It’s not good enough to just go and see the film, writes Luke James

A day doesn’t go by without a new movie review being written and posted on the internet; either from a lone blogger or an established critic for one of the world’s media publications. Everyone, it seems, has an opinion about the latest film.

The journalistic fallout from the Golden Globe awards has been suffocating. I had to stop reading re-hash after re-hash of the same plagiarised, inert ramblings on one blog after another for fear of a boredom-induced coma. If this sounds harsh, consider this; many people set up a blog and start writing in the hope of being noticed or to breakthrough as a professional writer. This is commendable and yes, it does work. However, it’s important to be noticed for all the right reasons.

Film reviewers should really know a bit about filmmaking. They should really do a bit of research too. I’ve lost count of the number of reviews of Avatar. Quite frankly, it seems many reviewers hadn’t even bothered to watch any previous film directed by Mr Cameron. A rookie mistake it would seem, because then the articles are littered with over-used ‘brilliants’ or ‘amazings’. What do these words actually mean within the context of the film? Why would I want to go and see something solely described as ‘outstanding’? The words mean nothing without context.

For example: ‘Avatar is simply breathtaking!’

Is it? Is it really? Well I will be sure to take my inhaler then as I wouldn’t want it to bring on a touch of asthma.

If the ‘critic’ had written ‘Cameron’s use of 3D graphics resulted in images that sucked me into the dramatic narrative the way liposuction sucks away the overindulgence of years of gluttony’, I’d be impressed. Not because I agree or disagree, but because it’s an original and thought-provoking statement.

A critic could go on and write a comparison, referencing early Cameron movies to contemporary Cameron offerings. Maybe, just maybe, if they hadn’t been too dazzled by the light-pen they’re using, they could have looked for a quote from the director, cast, crew – for goodness sake, I’d settle for one from the Dolly Grip. After all, that would, at least, make the piece stand out.

Is this asking too much? No, it isn’t. Not if the writer wants to get noticed. Write something different. I’ve read a few, very good critiques from writers; but they’ve nearly always taken a contrary standpoint or written using a unique style.

Here are my tips for writing a film any review. This’ll be the minimum an editor would want from you. If you want to be paid for your writing; then you really will have to do your homework.

1. Whatever subject you are reviewing, establish what sort of audience it is trying to reach. This will ensure you assess it against fair criteria, rather than just judging it for not achieving an objective which was never intended.
2. Whatever you are writing about there is a minimum amount of essential fact which must be included e.g. the film title; writer and director (never assume or presume the reader knows this, no matter how topical or popular).
3. Additional facts can be interesting and may be necessary to put the work in context e.g. how does it relate to previous films from the same director?
4. Avoid clichés like the plague! Seriously, slovenly adjectives make reviews dull and lifeless. Find synonyms for the following: stunning, entertaining, breathtaking, spectacular etc. A child may say a particular performance was “brilliant”, but an adult writer should use more imaginative and descriptive words. Use a thesaurus and dictionary. It’s lazy writing otherwise.
5. Support your view. A critic of films, for example, must have seen many films. Contrast and compare so your reader can relate the new production to something they have previously seen.

Finally, you need to include enough detail about the storyline to give readers a flavour of what to expect, without giving away too much. Your analysis of what works (or doesn’t work) and why, need to be explained. Provide hard evidence to support your subjectivity.

And remember; the word critic comes from a Greek word to judge. A critic is a person who analyses the evidence; sums up what they think is good as well as what they feel is not so good. Only then should they come to a verdict and make a final judgment.