From Rotten Tomatoes to Roger Ebert, film reviews are informative literary mediums through which critics analyze a film’s overall quality, with the goal of distinguishing whether or not the film is worth watching. A film review has a typical structure: it is comprised of an introduction that provides basic background information about the film, actors, producers, and directors. It is generally followed by a brief plot summary, film analysis (of themes, film technique, acting, etc.), and a conclusion, which contains the recommendation or disapproval of the film.
In Daniel Mendelsohn’s film review, “An Affair to Remember,” of Brokeback Mountain, he ignores this typical structure of a film review. In fact, Mendelsohn’s review actually serves as a hybrid literary piece functioning as both a film review and a social commentary.
In the opening paragraph, Mendelsohn introduces the background film information in the span of one sentence, which other critics typically do in one entire paragraph. The social commentary aspect of the review begins almost immediately as he says, “[Brokeback Mountain] is a tale about two homosexual men. Two gay men… To some people it will seem strange to say this; to some other people, it will seem strange to have to say it.” This topic spills into the next paragraph, as he details how other reviewers have been avoiding this key fact. Critics have mistakenly glanced upon the fact that it is a gay love story, mislabelling the movie as a “sweeping romantic epic” with “universal appeal,” ultimately degrading the true premise of the film and effectively make this gay film less gay. Mendelsohn’s remarks are valid and true, but it is simply surprising to find this sort of discussion within the frame of a film review. Furthermore, this film review strays from the typical styles as the piece feels like a battle between Mendelsohn and other critics. For instance, the first page of the review functions as a preface to his eloquent condemnation of the critics who are plagued by their reluctance to be explicit about the film’s themes and content. He uses the first page to set himself apart from other critics, directly quoting other’s misinterpretations of the film and building a sound argument as to how they failed to see the movie in the proper light. After clearing the air, he begins analyzing the film for what it is, even citing specific scenes to build his argument upon. …show more content…
Although film analysis is commonly in a movie review, the way in which Mendelsohn presents the analysis varies. During his analysis of key scenes, he reminds the readers that there is an appropriate lens and mindset that one must have in order to understand and appreciate the movie for what it is, all in combination with his discreditation of the misinformed film critics. Mendelsohn serves as a defender of the movie, he is fighting for the authenticity of the film; he wants others to understand the film in its genuine form without it being misconstrued by heteronormative standards. Essentially, he skips the quintessential structure of a film review, yet somehow still manages to fuse the plot summary, film elements, and background information within his argument. Effectively, it’s all there but just in a appropriately disordered fashion, with a hint of social commentary. This film review felt revolutionary simply because it is more than just a movie review —it is also a lesson and commentary on the gay
In Daniel Mendelsohn’s film review, “An Affair to Remember,” of Brokeback Mountain, he ignores this typical structure of a film review. In fact, Mendelsohn’s review actually serves as a hybrid literary piece functioning as both a film review and a social commentary.
In the opening paragraph, Mendelsohn introduces the background film information in the span of one sentence, which other critics typically do in one entire paragraph. The social commentary aspect of the review begins almost immediately as he says, “[Brokeback Mountain] is a tale about two homosexual men. Two gay men… To some people it will seem strange to say this; to some other people, it will seem strange to have to say it.” This topic spills into the next paragraph, as he details how other reviewers have been avoiding this key fact. Critics have mistakenly glanced upon the fact that it is a gay love story, mislabelling the movie as a “sweeping romantic epic” with “universal appeal,” ultimately degrading the true premise of the film and effectively make this gay film less gay. Mendelsohn’s remarks are valid and true, but it is simply surprising to find this sort of discussion within the frame of a film review. Furthermore, this film review strays from the typical styles as the piece feels like a battle between Mendelsohn and other critics. For instance, the first page of the review functions as a preface to his eloquent condemnation of the critics who are plagued by their reluctance to be explicit about the film’s themes and content. He uses the first page to set himself apart from other critics, directly quoting other’s misinterpretations of the film and building a sound argument as to how they failed to see the movie in the proper light. After clearing the air, he begins analyzing the film for what it is, even citing specific scenes to build his argument upon. …show more content…
Although film analysis is commonly in a movie review, the way in which Mendelsohn presents the analysis varies. During his analysis of key scenes, he reminds the readers that there is an appropriate lens and mindset that one must have in order to understand and appreciate the movie for what it is, all in combination with his discreditation of the misinformed film critics. Mendelsohn serves as a defender of the movie, he is fighting for the authenticity of the film; he wants others to understand the film in its genuine form without it being misconstrued by heteronormative standards. Essentially, he skips the quintessential structure of a film review, yet somehow still manages to fuse the plot summary, film elements, and background information within his argument. Effectively, it’s all there but just in a appropriately disordered fashion, with a hint of social commentary. This film review felt revolutionary simply because it is more than just a movie review —it is also a lesson and commentary on the gay