Movies  •  Critics  •  About
Existimatum  >  Movies  >  Prisoners  >  Reviews  >  Kansas City Star

Jon Niccum’s “Prisoners Is Shackled by Convoluted Plot” Is Basically Critique-Less

In response to Jon Niccum’s 429‑word review of Prisoners on Kansas City Star

By ,

Jon Niccum’s “Prisoners is Shackled by Convoluted Plot” starts off promising  enough, but as you begin reading the review, the title becomes almost meaningless as you realize that at no point does the critic bring up his key issue with the film.

Niccum walked away from Prisoners with some less than  pleasant thoughts. As a result, it is odd that there seems to be more compliments, thrown seemingly out of spite, then critiques of what the film does wrong.

The title the film indicates that the film is “convoluted.”  Readers who patiently read on, waiting for the promised payoff will be sorely disappointed. The issue is surprisingly absent from the write-up. He must have forgotten how confusing the film was out of anger and frustration.

Adding insult to injury, there are a fair amount of spoilers, but nothing so egregious that it should stop most from still seeing the film.

The lamentable part of this whole proceeding is that the writing is actually good. There is a nice bit of color to Niccum’s prose,  and it isn’t your standard “the film was good” or “the film was bad” format.

There is an importance placed upon word choice and delivery. Sadly without any actual critique or  at the very certain claims being backed up, or even explored, the review ends up falling into the “useless” bin.

The writing is good but if the internal components of the review aren’t there; the piece is either  incomplete or faulty. That is the problem here. Its a faulty review, missing key elements that readers have come to expect if they are to make a decision. Thus, in case you couldn’t put figure it out by now, just go ahead and skip this review.    

Quality of Writing Quality of Argument Spoiler Avoidance Presentation