Movies  •  Critics  •  About
Existimatum  >  Movies  >  Thor: The Dark World  >  Reviews  >  We Got This Covered

Sam Woolf’s “Thor: . .” a Discombobulated Dissertation

In response to Sam Woolf’s 1478‑word review of Thor: The Dark World on We Got This Covered 

http://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/thor-dark-world-review/

By ,

Sam Woolf delivers an enjoyable product in “Thor: The Dark World Review.” Too bad it missed the editing process.

When the reader first peruses this piece, they will likely get their hopes up that it is to be an engaging, worthwhile site to behold—and they would not be incorrect. Woolf clearly has a gift for alliteration. Clever and poignant analogies seem like they could flow out of him indefinitely, and really enhance the quality of his descriptors. He makes it a point to set up the tone properly, embellishing just the right aspects without slanting the piece as a whole. The result is a wholly entertaining, unbiased assessment of the subject and its value to the audience.

Tragically, in waxing poetically as does, he embellishes far too much. Indeed, this is the most noticeable of the two main weaknesses of this piece (the other being organization). Although it is a mostly enjoyable experience with vibrant detail and interesting back-story, much of it could be cut without diminishing the overall effectiveness of the piece one iota. The sheer amount of text on display is sure to give the reader a migraine as painful as if a concrete hammer was slamming into their skull.

To complicate things further, the information overload is delivered slightly out of sequence. A good chunk of the early passages, if not all, should be placed after the synopsis of the premise, as it transitions into the conclusion much more cleanly.  As it stands, the reader needs to warp from the author’s head to the subject details back to the author’s head. Too much warping can cause confusion for the reader and make their migraine even more severe.

When Woolf is atop his game, not many can rival him. Alas, when he falters, he falters big. Such is the case here. It would be one thing to make trivial oversights here and there; even the best of his peers are afforded some leeway in that regard. Unfortunately, rudimentary “rookie” mistakes stand out like a sore thumb, especially for a person of his exceptional talent. They turn what may have been a great literary masterpiece into a glorious, spectacular train wreck.    

Quality of Writing Quality of Argument Spoiler Avoidance Presentation