Molly Mitchell
Advanced Writing Composition
Genre Analysis Draft
Movies are a central point in American culture. According to IMDb, the most popular
movie in the history of the United States, Avatar, grossed $760,505,847 at the box office,
followed by Titanic, which grossed $658,672,302 (IMBd). New movies are released every week
in theatres, and many Americans attend these movies on a regular basis. There are a variety of
different types of movie reviews that reflect America’s fascination with the cinema. Basic movie
reviews, film critiques, and fan-based reviews are the three key types of reviews. They are
different both in regards to textual features and in the ways that they reflect our culture as a
whole. Movie reviews as a genre are written as responses to artistic pieces created within pop
culture, and they reflect our ability to respond to and interpret these works of art. Film critiques,
which are the most popular type of reviews, speak the loudest about American culture because of
their prominence. Those who subscribe to these critiques are most concerned with the artistic
integrity of a film, rather than simply it’s entertainment value or it’s possible fan base, which
opens the doors for a more communal experience.
Film critiques look at movies in the most in-depth, analytical way compared to the other
two types of reviews. Critiques are also the most common types of reviews. Critics cover a wide
assortment of topics. For example, many discuss whether the film was “respectful” or skewed
from the original piece it was based off of, if applicable, or the director and his or her history in
film-making. Keith Phipps, a film critic for NPR, wrote a review on the 2013 film “The Great
Gatsby”. In his critique, he starts off with a note on the director’s past films and alludes to the
novel on which the film is based, commenting on the enormous reputation the novel holds. He
write, “If anyone could pull off a multiplex-friendly adaption of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great
Gatsby – a film treatment that might be capable of stepping out of the long shadow cast by the
book – it’s Baz Luhrmann, right? The Australian director who dragged Shakespeare’s starcrossed into the music-video-shaken, bullet-ridden ‘90s with Romeo + Juliet and compressed a
century’s worth of pop music and melodrama into the glorious Moulin Rouge?” (Phipps). In his
critique, he does not simply discuss the film in question, but compares it to past films by the
same director, and also references the novel on which it’s based. He puts the film into context,
rather than viewing it as a stand-alone piece.
Film critiques also focus on the technical aspects of the film in question. For example,
Ann Hornaday of the Washington Post wrote a critique of the 2012 film “The Hobbit – An
Unexpected Journey”. She notes, “Purely in it’s own terms, ‘An Unexpected Journey’ can’t be
seen as anything but a disappointment, a dreary, episodic series of lumbering walk-talk-fight
sequences that often looks less like genuine cinema than a large-scale video game, its high-def
aesthetic and mushy close-ups perfectly suited to its presumed end-use on a living room wall or
iPhone” (Hornaday). Hornaday takes the picturesque quality of the film and uses as a part of her
criticism. To her, the advanced technical aspects are a drawback on the overall effect the film
had on her, because they took away from a genuine cinematic feel that she seeks in movies.
The biggest distinction between critiques and other types of reviews are the inclusion of
discussions on the big, thematic elements in the film. Another NPR film critic writes in her
critique of the 2011 film “I Don’t Know How She Does It”, “In the chick flick world, hell is
other women, and here specifically it’s the stay-at-home wife and mother. Like so many of its
genre, this movie snickers long and loud at non-working mothers, represented by Kate’s passiveaggressive mother-in-law (Jane Curtin) and a blond harridan (astutely played by Busy Phillips)
spitting pious venom from the StairMaster or scoffing at Kate’s store-bought contribution to the
school bake sale” (Taylor). As can be seen in the excerpt, Taylor goes beyond the face value of
the film in question and delves deeper into the issues at hand, in this case gender stereotypes. In
several regards, then, film critiques take a much more in-depth, informed look at movies, and
view them as an art piece in addition to a form of entertainment. They represent our ability as a
culture to interpret a work of art and to relay to others what we have come up with. Film critics
are usually educated on the technical aspects of filmmaking, about the details of the specific film
in question, including the technical aspects, and about the larger thematic elements that the film
addresses, thus making their analysis more dependable and informative.
Basic reviews are also common types of reviews, though not as prevalent as critiques. In
general, they are written, although sometimes they are in the form of videos, or clips of
television shows. They tend to be short and snappy and cover topics such as which actors and
actresses play in the film and the major plot points. In general, these types of reviews don’t give
an in-depth analysis of the film. Rather, they skim over the hot topics that people would be
interested to know in deciding whether or not to see the film. Often times they quickly cover hot
topics, or topics that are frequently talked about when discussing the film in question.
An example of a blog that provides these types of reviews is
fastfilmreviews.wordpress.com, a popular site that gives brief overviews of popular films. Mark
Hobin is the author. In his review of the 2013 film “Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs 2”,
Hobin writes, “Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs 2 isn’t the most original tale or even the
funniest, but it is pleasant. The narrative ramps up the frivolity by extending the capabilities of
the FLDSMDFR. It now creates bizarre living breathing food-animal hybrids or Foodimals.
They’re the best thing about the story… it’s nonsensical fun, nothing more, and that’s okay”
(Hobin). The writer’s key purpose is to share his or her opinion about the movie, and to convince
or dissuade the reader to see the movie. They are concerned with whether or not the film came
through with its promise to entertain. These types of reviews are trying to appeal to a more
general public, hence why they are shorter then other types of reviews, and only skim the surface
of the details of the film. Another example of a basic movie review can be seen at a website
entitled Popsugar Entertainment. They have a movie review segment called Watch, Pass, or
Rent. The lead actors and actresses are named, a brief overview of the plot is given, a clip or two
of the movie is shown, and then several people are interviewed on whether or not they found the
film entertaining. Based on these testimonies, Popsugar Entertainment gives the film a rating of
watch, pass, or rent. The creators of these videos are not concerned with giving a detailed
analysis of the film. They understand that their audience wants a quick and to the point review of
the movie in question.
Fan based movie reviews are a different story altogether. When certain movies come out,
they have already established a large fan base, and thus people who already have expectations of
what the movie is going to be like. For example, when the Hunger Games movie came out, the
movie already had a large fan base because it was based on a best-selling book. A similar fan
base has developed for movies such as Star Wars, the Doctor Who films, the Lord of the Rings
movies… and so on. As a result of previously cultivated ideas, fan based reviews tend to be more
skewed then other types of reviews, because the reviewer already has an idea in their head of
what the film should be like. These reviews can either be too harsh, because the movie didn’t
meet their pre-conceived notions, or overwhelmingly positive, because the expectations were
met. Either way, fan culture is a unique aspect of movie reviews in that it’s the most
communicative form of reviews. Fans of certain movies create communities in which they can
express their opinions and ideas about the movies they love, thus creating an open, opinionated
conversation. A prime example of this can be seen within the Star Wars fandom. Mike, from
Milwaukee, WI, put together a 70-minute video in response to Star Wars: Episode I The
Phantom Menace. According to Peter Sciretta of slashfilm.com, who wrote an article on Mike’s
video, some of the various topics Mike covers in his video include the lack of direction or
emotional involvement in the film, character flaws he found, and an analysis of light saber duels
(Sciretta). It’s clear to see that Mike went into this film with prior expectations, and his video
was his way of contributing to the larger conversation taking place in his fandom. While being
part of a fandom can be a lot of fun, and these communities are a unique response to the artistic
piece in question due to their communicative nature, it’s difficult to interpret a film at face value
in such situations.
As a culture, America loves films. Film reviews are a key way in which our society
responds to the films we love to watch. Film critiques written by critics, basic movie reviews,
and fandom-based reviews are the three key types of reviews, with film critiques being the most
prominent and readily available. The fact that these critiques are the easiest to access and the
most plentiful speaks for American culture as a whole. America is comprised of people who
value films for their artistic integrity. Our interest in what lies beneath the surface of a film can
be seen in the types of reviews that are most prominent. A quick Google search of “movie
reviews” yields nothing but film critiques in the first two pages of search results. Ilona K.E. de
Jong and Christian Burgers of the VU University of Amsterdam, on the subject of consumer
critics versus professional critics, state, “Both quantitative and qualitative analysis show that
these two groups of text differ: Consumer critics mainly evaluate the movies and mostly write
from personal perspective. In contrast, reviews written by professional critics describe the movie
instead of evaluating it” (Ilona, Burgers 75). Fan-based reviews would fall under the consumerbased reviews. We are a society of artistic integrity, and the prominence of film critiques
displays this.
Works Cited
Hobin, Mark. Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs 2. Fast Film Reviews. 19 September 2013.
Web. 18 October 2013.
Hornaday, Ann. Critic Review for The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. Washington Post. 14
December 2012. Web. 18 October 2013.
Ilona K.E. de Jong, Christian Burgers. Do consumer critics write differently from professional
critics? A genre analysis of online film reviews, Discourse, Context & Media, Volume 2,
Issue 2, June 2013, Pages 75-83, ISSN 2211-6958
IMBd. All-Time Box Office: USA. IMBd. 17 October 2013. Web. 18 October 2013.
Phipps, Keith. ‘Gatsby’s’ Jazz-Age Excess, All Over The Screen. NPR. 9 May 2013. Web. 13
October 2013.
Sciretta, Peter. Watch This: 70-minute Video Review of Star Wars: The Phantom Menace. Slash
Film, 17 December, 2009. Web. 18 October 2013.
Taylor, Ella. ‘She Does It’ But You’re Probably Not Up To The Job. NPR. 16 September 2011.
Web. 13 October 2013.