Movies  •  Critics  •  About
Existimatum  >  Movies  >  Ender’s Game  >  Reviews  >  Aisle Seat

Mike McGranaghan’s “ENDER’S GAME” Is a Third-Act Spoiler

In response to Mike McGranaghan’s 725‑word review of Ender’s Game on Aisle Seat

By ,

Mike McGranaghan’s “ENDER’S GAME” is a bland mixture of description and spoilers which ultimately accomplishes nothing except upsetting the reader.

Why do critics feel the need to offer up details from the final act? Some critics proudly state their loose attitude towards spoilers (which is troubling), and others just seem oblivious. McGranaghan writes so specifically about the final act in ENDER’S GAME and appears to believe that the novel Ender’s Game has been read by everybody. Why even go there? Why would the reader appreciate this bit of information?

The analysis of ENDER’S GAME is average at best, which makes the spoiler even more problematic.  
McGranaghan adds his name to a list of critics in Ender’s Game that briefly describe who the lead characters are, but say nothing about the actual performances of the actors.

The writing in ENDER’S GAME is solid at times, but overall the phrasing is quite vague. McGranaghan appears to be on the verge of a complete analysis but quickly resorts to cliches. Here’s an example: the critic says that watching the main character’s actions “makes for compelling entertainment.” Why is it compelling? Asa Butterfield does “first-rate work in the role”. First-rate? What are the specifics of first-rate acting? McGranaghan doesn’t say.

ENDER’S GAME spoils and McGranaghan doesn’t seem to understand the general reader.    

Quality of Writing Quality of Argument Spoiler Avoidance Presentation