Movies  •  Critics  •  About
Existimatum  >  Movies  >  Ender’s Game  >  Reviews  >  Combustible Celluloid

Jeffrey M. Anderson’s “Ender’s Game” Plays Games With Fans’ Hearts

In response to Jeffrey M. Anderson’s 657‑word review of Ender’s Game on Combustible Celluloid

By ,

Most critics are accused of spoiling a film by just alluding to the denouement, a surprise cameo, or an unforeseen plot twist. Jeffrey M. Anderson, in his “Ender’s Game 2013,” isn’t content to simply hint at the ending of Ender’s Game, so he blatantly describes the final frames in vivid detail.

It’s possible Anderson had the flu on the day in critic’s class when they covered the whole spoiler thing, but he seems completely clueless as to why it might be a problem for some readers to hear the ending of the film they are going to see.

Anderson apparently didn’t skip Grammar class, however, because the writing is technically proficient; there are no glaring problems with grammar or punctuation, but the prose is still awkward and stilted.

The criticism doesn’t fare well either. Readers are left with deeply profound, analytical observations like, “the movie Ender’s Game is so-so” (which is repeated, not twice, but four times throughout the piece), “war is bad,” and, in a moment of uncharacteristic brilliance, Harrison Ford’s “character is quite flat.”

This is a glorified forum post whose dull writing and shallow critique drag it into a no man’s land from which no reader will ever return.    

Quality of Writing Quality of Argument Spoiler Avoidance Presentation