Review of the Reviews

Electrick Children (dir. Rebecca Thomas)

A few months ago while stuck at home battling a bout of the flu, I decided to browse Netflix. I didn't know exactly what I was looking for or what I would find, but I stumbled upon Rebecca Thomas's 2013 film Electrick Children and fell in love with the interesting story line and unique directing.

Having received an 86% on Rotten Tomatoes' "tomatometer", it proved a little difficult to find a negative review from a legitimate film critic. Joseph Walsh of British film review website Little White Lies argues that "the film falls apart structurally, most notably in its transition between the second and third act" and later says that the movie is unsatisfying and generic by the end. Walsh begins his review giving a brief summary of the movie. He then touches on Thomas's inspirations, touching on a couple of her previous movies and her real-life experience. When the actual review part of the review starts, Walsh praises many aspects of the film. He doesn't mention the movie's downfalls until the second-to-last paragraph of the article. He focuses mainly on the plot, specifically the way Electrick Children seems run-of-the-mill by the end. He mentions that the redeeming feature of the film was the good acting done by the two main characters.

Stephen Holden of The New York Times thinks differently, however. A majority of this review is taken up by a lengthy summary of the movie. At the end, Holden describes the film as being sweet and refreshing, his only criticism being that the scenes don't always transition nicely. The vocabulary that Holden uses ("residual glow", "refreshing", "sweetness") reminds the reader of something simple and fresh, like a glass of lemonade or a relaxing summer's day. He may have used these words because like that vocabulary, the film is simple and fresh, and reminds viewers of innocence and simplicity. 

I like Walsh's comment that "One of the film's greatest successes is the juxtaposition of life within the [Mormon] community with that of the youth culture of Las Vegas (where much of the film is set), offered without any simplistic judgements over which way of life is morally and socially preferable." I agree with this statement. Many movies are biased and would try to persuade viewers that one way of life is better than the other, but this movie does a great job of not taking sides. I also agree with Holden's point that "...its narrative continuity is tenuous at best." The movie is very choppy and at times hard to follow. A lot of transitions leave the viewer disoriented and confused about what is going on.

If I had never seen the film before, I would most likely be persuaded by Walsh's negative review than Holden's positive one. Holden spent most of the article describing the movie's plot. Walsh kept his summary of the film short, making sure to quickly move on to the more important part: reviewing the movie. Holden's actual review was very short and slightly vague. Walsh went into more detail, therefore proving that he knows more about the movie than Holden does.

If I were to write my own review, I would be sure to go into detail. Learning from Holden's mistakes, I would keep my summary of the movie short. Readers do not need a deep understanding of the movie in question in order to understand the review. I would also reference certain points in the movie to further my arguments. Lastly, I would include both the good and bad in my review, which is something I liked about both reviews that I read. There are pieces of every movie that are good and pieces that are bad. No movie is absolutely bad or entirely good, and it is important to me that readers of my review know that.