Movies  •  Critics  •  About
Existimatum  >  Movies  >  Prisoners  >  Reviews  >  Entertainment Weekly

Owen Gleiberman’s “Movie Review: Prisoners (2013)” Is Banal

In response to Owen Gleiberman’s 823‑word review of Prisoners on Entertainment Weekly,,20483133_20721902,00.html

By ,

Owen Gleiberman’s “Movie Review: Prisoners (2013)” is a staggering performance of how not to write a compelling review.

He commences the review with an audaciously irrelevant comparison of Prisoners to movies produced in the 1970s, and then moves on to a complete, step-by-step delineation of what occurs at the beginning of the film. By doing so, he completely spoils the content of the scenes with his choppy words.  Not only does he spoil, he spoils poorly.

The reviewer describes what he thinks the characters know and don’t know during key plot movements, as if he is literally inside of their heads. He expresses such adoration of Hugh Jackman’s and Jake Gyllenhaal’s physique and performance in the film that it sounds like Gleiberman has imaginary co-dependency.

The review continues with an unholy atrocity of “what if”questions that could irritate Mother Teresa. He writes about so many themes the reader can’t unearth what the movie is really about, let a lone the review.

By the end of the review, Gleiberman even tells how he feels the storyline echoes, which in turn will make readers want to puke sideways.

The review is written in ridiculously small font with excessively long paragraphs, but above all else, this challenged reviewer over-uses adjectives.

While it’s clear that Gleiberman likes the film, it’s also clear that his review is nothing but a desperate display of emotional writing that is unworthy of readership.     

Quality of Writing Quality of Argument Spoiler Avoidance Presentation