The movie i'm going to be reviewing is 21 Jump street, an 80's television show remade into a movie directed by Phil Lord and Chris Miller.
The first review written by Peter Hartlaub from San Francisco Chronicle. Peter insists that the film is consistently funny, and it sometimes feels "original". He says 21 Jump street takes the name and the part about high school, and pretty much mocks the rest with success. Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum, two rivals in high school are sent to duty at the jump street program. He then goes to say this movie is better if you come in with no spoilers and low expectations. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/03/15/DDOK1NK2P6.DTL
The second review was written by David Noh of Film Journal International. His approach is an inviting as the first review. They've updated the 1980's TV show, some might say reduced it as the whitewashed film is missing the presence of the asian and black characters originally played by Dustin Nguyen and Holly Robinson Peete. He then says the script is pocked, nay, brimming, with homerotic references looking to be jokes. Twice women get pushed out of the cars to sprawl curbside, and at one point Jonah Hill punches an old lady in the face. He also describes some scenes as disturbing and not worth seeing.
http://www.filmjournal.com/filmjournal/content_display/reviews/major-releases/e3i61d137eb15fdb730853b88a3202ec2d9
Both the reviews had there own separate views of the movie. While Peter perceives the film as consistently funny, David finds the humor to be disturbing and not as funny as it is. In comparison both films did good on not spoiling the whole movie, but to explain the plot and characters more then the movie itself. Overall i liked the writing from David more. He used good diction to describe the characters and strong criticism to stray readers away from the film. David also uses description well to describe the two actors as too old for this film. " heroes’ ability to impersonate teenagers, not easy when Hill’s drastic weight loss has had the accompanying effect of aging his face (see: Al Roker) and Tatum’s eye bags have always been an essential element in keeping this actor from being too Abercrombie perfect"
Overall i would advise anyone to watch this film if they like Dumb witted, bad language, and sick jokes.
1 comment:
TREVOR,
YOU WRITE, "He says 21 Jump street takes the name and the part about high school, and pretty much mocks the rest with success." IS THE FILM A PARODY, THEN?
" missing the presence of the asian and black characters originally played by Dustin Nguyen and Holly Robinson Peet" IS THIS A QUOTE?
WHAT ABOUT THIS ONE? "the script is pocked, nay, brimming, with homerotic references looking to be jokes."
ELEVATE LANGUAGE: "In comparison both films did good on . . . "
NOT SURE WHAT YOU MEAN HERE: "but to explain the plot and characters more then the movie itself. " YOU SAY THERE'S NO SPOILERS, BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE SEPARATION HERE BETWEEN "PLOT AND CHARACTERS" AND "THE FILM ITSELF". PLOT AND CHARACTERS ARE THE MAJOR ELEMENTS THAT MAKE A FILM.
"Overall i liked the writing from David more." ALWAYS USE THE AUTHOR'S LAST NAME.
WHEN YOU MAKE STATEMENTS LIKE THIS ONE, "He used good diction to describe the characters and strong criticism", ALWAYS PROVIDE TEXTUAL EXAMPLES. WITHOUT THE EXAMPLES, READERS CAN'T SEE/UNDERSTAND THIS DICTION OR CRITICISM. SOME OF THE SENTENCES APPEAR TO BE QUOTES BUT AREN'T FORMATTED AS SUCH, SO IT'S HARD TO TELL.
YOU DO A GOOD JOB CONTRASTING THE TWO CRITICS' DIFFERING OPINIONS OF THE FILM AS A WHOLE. YOU DON'T REALLY FOCUS ON THE DIFFERENCES/SIMILARITIES IN TERMS OF FOCUS: DOES ONE REALLY FOCUS ON PLOT WHILE THE OTHER FOCUSES ON CHARACTERS? DO BOTH REALLY FOCUS ON DIALOGUE? ETC.
Post a Comment