Movies  •  Critics  •  About
Existimatum  >  Movies  >  Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2  >  Reviews  >  Financial Times

Nigel Andrews Might Be Certifiable in His Peculiar “Meatballs”

In response to Nigel Andrews’s 166‑word review of Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2 on Financial Times 

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/2d49ea12-3cc0-11e3-86ef-00144feab7de.html?ftcamp=published_links%2Frss%2Flife-arts_film-television%2Ffeed%2F%2Fproduct

By ,

Nigel Andrews’s “Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2 – film review” for the Financial Times film section follows their tradition of barely there reviews, giving readers a scant 166 words (which, in the case of FT, is actually an opus).  

Again, the problem here is not necessarily with length, but what Andrews does with it. Essentially nothing.  

He opens with a joke so nonsensical, you’ll be scratching your head for the rest of the review: “But if you remember Meatballs 1 you probably, as they say of the Sixties, didn’t live through it.”

Anyone?

And it’s downhill from there. Andrews’s references are so offbeat they’re bizarre and his word choice is stranger still.

It doesn’t help the proceedings, either, that his sentence structure is so muddled it can only be described as drug induced.  

Instead of using his three short paragraphs for something resembling critique, Andrews closes by musing that “the name Starbucks doesn’t feature once. That usually unstoppable company must have fallen asleep in the crow’s nest of the good ship Product Placement.”

How this qualifies as a judgement about the film baffles the mind but it’s par for the course in a review that will have you questioning your sanity. Best leave this one in the loony bin.    

Quality of Writing Quality of Argument Spoiler Avoidance Presentation