Discussion Board 7

Critically read two film reviews written by David Ellis and Erin Aubry Kaplan. Answer one of the following questions:

  • What kinds of evaluation criteria does each of these reviews use?
  • Can you summarize an overall judgment of the reviews within several sentences?
  • Which review do you think is more informative and well-balanced?
  • Imagine that you are a reader of these reviews. What audience are you a part of? Which review do you prefer reading?




16 Responses to Discussion Board 7

  1. wpaden says:

    In the review of “Django Unchained” by Davis Ellin, evaluation criteria such as theme, plot/storyline, characters, actors, genre, directing, language, controversy and realism were used. Ellin’s review was rather short in comparison to the review by Erin Aubry Kaplan, who, including all the above criteria added the personal experiences of other people and how they felt about the movie.


  2. If I was a reader of these reviews, I would prefer to read the first review as it describes the general movie qualities of “Django Unchained” rather than it’s controversial depiction of slavery. As a Tarantino’s fan, I want to know what kind of Tarantino film the movie is, not how controversial it is to the issue of slavery. While the first review discuss the general plot, casts, acting and some of it’s scenes, the second review is mostly about the controversy or a different but mostly criticizing opinions on the movie. If a person is more interested in the movie itself over the dark past of slavery, s/he will definitely enjoy the first review better.


  3. fbalde96 says:

    The review of “Django”: an unsettling experience for many blacks by Erin Aubry Kaplan.The Los Angeles Times has more information and well balanced because in the introduction he gave the three different main points that he will talk about in the body paragraph. It means he gave a brief idea to attract the reader so that he will be curious to know what is inside the body. Its kind of to put the reader in the scene of the movie, to be real. He also gave the problem of black and white and the statistic. Then gave the solution facing to the problem. therefore, The second review is more interested in the movie of the problem between black and white and is more informative.


  4. chrisveress says:

    As a reader I looked at evaluation criteria. The first review by David Ellis is much more substantial in content. He talks about the director, plot, actors, character development, some problems with the movie such as controversy over certain words used, and he gives a quick summary at the end. He goes much more into detail than the second reviewer. The second review is mainly about the controversy over the movie and how African Americans would view the movie being that it made light of slavery. She had some plot but not much and the whole review pretty much bashed Django.


  5. ejmeyer says:

    In the first review by Davis Ellis, the evaluation criteria he went off of was plat, actors and their presentation of their roles, and opposing view point followed by a basic description of the movie and which audiences would like this movie. the second review by Erin Aubry focuses more of how the movie makes people fee and the choice of words that are present throughout the movie. overall, it seems like both reviews like the movie to some extent but have issues based on an ongoing issue, racism.


  6. bohdantr says:

    David Ellis uses the acting performance and celebrity of the actors as evaluation criteria, as well as how thought-provoking and interesting the story was. He also suggests dialogue is good, but doesn’t explain what about the dialogue he likes. The writer also evaluates based on how gruesome or distasteful he feels the movie is. Erin Aubrey Kaplan refers to others opinions as evaluation criteria. He quotes some people, often with identified race, and frames them as representative of the race, or having authority over how good the movie is. Evaluations he uses focus on how slavery isn’t an appropriate subject for humor or exaggerated violence, and how constructive the film is to black society.


  7. gunhoko says:

    Surely the review, written by Kaplan, was much more informative than the review by Ellis. However, I believe it was rather too informative and too long for a review. People usually watch movies for entertainment – at least for the most of “Hollywood-ized movies”. Also, people read reviews in order to get information about the movie itself such as plot, actors, graphics and music. Kaplan’s review is very informative specifically on the opinions of the community and it is somewhat like a report or a collection of other people’s review. From the perspective of a movie review reader, Ellis does a good job in comprehensively reviewing the movie and in giving adequate amount of information succinctly.


  8. tommydang says:

    The overall judgment of the review on the film Django Unchain by David Ellis and Erin Aubry Kaplan both talk about the film being very graphical. David Ellis describes that some elements were particularly disturbing. Aubry Kaplan shows how graphic the film is by saying that it is a graphical, high stylized violence, insensitive, exploitative and ahistorical movie. In addition, both authors state the use of language regarding the N word overused, which was a little disappointing. However, despite some of the criticized statements used by both authors in the review, they thought the film to be decent.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. dershent says:

    The first review on Django Unchain by David Ellis is mainly goes about giving the reader the synopsis of the movie and his opinion of it. David Ellis talks about the actors performance, the director’s style, performance and content of the movie and lastly the enjoyment factor of the movie. While the second review on Django Unchain by Erin Aubry Kaplan talks more about the meaning and it’s content appropriateness. He draw on the article mainly quoting other influential people and talks about it’s controversies.


  10. The review on Django Unchain by David Ellis is focused more mainly on the plot, graphics, the script, and the director’s style. He mentions how some of the parts in the movie should have been cut off from the script entirely because of how offensive it was. The second review was mainly to show a controversy with the first review, even though they had some similarities on how the movie was too disgusting and what should have been excluded.


  11. junhyeoperic says:

    The review on ‘Djange Unchain by David Ellis is more to be in the plot, characters, actors ,genre, and etc. It is containing lots of things we were reminding importance in our classes. He was talking about differences between those two different director’s style. Also as he says this problem also mentioned to our reader that there is the black or white static from view of customers for their goods.


  12. dckim5 says:

    In Ellis’s review for Dejango Unchained, he first evaluates the plot of the movie, then access how the director went about making the film. Ellis then comments about the featuring actors, and also about how he feels about the dialogue that is used, and some of the morbid scenes that were shown. While Kaplan differs in evaluating the movie in that he mostly focuses on how controversial the movie can be because the movie is about racism. He mostly talks about how some people may come to really like the film while others might dread it. Kaplan also compares Dejango to other movies such as “Inglourious Basterds”


  13. jasonkimik says:

    I strongly prefer the second review over the first one. I know that some people are not happy with the second one as it highly focuses on the racial issue. However, I think that the director of the movie haven’t chosen a plot like this if he wasn’t planning on dealing with the issue. I also certainly believe that the whole point of doing a review is to convey the feeling, thoughts, and ideas that the movie gives away, not the technicality. When you go to watch a movie, you don’t go for some artistic movie qualities. You might like a movie that is garbage but still leaves you the feeling. I am sure that the second review is the one that the reviewer conveyed what he felt.


  14. aidanobr says:

    The review of Django unchained by David Ellis speaks of the movie rather positively in regards to the review done by Kaplan. Ellis sees the film as a success overall and although not the best in the line of Tarantino movies does well to continue his legacy. most of the beginning of the film is focused on plot summary and paying homage to actor performances. its towards the middle of the review where the review begins to draw similiarities to Kaplans. both reviewers feel unsettled by the racial magnitude of the film. Ellis explains that although he slightly understands the style he felt Tarantino went overboard and that there were entire scenes that shouldn’t have even been in the film. As for Kaplan she felt a lot stronger about the racist theme of the movie and was more disgusted by it. she did also see the comedic relief in the film,but said that days later she looked back and couldn’t help but feel the sting of racism. She contrasts the film to “inglorious bastards” and how they both had the same kind of tensions around them, but because blacks are still dealing with that racism today Django was a lot more unsettling. she also had issue in the fact that Django didn’t really seem to accomplish much, but retell a horrifying experience of a generation with a splash of comedy and gore.


  15. gjalmont says:

    The Django Unchained review by David Ellis goes over many different aspects of the movie. He evaluates the movie on values such as actor’s performance, director’s style, dialogue, plot and theme, and some of the film’s more extreme moments. Ellis’s review is overall positive, and gives a bit of a summary and acknowledged its quality among Tarantino films. However, it seemed that he felt uncomfortable with some parts that could be seen as graphic or inappropriate. The review by Erin Aubry Kaplan focuses more on the film’s controversial theme and moments. She felt that the comedic racial moments were distasteful and that the movie had the feel of racism and racist language. Kaplan’s review was definitely more on the negative side as compared to Ellis’s mostly positive review.


  16. gregkim360 says:

    David Ellis’s review of Django Unchained covered all corners of a high quality review. He mentions how this matches the usual style of the directors’ movies and mentions the performance of the “top-notch actors”. He also adds a little summary of the movie and the background of each character. After mentioning the positives, he starts to mention the negative aspects of the movie. Most of the scenes that made him uncomfortable were from the treatment of blacks in the movie; the over-use of the N word and the methods of torture they used. Kaplan’s review however would be more detailed and also include personal reactions towards the movie from other people. She also compares the movie to another movie, “The Inglorious Bastards”, and overall has a more positive review of Django.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s