Movies  •  Critics  •  About
Existimatum  >  Movies  >  I Give It a Year  >  Reviews  >  Washington Post

Stephanie Merry’s “‘i Give It a Year’ Movie Review” Though Pleasant, Fails to Set Itself Apart

In response to Stephanie Merry’s 572‑word review of I Give It a Year on Washington Post

By ,

There are no memorable moments in ‘I Give It a Year’ movie review, Stephanie Merry’s review for the Washington Post. Its all very serviceable. The movie is finely described, a few solid points are made, and before you know it the review is over and you‘re reading certifications and run time.

Its hard to point out exactly what’s wrong with the review, but one gets the sense that Merry herself knows that she’s just going through the motions. She casually describes characters and includes a representative scene for each one, never plunging any deeper. She’s writes like she is a prisoner to her subject matter, unable to deeply examine a film that doesn‘t seem to deeply examine anything.

Merry’s final two paragraphs show her at her strongest. Her readers get a brief glimpse of her potential talent as she finally distances herself from her character-scene formula and discusses the spirit in which the film was made and the underlying assumptions the creators must have adopted. As she discusses the shortcomings of the film vis-a-vis this big picture approach, things start clicking. Readers will really get a sense of the talent Stephanie Merry is able to display. Unfortunately, its all too little too late. The competent finale doesn‘t justify putting this review on your must-read list.    

Quality of Writing Quality of Argument Spoiler Avoidance Presentation