Movies  •  Critics  •  About
Existimatum  >  Movies  >  Gravity  >  Reviews  >

Kent Turner’s “Gravity” Review Is a Short, Underdeveloped Prospect

In response to Kent Turner’s 253‑word review of Gravity on

By ,

Kent Turner’s “Toronto International Film Festival” review of Gravity is too lean to offer its audience any substantial entertainment value.

TIFF finds Turner seeking (among other things) big-budget action in IMAX-3D. He finds what he’s looking for—but he can’t be bothered to tell you much about it except that it’s tight, dramatic, and might cause palpitations. There’s some depth there, he explains. He immediately distances himself from his only strong conclusion.

He does so by disagreeing with himself and offering, in support, a minor spoiler the reader really didn’t need to know.

That’s about all the audience is given, and it’s a sore disappointment. The impression is that he could have devoted more time to his work, but whatever premise he could have built upon was whittled into a meager 253 words, not even all of which are devoted to his craft.

Although it’s not a new problem, the recent “anthology reviews” cropping up tend to spread their wealth of material among several half-baked pieces rather than focusing on a core central concept. The Gravity portion of TIFF is less review than overview, and without strong positions it doesn’t offer anything that more substantial reviews—even subpar ones—don’t offer.

Less is rarely more; though in reviews, less is in fact sometimes better. This is one instance where less is more: more reason for the audience to take their readership to a good review.    

Quality of Writing Quality of Argument Spoiler Avoidance Presentation