A great movie review enriches the experience of the viewer, adding depth to their understanding of the film’s themes, performances, and techniques. And, as the winning pieces in our Film/TV Series Review Competition demonstrate, a review can do even more by exploring and challenging the larger systems and contexts within which the film was made, encouraging readers to see the past in a new light and ask crucial questions about the present.
Read on to discover Guest Judge Mat Kesting’s winning picks and commentary below!
WINNERS AND FINALISTS:
First place: The Age of Shadows (2016) Espionage and Morality under Colonisation by gc23 (UK)
The Age of Shadows review written by gc23 is expertly crafted and well structured: a critique of the work that also provides additional insight and context for the reader. This review provides a sufficient level of plot and character insight woven with critical analysis to alert the reader to what can be expected from the film, while also drawing attention to its narrative and technical strengths. Impressively, the reviewer has referenced the work within a broader historical context, while also remaining alert to the subjectivity of historical storytelling. The reviewer’s critical analysis is clear and culminates in a recommendation to the reader. Congratulations to gc23!
Runner Up: Putting Down Roots: Minari & Diaspora Asians by alyssums (Korea)
“Putting Down Roots: Minari & Diaspora Asians” by alyssums is presented through the lens of a personal perspective, successfully qualifying Minari within lived experience. In this instance, this approach is both compelling and strategic; it entices the reader to contemplate the narrative fiction as representative and gives license to the reviewer to assess the film’s authenticity. Moving beyond the film itself, the review draws focus on the inadequacies of the awards system: highlighting qualifying limitations imposed by some high profile accolades while also inviting reflection on their relevance to contemporary American national identity. The reviewer successfully arms the reader with a rich personal perspective in which to consider the film—well done!
Finalists:
Shawshank Redemption—A Prison Movie Refreshingly Unlike Any Other by JihongHur (Korea)
You’re Not Dreaming; It’s Just Inception by smileitllmakeyouhappy:) (US)
PEER REVIEW WINNER AND FINALISTS (selected by WtW):
Best Peer Review: rosie_’s (Australia) review of The Grand Budapest Hotel: Wes Anderson’s Flawless Portrait of a Long-Forgotten Era
Rosie’s review was thorough and kind. She began each comment with positive feedback, and I particularly loved that her positive feedback was specific. Throughout the review, Rosie does so much well: she acknowledges the great analysis that the writer has already accomplished and encourages them to dig deeper—providing possible entryways for this deeper analysis by posing questions. Rosie shows deep engagement with the writer’s preexisting ideas. The writer is still in the driver’s seat, but Rosie successfully provides some possible direction.
Detailed reviews bear the risk of discouraging the writer; sometimes the amount of advised corrections will seem overwhelming. Not in the case of Rosie’s review—on the contrary, she makes the idea of a second draft feel not only possible but also exciting. Great job, Rosie!
Peer Review Finalists:
Ravi Tej Guntuku’s (US) review of Loki Season 1 Explained
A. Penderwick’s (US) review of Hamilton: The Revolution in This Century
Chai Tea’s (Australia) review of Star Wars, a Thorough Review
