Poetic Justice

In this review Robert Ebert explains how the movie is told from the point of view of a young woman named Justice. He explains how the movie started out as Justice and her male companion being on a date at a drive in movie theatre, where he was killed because of an altercation. He compares the movie to " Boyz in the Hood". He states that "unlike 'Boyz' which was fairly strongly plotted, 'Poetic Justice' unwinds like a road trip from the early 1970s, in which the characters are introduced and then set off on a trip that becomes a journey of discovery." He concludes that "Poetic Justice" is a soft gentle film, more of a romance than a commentary on social conditions.

Public Speaking

This link sends you to a page that will explain how to make a great presetation without making a fool of yourself. It takes you through each step of how to create and present a great speech and it gives you tips and advise on how to be a successful public speaker. Another good site is http://www.hawaii.edu/mauispeech/html/speaking_tips.html this is students talking to students allowing the reader to relate more to the article.

Ebert vs. "Kinky" Phantom

Any Phantom of The Opera fans out there?! Well if you like the film as much as I do, I think that this review by Roger Ebert will set you up in flames. He argues several points and I know that this review will be one in which would be easy to write a persuasive paper on. Check it out.

Is it a hammer? A nail gun? A screwdriver? No... it's "Saw"!

In this review by Roger Ebert which was published in the Chicago Sun Times he basically tears down the movie, calling it a movie that is: "...not quite worth the ordeal it puts us through." He gives the movie 2 stars, which i do not agree with, i believe it deserves better. Through this review he talks about how there is no motivation behind the killings in Saw. He makes claims about the killer Jigsaw, stating that : "he joins that sturdy band of movie serial killers with time on their hands to devise elegant puzzles for their victims and the police." I personally would have thought that Roger Ebert being such a well known film critic would have given this movie a better thought and a better review, but i suppose he's just not a fan of horror flicks. This also gives me some good arguments for the paper.

Perfume: Story of a Murderer

Roger Ebert's review on the movie "Perfume" starts of by him saying "Not only does 'Perfume' seem impossible to film, it must have been almost impossible for Patrick Suskind to write." He mentions positive incidents he had with the movie, which shows him getting personal with the movie. Ebert then begins to tell the story and the main idea. He again relates an event in the film with one of his own. He comes off as if extrememly interested with the uniqueness of this film. At the end he says, "Why I love this story, I do not know. Why I have read the book twice and given away a dozen copies of the audiobook, I cannot explain." He also says he does not see anything fun about the movie, yet there is. There is a lot of fun things to watch since in very unique and maybe wierd ways the movie involves horror, action, detective-ish, and obsession, which we can relate to romance in a way. Imagine all of these genres put together to make a film simply about perfume! A very creative movie that keeps you at the tip of your chair!

A Movie of "Titanic" Proportions

In this review published in the Chicago Sun-Times in 1997, Roger Ebert explains his feelings about Titanic. He opens his review by calling the Titanic itself a "great iron Sphinx." His entire introductory paragraph is about the Titanic ship. Ebert never ceases to say extremely good things about James Cameron and his masterpeice of a film. He explains the characters of the film and goes more into depth about the film. He does not dismiss this movie as a flop but as a work of art by giving it a full 4 stars.

Two Weeks Notice

In this article Kirk Honeycutt ("The Hollywood Reporter") reviews "Two weeks Notice." Honeycutt starts his article by saying, "Marc Lawrence's script for "Two Weeks Notice" is so perfectly tailored to its stars." This is such a good statement, because after watching this movie and trying to figure out who could have done a better job playing the roles, no one comes to mind. In this movie Sandra Bullock's character works for Hugh Grant's character. The story goes about setting up situations for romance to arise. Of course a romance brews and begins with an ending of a professional relationship. The end isn't original at all. The general outline of this film isn't original, but it is an enjoyable film.

SAW

The New York Times writer, Stephen Holden, comments that Saw does a "better than average job" at creating the torture games between sadist and victim, but just isn't all that scary. He even gives it a low ball hit by comparing the movie to the physical game show, Fear Factor. The twisted gore scenes is not what gets Holden, but the reason why "The Jigsaw Killer" is out to kill is whats creepy. I'm not sure if I agree, and Holden's evidence isn't too supportive either but Saw did shine one new twisted plot ideas.

The Pursuit of Happyness

In my opinion, movies generally based on true stories have a ton of heart and emotion depicted on screen. Well, in the opinion of Robert Wilonsky of the Village Voice, The Pursuit of Happyness is a movie with bad performances and horrible directing. Wilonsky picks apart this movie from Will Smith's performance to the entire movie as a whole. He said, "The movie, the first English-language film directed by Italian Gabriele Muccino, is too emotionally slick to work, too visually glib to have an impact, made by people who think grit is something that's brought in by the prop department." He criticizes this film without any mercy. This man is so severe in his writing style because he honestly does not care what others think about the film or how much money it made overall.

How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days

Published in the Suntimes newspaper Roger Ebert reviews the movie "How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days." He begins off by saying "I am just about ready to write off movies in which people make bets about whether they will, or will not, fall in love. The premise is fundamentally unsound, since it subverts every love scene with a lying subtext." This opening to his review is very bold and his opinion on the movie seems to be very clear from the beginning. He gave the movie a dismal one and a half stars. Perhaps it is because he is a guy and this sappy romance did not appeal to him as say an action film would have. He goes on to talk about the characters and says "The hardest thing is to sympathize with two people who are denying their feelings, misleading each other, and causing pain to a trusting heart." Overall Roger Ebert does not seem to be very impressed by this film.

Scene it?

This review article in the New York times is a great persuasive article about the film American Gangster. It's an articulate well written article that touches bases on all the movie has to offer. It is a encaptivating summary of a true cops and robbers story or in this case drug dealer.

Why Isn't There More Political Films? 'Fahrenheit 9/11'

With the link I have provided it will direct you to a piece of writing from the San Francisco Chronicle about the documentary Fahrenheit 9/11. The reason this film was chosen is because it can closely relate to Titanic. That is through it's tragedy stand point. This piece talks about how the film is both persuasive and passionate. Michael Moore gives us this amazing documentary persuading the viewers about the true story. Who really knows what the true story is? Here it's broken down into small pieces and convinces you about what the truth really is. This is what it's about,"Its serious purpose. Its tone. Its mix of words and images, and the way both linger in the mind. There's the way the movie fashions its arguments, and the cumulative effect the experience provides -- what you feel walking out, what you think about the next day."

American Gangster

In this review the reviewer outlines many reasons why the movie American Gangster deserves a top stop in the history of movies. Todd McCarthy, the reviewer, states that this movie should have been released a long time ago and it's a wonder that nobody thought of the idea for this plot. One main reason that the movie does good is that the movie chooses really good actors for the roles that they must play. Specifically, pitting Denzel Washington against Russel Crowe was an excellent choice. Another reason why this movie does good is that plot that the movie portrays. Todd McCarthy states that there is alot of irony with twists and turns and this keeps the interest of the viewer.

To saw or not to saw; that is the question

Realistic characters, realistic setting; it gives you the chills. The link I have provided here is to a movie review on the 2003 movie SAW. If you have not watched this movie you have most likely heard something about it. It is full of lots of suspense, lots of gore, and lots of violence. Victoria Alexander, the author of this review, thinks that all these characterists and the way they are combined make SAW a must see movie. She says, "It is an intriguing thriller that has enough surprises that it is not a letdown."

MI3 Back once again, and not to dissapoint

In this review, by Kenneth Turan, a Los Angeles Times Staff Writer, the film is praised numerous times with supporting evidence and description of the plot, characters, setting, and director. Turan describes two major characters, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Tom Cruise. Turan quotes, "Good-versus-evil films often rise or fall on the strength of the evildoer. In the Oscar-winning Hoffman, who isn't counting "Twister" when he says he's never done an action film before, "M:i:III" has a spectacular actor who delivers deadpan some of the most unnerving speeches in villainy's history". He also states that the director, J.J. Abrams, has proficient directing esp. in Tom Cruise's role. Turan also shares with us in the second paragraph two other hit television series, "Lost" and "Alias", that Abrams was a part of as co-creator.

Should you see Saw?

In this review of Saw, Roger Ebert lets the viewers know about what made Saw an amazing movie and what the producers did wrong. He also compares Two other movies in the same genre that had characters almost deal with the same problems. Ebert then goes on to list the characters and what special traits of theirs they used to make it a unique film that was remade into three stories. From this, Ebert lets his viewers know the basic truth, rent or buy the film?

Jelani Whitehorne

Should you see Saw?

In this review of Saw, Roger Ebert lets the viewers know about what made Saw an amazing movie and what the producers did wrong. He also compares Two other movies in the same genre that had characters almost deal with the same problems. Ebert then goes on to list the characters and what special traits of theirs they used to make it a unique film that was remade into three stories. From this, Ebert lets his viewers know the basic truth, rent or buy the film?

Saw IV

In this review Ethan Alter explains why he feels as though jigsaw is dead. He states "Old Jigsaw is as dead as a doornail." He compares the movie to "Nightmare on Elm Street" and "Friday The 13th". He sees Saw as the 21st Century version of those long running franchises, which have racked up a combined 17 films over the past two decades. He feels as though the Saw sequel will not stop until it reaches its 10th series, which is very unneccesary. He states that the Saw movies are fanatical about continuity. He feels that the Saw movies have grown increasingly arbitrary and nonsensical. To conclude his review he feels as though Saw IV is a disappointment.

Wimbledon

In this review Roger Ebert expresses the reasons why he enjoyed Wimbledon. He talks about how the conversation between the characters is actually a conversation and not just dialog. What Roger Ebert enjoyed most about WIMBLEDON was the warmth between the characters and the tennis action scenes. He gave the movie 3 stars and also says that the movie has a warmth that is worth welcoming.

Transformers (2007)

In this review on the sci-fi action flick, Transformers, Steve Rhodes explains that the film would be more liked by the younger audience than adults. Transformers is a movie that appeared to be well-liked by many viewers, or maybe just by those who like to play with action figures. Rhodes describes the movie as "one long commercial for General Motors". The movie is said to be way too long with a concluding part that goes on for about an hour. Overall, Transformers is a movie that would most-likely be enjoyed by boys who recieve entertainment by action figues and Power Ranger episodes, as for adults on the other hand, will see the movie as nothing more than a migrane headache.