask once more.
The one actor that gave this reviewer pause was Anne Hathaway as
Selina Kyle. She has historically been typecast as the girl next door,
so it was a shock to watch her steal and fight her way through the
City of Gotham. After a few scenes, however, we were convinced
that the casting decisions was a good one, as Hathaway portrayed
the darker Catwoman role brilliantly.
True to Nolan’s style, at 164 minutes, this film is fairly long. There
were a few times when the movie felt a bit drawn out, but the
gorgeous action scenes and impressive dialogue really held the
audience’s attention and kept them on the edge of their seats.
However, the timeline was a bit unclear at times. For a number of
scenes, it was hard to tell whether it had been days or months or
years that had passed since the last time a given character had been
on screen.
Review:
Christopher Nolan brings yet another adrenaline-filled, comicinspired movie to the big screen. We see all sorts of familiar faces
this time around, but the audience is introduced to a few new
characters as well.
When crisis threatens Gotham City, Bruce Wayne jumps back into
the Batmobile to fight crime. Batman is joined on his quest by an
eager orphaned cop (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), a seductive cat burglar
(Anne Hathaway), and a violent masked villain (Tom Hardy).
This film served as great entertainment with its colorful cast and
numerous plot twists. Nolan used actors that had either appeared in
previous Batman films or in his blockbuster hit Inception, and all of
them shone in their respective roles: Tom Hardy was almost
unrecognizable in his Bane costume, while Joseph Gordon-Levitt
and Marion Cotillard were both excellent—and obviously
comfortable with Nolan’s directing style and the film’s dramatic
tone.
Despite the films minor shortcomings, The Dark Knight Rises is
exciting, creative, and dark—and well worth a few hours of your
time.
How to write a film review
Title
Introduction: You can start off with information about the film
(e.g. financial aspects, awards, reviews) and/or the director (e.g.
awards, former movies). Also quotes and/or anecdotes may catch
the reader’s attention. You can also describe what you expected
from the film.
Main part: Provide a brief summary of the plot. Make sure that
your summary makes sense to a reader who does not know the
movie. Do not refer to specific scenes. Is the plot interesting,
believable or rather predictable?
Present the main actors and their characters and say something
about their performance. If you like you may give reasons why you
identify with a certain character. Are the actors believable and sympathetic?
State your opinion of the movie and give reasons for it. What are its
strengths and weaknesses (camera, soundtrack etc.)? Support your
opinion with specific scenes.
You can relate the film to other well-known examples of its genre
(thriller, comedy, drama etc.) and/or theme. What is unique about
your film? Does it have a specific message? If so, do you agree with
this message?
You can place the film in its cultural context and/or
describe/speculate on the director’s intention and message.
Conclusion: Either recommend the film or advise against seeing
it. Is this only a film for teenagers, women, young men?
Další informace např. zde:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/english/creativewriting/
movingimagesrev2.shtml