Movies  •  Critics  •  About
Existimatum  >  Movies  >  The Hunger Games: Catching Fire  >  Reviews  >  Detroit News

Tom Long’s “Scope and Execution” Lacks Commitment and Detail

In response to Tom Long’s 618‑word review of The Hunger Games: Catching Fire on Detroit News

By ,

Tom Long’s latest review offers little original thought for the audience, and merely addresses themes of the sequel without expanding. It’s vague piece of work that lacks commitment—unless the title is factored in: “Review: In scope and execution, Hunger Games sequel tops original.”

There is hope at the beginning of Scope and Execution. Long makes a clear argument, and transitions to the new ideas of the sequel. Unfortunately, a statement like “There’s simply a whole lot more going on” speaks volumes about the dedication of Long. What exactly is going on? The critic refuses to critique the film, but does acknowledge that it exists.

To be clear, a sentence or two here and there is technically considered critique. Long may feel that he appropriately analyzed the performance of Jennifer Lawrence with “more than capable of expanding with the material,” however the critic refuses to expand on his own material. Why is Lawrence more than capable? The vagueness of Long’s work is beyond frustrating.

The majority of Scope of Execution consists of Tom Long summarizing the film. By the conclusion, he once again  makes it clear that the sequel is better, but only with phrasing that could be accomplished by anyone coming out of a theatre.

Scope and Execution is disturbing due to the lack of original thought and attention to detail.    

Quality of Writing Quality of Argument Spoiler Avoidance Presentation