Review of the Reviews

Within Moira Macdonald's review of "Fantastic Mr. Fox" (http://www.seattletimes.com/entertainment/movies/mr-fox-is-truly-fantastic/) I couldn't help but agree with every point she made with this film. Most of us know already that this movie is based off of Roald Dahl's children's book that was published in the 70's. But she reassures us of the plot based in the film to let others be aware of what she will soon to review with her particulate use of diction. What seemed to be a simple story for children to enjoy, she takes you into how she dissects this film to make it seem like a vast area waiting to be filled with enjoyment for all ages to enjoy to the fullest. The transitions are smooth to keep in order of how she viewed the film and let the reader know what she views most importantly to her liking of the film. She goes onto describe every character with specific characterization to help the reader visualize how they seem to be. From what I read the basic theme she delivers is assuring that Mr. Fox is in fact Fantastic.

Any film guru would look for themes/messages/ or references to real world events in any/every film they uncover. When I watched this film as many times as my hands could show me, I realized that Wes touches base on multiple messages for the viewer and references to other movies that adults and kids would enjoy. I'm glad Moira includes one of the messages to give anyone who has not seen the film something to look forward to. Towards the end, Moira reminds us of the scene where Mrs. Fox discusses to Ash that there is something "fantastic about being different"and how every animal in this cute remarkable film has qualities that make everyone unique in some way. From the scenery Wes Anderson brings to the audience to the witty dialogue between the wild but lovable animals in this 87 minute film Moira serves the best feedback on this film.

Everywhere I searched it took me about 2 hours to uncover a remotely negative review on this gorgeous film. A 2 star giving pretentious critic decided to crush this film into bits with terrible reasoning behind it. Dustin Putman (http://www.dustinputman.com/reviews/f/09_fantasticmrfox.htm) started off the same way that Moira did. A brief description but of course with different diction to show he is against this film in certain ways. What he does to critique this film is the professional way to do it, instead of deliberately bashing the director without evidence. He gives a intellectual reason of his disliking towards the film and then goes onto provide evidence from what he resulted to receiving from the film. The review goes onto repeat this style till the end paragraph and he describes that the film is only half decent just because it is a stop motion and the scenery is "fantastic." He leaves the reader with the reason of the movie being unenchanted towards the audience and that a defibrillator could have helped, inferring that it would help bring life into the film. Although this critics review on the film was negative towards an outstanding film, Dustin mentions valuable points and stays fairly neutral so no one will get too offended.

Relating to valuable points, I found reasonable quotes throughout my reading of each of the reviews. In Moira's review in the very beginning she states "Wes Anderson's utterly charming "Fantastic Mr. Fox" is that rarity: a children's movie for all." Not only do I find this quote reasonable, I agree with it and happy she said mentions this. I understand that she is telling the readers that the movie is open to all ages, even if the book was intended for children. Wes Anderson made the movie open to everyone so it can be viewed with your children and enjoy it with them. It is rare to find positive quotes from a negative review, but since it is from Dustin Putman, I was able to find a neutral standing quote about what he thought of the film. He mentions in his final paragraph that As for what the late, great Roald Dahl would think? He probably would not be pleased with the liberties taken to his book, but he would appreciate that Wes Anderson has stuck to his guns and delivered a film with a singular vision and none of the smarmy bathroom humor and cheap pop-culture references that litter up many of today's family efforts." Finding new and unseen footage in a film based on a book can be disappointing for anyone who were looking forward to seeing the exact replica. Dustin does make a valuable point that Wes did add a lot of pop culture references to stay up to date within this film just to "milk money" from all ages. In order for a movie to do well, especially based on a book, there shouldn't be too many changes or style differences so that the viewer is disappointed with the director and cast members.

Some have not seen this film, which is understandable since it is a stop motion film that came out 6 years ago, but I will but my two sense in for those people. We all look at reviews of films before we see them, at least I do, and we tend to not waste money on a movie with terrible reviews. Some of us don't care what the critics say and see it anyway and heck that's how great indie movies have been discovered just because of one person giving it a whirl. Seeing these two reviews side by side and deciding which one grabs my attention and gives me all the critiques for the film makes me point out some deciding factors. To start off though, I would find the negative review more convincing. Simply because it's better to read a negative review to see what this author personally doesn't like about the film, and if I can agree with him/her. My decision on seeing a film is based on the review if the author has great diction, gives both sides to a stance, and provides references to other movies to relate it to the original. Dustin's review was more convincing because of these reasons. And Moira doesn't. She continues to just focus on how great the film is and how everyone should see it. She doesn't address the other side. If her review was a speech, it would fail miserably because it doesn't follow the certain critiques I see in a convincing review.

There are certain points to absolutely need to be stated in a review and these, that I am about to discuss, are what I would include about dissecting a film in one page. I am a big believer in a intellectual vocabulary and if that is incorporated into a analysis of the review, it would make the review that much better. Some points are small, but change the perspective of how you absorb it a lot. I tend to write short stories often and when I do I focus a lot about the theme/message from how the viewer will take it and have them think about it afterwards so I would of course bring that topic up in discussion of the review. I wouldn't focus on too many other qualities of the film besides cinematography and sound. Because these types of focus points can reform to how you see the movie. I would also give some context for the non-viewers of the film so everyone who stubbles upon this excerpt will understand it throughly.  Keeping the review in a technical structure to what needs to be said first would be included so the reader will continue reading and become sucked in. From what I notice in plenty of critic's views on movies are that they focus too much on trying to make you pick sides about either it being good or bad. I wouldn't include a argument in a review, because this isn't a debate, it is my analysis of the film. I will state what I enjoyed about it and how others can to, but I will not provide evidence for the readers why I am absolutely sure that the movie is terrible or extravagant.