Movies  •  Critics  •  About
Existimatum  >  Movies  >  Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2  >  Reviews  >  Boston Globe

Tom Russo “Meatballs 2 Is Colorful, if Reheated” Leaves Audience Hungry

In response to Tom Russo’s 82‑word review of Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2 on Boston Globe 

http://www.boston.com/ae/movies/2013/09/26/movie-review-meatballs-colorful-reheated/Go2obDCUQYhBQTAjCueqHI/story.html

By ,

In his review “‘Meatballs 2’ is colorful, if reheated”, Tom Russo gives the reader a short teaser with no lasting conclusions.

Russo begins the review bold and strong, with firm expertise that is seasoned and confident. The reader is effortlessly pulled in, and just as Russo begins to fold his readers up in all the literary fabric of his opinions, the review is cut short.

Unfortunately, Russo caters to a very specific clientele. You won’t be able to access this story unless you are a member of the newspaper the review is printed in. Dejected, the reader is forced to retreat from their active engagement with this quality review and ponder on all the wondrous words that could have been enjoyed in a perfect world.

The presentation is consequently lacking. No trailers, no pictures, no pull-quotes, just a simple sign attempting to lure the reader into continuing with the story, for a small price.

As far as the quality of argument, there is no argument to be had. When the audience doesn’t have access to see it, there can be no commentary about it. It calls back to the saying “If a tree falls in the woods, does it make a sound?” Alternatively, “If a review falls behind a firewall, does it make an impact?” In this case, the answer is no.     

Quality of Writing Quality of Argument Spoiler Avoidance Presentation