Who knew when watching a movie many hidden signs are missed. Watching a movie is not just enjoying a story it could be, historical,comedy or romance. However there is different kind of critics that see more than just movie. As explained in Norton’s Introduction to Literature, the ability to read and interpret literature is a unique human ability. This analysis, or literary criticism, cannot be done by computers. It requires the ability to process many different signals. There are a variety of approaches. The same can apply to critiquing movies or videos. The critics in the three videos provided, the Siskel and Ebert review of Halloween, the Screen Junkies review of 300 and the Screen Junkie review of Frozen utilize a variety of approaches and emphasis.
Siskel and Ebert employ a variety of techniques. Surprisingly, the two male critics use feminist criticism. They mention the movie Halloween, unlike some of its genre, does not demean women. They contrast Halloween to “…movies which demean half of the human race.” (Siskel and Ebert trailer.) Ebert points out how the viewer’s sympathies always lay with the woman, not the
…show more content…
Query theory is evidenced by the list of perceived “homoeroticundertones” such as the phallic objects, men wearing thongs, and absence of women. They do not say the producer, Zach Snyder, is gay. However, as explained in Norton, queer theorists “… find queer implications regardless of the author’s acknowledged identity.” (Mays, 2349.) There are also examples of reader (viewer) response. At the beginning of the review, the reviewers claim the movie, with the various shirtless actors, will make men everywhere feel out of shape. The accent is improper according to them, the fighting is nonsense according to the critics. This film is not seen as a fight for something important but instead its filled with homosexual scenes according to these