Genre Conventions Research: District 9 Review
Language:
The article begins with cynical tone, addressing the fact that aliens have been used several times in film. The reviewer than goes through a list of the different types of aliens we have encountered in film. This is presented to us not very seriously, in fact almost comedic and playful. There is use of contrasting language, "Cute ones..." "...Nasty bastards..." The use of vulgarity infers that the reviewer possibly doesn't take the review itself very seriously, almost trying to ease the reader in, taking to them at a one to one level, rather than using journalist jargon to alienate the reader.
The reviewer than goes onto point out the unoriginality in the film, with its' constant references to other sci-fi films that the film features. For example - "Human metamorphosing into something more than human? Why, hello there, The Fly." This is, again, very playful, funny language, as it points out the faults and unoriginality of the film first and foremost, possibly to allow room for good points of the film and its' positive attributes.
The tone of the review than changes from one of cynicism and scrutiny, to one of possibly genuine respect and admiration for the film: "It's a genuinely exciting and surprisingly affecting thriller..." This entices us, by implying that, if the film, whilst being unoriginal, can still have the power to affect us in this way, it is possibly so that we may firstly want to continue to read the review, in order to gain the reviewer's own expert opinion into the film and secondly, be so convinced by the reviewer's words that we are interested in seeing the film for ourselves, to make our own judgement.
The reviewer seems to have respect for the filmmaker's convictions during the making of the film, which is evident in this sentence: "The astounding...special effects aren't dwelled upon...this isn't just a fantastical sci-fi pic...this is real..." Almost trying to imply that this film, because of its non-grandiose, rough, documentary like style, is setting itself apart from the usual run of 'sci-fi' films we are bombarded with these days, and and that, despite its constant reference to 'sci-fi' films past, that is immaterial because of the way the filmmakers have executed the film. Also, later on in the review, the reviewer makes the point of saying that the film cost $30 million dollars and that it still looks stunning, and goes on to poke fun at how filmmakers such as Michael Bay "have dreams that cost more than $30 mil," therefore ridiculing the current trend of plying 'sci-fi', or any big, mainstream film, for that matter, with ridiculous sums of cash that generate great style and visual effects but little substance, which in-turn implies that District 9 again sets itself apart from the usual run of 'sci-fi' films in that it looks fantastic and has a intriguing, deep meaning to it as well.
The author then goes further into detail about the actual plot of the film, pointing out a weak point of the film that The aliens...clearly operate as an allegory...[one so clear] it might as well be wrapped in cling film,", but which is than made up for by a description of what the reviewer calls "some of the best...extra terrestrials..." The reviewer's description enhances the full page close up of the alien seen on the opposing page: "...Non humanoid...Clicking monstrosities...Can rip a man's head-off in a heartbeat..." The close up seen on the opposing page clearly matches up to the reviewer's description, and so possibly they may be implying that the filmmakers, through their use of special effects and their presentation of the alien creatures in this way, have coaxed the desired effect out of audience members and that their use of special effects was very well used.
After giving us a very thorough deconstruction of the film's positive points, such as the film's main character "shying away the easy, traditional path of the reluctant hero," and "the action...is absolutely stunning," the reviewer than deconstructs the film's negative points, by calling it "hugely enjoyable but flawed," that "there are gaping plotholes...which (come to you) several hours later...and just won't leave," and that "the illusion that the movie is a documentary is dropped around the 25 minute mark...only to be reintroduced arbitrarily at intervals...becomes jarring and removes us from the...action." This balanced use of evidence is key in that this gives us a two-sided review/opinion, giving us both the negatives and the positives of the film, and not drooling incessantly over the film whilst not pointing out any bad points. This implies a high sense of professionalism and non-partiality, and that the reviewer, while it is evident that he enjoyed the film, remembers that he is, first and foremost, a film critic, and that he is being paid to do this job, and that he must follow it through to the best of his abilities.
Layout:
There is lots of use of black, orange and maroon, though this is not done to stay in keeping with motifs seen during the film being reviewed, but rather a motif seen through the magazine (i.e., all of the films reviewed in the magazine, even District 9, which is the main review article, use the same black, orange and maroon colour scheme).
A marker dated from 'August 28-October 1' is seen jutting out at a canted angle from a black and orange banner above it reading "In Cinemas." This implies a very cool, laidback feel, and that these reviews are as much aimed at the general movie-going everyman than they are at the film connoisseur.
The review itself is presented through the use of columns, three long columns on every page that the review is seen on, i.e. pages 50, 52. The columns hold no more than 7 words on every line, and are in very small font size. In keeping with a traditional magazine/newspaper/journalistic discipline. Also, its' length. This is the main film review of this particular issue, and so it is expected that this will be the longest and most thoroughly reviewed film as this is the film out at the moment with the most hype and the most draw at the box-office. Almost satisfying a need within the eager readers/audience to find out as much of the film as possible before heading off to see it.
On page 52, there is a key quote from the review (paraphrased): "The action is stunning...electrical blasts splatter villains all over the lens..." The quote is much bigger than the review from which it comes from, and this instantly catches our eye and makes us want to firstly be more excited and tempted by the film and secondly, read the quote in context, to see what overall effect it has on us as readers.
A small text box on the bottom right hand corner of the image of the alien, giving us trivial facts about alien films past and the making of the film. In keeping with the style of humour of the review, the constant harking back to alien films past, specifically the reference to 1982, the release date of Spielberg’s E.T. as being “the year the aliens first came to Earth,” and where inspiration for the film and its alien creatures came from.
Images:
A full page close-up shot of one of the main alien creatures seen within the film, which is eye-catching, grotesque, oddly beautiful in its own way, and evident of the wonderful special effects seen in the film, can be used as a comparison to the reviewer's description of the alien creatures in his review. Also, the idea that this is a full page close up almost implies that this is the key
example of the special effects depicted within the film, and that this is what the budget, which, for a sci-fi film is, as the reviewer admits, very modest, was used for, and possibly, to great effect and results.
A shot from the film which takes up about one third of the page. It is a shot of two MNU (the army seen in the film) attempting to kill one of the alien creatures. Again, it is very eye-catching and grotesque and evidence of the special effects seen in the film. Also, the caption "Ohhhhh, okey-cokey-cokey," is very funny and amusing and, whilst being a slight jibe at the film, is in keeping with the playful, comedic tone of the review.
No comments:
Post a Comment