Movies  •  Critics  •  About
Existimatum  >  Movies  >  The Hunger Games: Catching Fire  >  Reviews  >  Paste Magazine

Annlee Ellingson Introduces the Mega-Summary in “Hunger Games”

In response to Annlee Ellingson’s 742‑word review of The Hunger Games: Catching Fire on Paste Magazine 

http://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2013/11/the-hunger-games-catching-fire.html

By ,

Did someone order a large summary? Annlee Ellingson delivers a thorough description in “The Hunger Games: Catching Fire,” and her mild critique in the closing paragraphs only touches on the surface of the film. The work has its moments (like most reviews do), but the audience has to nothing substantial to take away from the mega-summary.

The main problem with Hunger Games is that it’s boring. Ellingson fails to produce any type of argument at the beginning of the review, and proceeds to serve up four long paragraphs of plot summary before anything substantial is said about the film. The structure shows a lack of understanding for the audience, and overall the work comes across as a minor-league effort.

Ellingson finally offers a tiny bit of critique by the fifth paragraph of Hunger Games, but then transitions to more description in the next. One may ponder what exactly the critic is getting at by merely describing the film.

The concluding paragraphs of Hunger Games features actual thoughts on the film, but Ellingson’s statements are extremely cryptic and bland. Director Francis Lawrence is referenced by name, but Ellingson is unable to expand in detail on her statement of “there’s more here at work than plot.”

Hunger Games is one of those reviews that consists largely of summary, and then surprises the reader with brief critique. The appearance of original thought is to be expected, but should not take a back seat to summary.    

Quality of Writing Quality of Argument Spoiler Avoidance Presentation