Film Reviews: How to write

1st Review – Queen of Katwe

LANGUAGE

Throughout the review, there is a constant use of media terminology surrounding

different aspects. Firstly, within the opening paragraph there is a utilisation of
conventional language associated to the film’s genre i.e. “heart-string-tugging drama”
which carries on into the following section “Mutesi’s story offers every cliché of the
‘poverty prodigy genre” and “yet Nair lets a lot of those clichés slide”. Through the
repetition of the word ‘cliché’ the audience become aware that Richards’ is familiar
with the conventions surrounding film genres and stereotypical representations
surrounding themes like poverty. Additionally, media terminology surrounding
techniques like mis-en-
scene, cinematography and production are addressed within the second paragraph such
as “screenplay”, “production design”, “costumes”, “frame” and “cinematography” thus
showing a wide range of knowledge within different areas and processes surrounding the
overall production of a film. Using media specific language does primarily target an
audience who not only reads a lot of film reviews and is a lover of cinema but is also
well educated and highly familiar within the field of media. Despite significantly
appealing to those who understand and identify with media related language, the style
does not confuse those who are unaware as the film review includes a wide range of
terminology and language throughout its content.

The use of language within predominately the opening and third paragraphs establishes
the main plot and genre to the audience using descriptivism and adjectives such as
“Phiona is reasonably happy, until she walks into a small classroom one day, enticed by
an offer of free porridge.” The amount of detail and refinement Richards’ goes into shows
his development and representation of the storyline as being extensive. Throughout, he
uses fair critical analysis offering both negative and positive opinions allowing the
language to be consistent for instance within the second paragraph he states how Nair
“doesn’t overplay Phiona’s achievements, wallow in squalor or overdo the rich/poor
divide” and “Nair makes her world vivid and real. She doesn’t just scrape the surface for
bits that seem most exotic. She gets stuck in.” He also credits other cast members work
within the production as “gorgeous to look at ”using metaphorical language when
describing costume and production design “every frame sings with pattern and texture.”
However, this is juxtaposed in the following third paragraph in which he is much more
negative and critical “However, it is hard to escape a pertinent fact: chess is incredibly
dull.” By using a imperative statement/fact calling the
overall storyline ‘dull’ may dishearten the viewer from watching the film thus decreasing
it success. Furthermore, Richards’ states “This in essence is a sports movie…” – again
commenting on the genre – “…yet Nair has lumbered herself with a ‘sport’ less
spectorfriendly than tiddlywinks. At least that has pieces flying through the air.” Using
words like “lumber” and “‘sport’less” creates an overall negative tone suggesting that the
storyline for the film has held the director back from their full potential. Also comparing
the game of chess to ‘tiddlywinks’ – a board game which is certainly not a sport and is
taken less seriously, conveys an insulting tone. Despite this, offering both sides of opinion
(positive and negative) provides a more personal, true and reflective review that appeals
to a wider audience instead of just being negative or sugar coating it.

Following this, he does then add another positive through the use of war/battle
language “to combat this” crediting Nair for scenes that contradicts his previous
statements “The rest of Phiona’s chess club is made up of huge personalities… giving
those scenes some of the requisite sports-movie flavour” suggesting her adherence of
conventions within the sport film genre. Then, he goes onto say how
the casting was “exemplary” commenting on the actors individually stating such things as
“a storm of personality”, “perfectly understated” and “shows her breakthrough was no
fluke” which indicates to the audience that perhaps the cast is the USP of this film.
Lastly, within the final paragraph he again uses a constant comparison of negatives and
positives ending on the negative of the narrative structure “The beats of the story are
ones you’ll have seen countless times before. You know how this goes. How it ends.”
insinuating that the plot and ending is predictable and boring yet juxtaposes this by
saying “when the triumph of adversity story is as well as told as this, it’s always a
pleasure to hear it again” suggesting that he personally would watch the film more than
once encouraging the readers to as well, aiding in the film’s success.

STRUCTURE/CONTENT
Firstly, the overall plot is introduced within the first basic ‘information’ section of
the review providing the audience with an insight and understanding towards the content of the
film if they were unaware or hadn’t heard of it before. This is just a generalised overview of the
storyline therefore doesn’t create any ‘spoilers’ or give too much information away which would
essentially put someone off of the film thus raising enigma codes. The plot synopsis first
establishes the protagonist yet does not name her just identifies her biological sex as “a young
girl” however then goes onto reveal location and setting “growing up in one of the poorest areas
of Uganda”. Once these are established the storyline is briefly touched upon in terms of the
theme surrounding chess, a personal journey and poverty; essentially being a success story which
within the first paragraph is revealed to be a “true story”. This insight immediately allows the
audience to decide whether or not they want to watch or will enjoy the film based solely on the
plot.

The first paragraph extends on the plot overview, touching on the narrative
structure and narrative itself in more detail through descriptive language. It also begins to
introduce the lead actors within brackets and what their roles are within the production “tells
the true story of Phiona Mutesi (Mandina Nalwanga)” and “a single mother (Lupita Nyong’o)”.
Within this paragraph Richards’ also credits the director Nair providing a personal opinion
surrounding her other films by saying “her best movie in over a decade” conveying how he himself
is knowledgeable within the topic of film as he knows about her other productions and he himself
believes that this is her best. The inclusion of this may appeal to an audience who are also cinema
lovers or just are aware of Nair’s other works in which they may or may not be a fan themselves.
Within the second paragraph, genre conventions are once again spoken again showing the film
review’s writer to have extensive knowledge within the subject of film whilst also further
commenting on the plot and scenes yet also commenting on the directors utilisation of such
aspects and techniques. For instance he talks about the “poverty prodigy genre” whilst states how
Nair establishes this in an unconventional way “yet Nair lets a lot of those clichès slide”. He also
comments on other cast members like “Wheeler’s screenplay”, “Stephanice Carroll’s production
design”, “Mobolaji Dawodu’s costumes” and “Sean Bobbitt’s cinematography” showing his
extensive amount of research into who did what within the production not just the primary
onscreen actors and director. Within the text, Richards explores the storyline and also makes his
own personal suggestion towards why Nair has utilised or portrayed a certain aspect in a certain
way e.g. “Perhaps it’s because Uganda has been her home for several years, but…” which is
conventional of a film review to have elements that make up this writers own perspective into
the film.

The third paragraph depicts a more overall negative tone conveying the other side of his opinions
juxtaposing the previous paragraphs positivity. Also, once again he comments on the overall plot
and genre and what he particularly does not like about it indicating his own personal stance to the
audience allowing them to see a more balanced approach within the review. Yet further down the
paragraph he again makes reference to positives when talking about particular scenes and
casting, predominately praising the actors. Amongst this a reference to another film that one of
the lead actors has been in identifying Nyong’o playing her first on screen role with ‘Queen
Katwe’ since “her Oscar win for 2013’s 12 Years A Slave” which again shows his extensive
knowledge into film. Additionally, it shows his research into the backgrounds of the cast included
within this production crediting and introducing to the audience to another film which may
encourage them to watch that production but also this particular film if they enjoyed 12 Years A
Slave – thus, this acts as a slight comparison point. Plus, by using a reference the USP of the film
can be identified through using star marketing as the audience of12 Years A Slave may be more
encouraged to watch this film if it includes an actor that was within that production hence forth
enticing fans of the actor to also watch aiding in the film’s success
 .

Finally, within the closing/last paragraph it ends on another constant personal portrayal of a
negative and positive aspect. Yet the final statement uses language such
as “triumph” and “pleasure” conveying how the overall film review ends on a ‘high note’ thus
providing a lasting effect/impression on the audience as being positive perhaps enhancing their
desire to watch the film, hence forth aiding in the film’s success.

TONE
The article is predominately written with an advanced and technical high
range of vocabulary using words like “squalor” and analytical references “the triumph over
adversity story” enhances a more sophisticated and formal tone to the audience. This perhaps
allows a more educated primary audience to be targeted. However, this is juxtaposed with a use
of colloquial language through onomatopoeia “oohing and aahing and bawling through their own
matches…” which provides the impression that the reviewer is talking directly to the reader in a
conversational style. Despite this, the reviewer does not use any slang within the review whilst
avoiding abbreviations and constantly utilising a high level of vocabulary thus allowing the
reader to gain a more knowledgeable impression of Richards whilst he conveys an almost
authoritative tone which is evident through his extensive research (e.g. into the cast and crew)
and detailed response. However, he also does show hint of a sarcastic tone through the statement
“At least that has pieces flying through the air” in which a comparison to ‘tiddlywinks ’provides
humour combined with the use of puns within the main title, caption etc. also creates comical
effect providing a more laid back atmospherical tone which contrasts to the seriousness of the
high level of vocabulary.