Movies  •  Critics  •  About
Existimatum  >  Movies  >  Romeo and Juliet  >  Reviews  >  East Bay Express

Kelly Vance Provides Short Lived Flame in “Romeo and Juliet”

In response to Kelly Vance’s 89‑word review of Romeo and Juliet on East Bay Express 

http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/MovieTimes?oid=3712253

By ,

In Kelly Vance’s review entitled “Romeo and Juliet” the reader is faced with a miniature review. Audiences should be careful not to blink in order not to miss the entire review itself! Weighing in at about seven sentences, Vance’s skimpy Romeo and Juliet surely packs a dismal punch.

This review is ridiculously short. Usually, short and to the point is preferred when reading reviews. Get the information needed quickly and move on. Vance took this advice a little too literally.

This wisp of a review provides short one-liners that have little flow or correlation to each other. It feels as if Vance put down exactly what she was thinking as she thought them, with no fluidity or structure to her paragraph of a review. Stream of consciousness does not often work in a persuasive writing piece and certainly earn itself any favors here.

Vance also makes acclamations and criticisms that hold no relevance for the audience. The beauty of a great review is that it gives information on a “need to know” basis, providing all the essential information and leaving out the superfluous. Starting the review by commenting on the weight of an actor seems like an unnecessary pot shot.  

Vance’s Romeo and Juliet is a quick read, and an unnecessary one. The minimal information contained within it is minuscule and cheap.    

Quality of Writing Quality of Argument Spoiler Avoidance Presentation