Movies  •  Critics  •  About
Existimatum  >  Movies  >  Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2  >  Reviews  >  New England Movies Weekly

Daniel M. Kimmel Critiques With Unabashed Ferocity in “‘Cloudy 2’ Review”

In response to Daniel M. Kimmel’s 542‑word review of Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2 on New England Movies Weekly 

http://northshoremovies.wordpress.com/2013/09/27/review-cloudy-with-a-chance-of-meatballs-2/

By ,

In Daniel M. Kimmel brazen review,“Review—Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs 2”, the critic defends the honor of the reader by stating his vexation and executing his argument with ferocious prose.

Review—Cloudy will remind the reader of an archer who nails the bulls-eye with precision and skill. The bold opening paragraph will grab the attention of the audience, hold them in suspense and possibly even make them laugh. Kimmel’s words are indicative of a craftsman who resorts to the fierce written word when only necessary.

The middle section of Review—Cloudy is neither deep nor funny, however Kimmel provides adequate description to express the general idea of the film. The mission statement of the critic should not lead one to think they will receive any more than the basics. Given the argument, the tactic employed by Kimmel is just.

The lionhearted critic sets his sights on the general idea of the plot, and triumphantly bolsters his argument with penetrating thoughts on why the premise is as flawed as the jokes. Kimmel is aware that some readers will find joy in the content, but makes sure they are informed and armored with cinematic knowledge.

Review—Cloudy is a relevant piece of work for opening weekend. It approaches the reader with care, and backs up the argument by intelligently looking at both sides.    

Quality of Writing Quality of Argument Spoiler Avoidance Presentation