|Reviews for The Interview|
| Ceres Wunderkind chapter 1 . 2/16/2005
Hm, do I smell a troll? I'll give you the benefit of the the doubt this time.
No, that wasn't a very good review. There are one or two things you can do to help you write a better one next time:
1) Get your English teacher to explain the difference between unsupported opinion and well-argued criticism.
2) Read the review guidelines on this site
3) Here is something I once wrote about review-writing:
What’s a good review? How about:
This is total garbage. You so suck. Kill yourself now and save the world.
Fantastic! This is so sweet!
Is the first one bad and the second one good? No! They’re both terrible. Why? Because neither of them says any more than "I hate this story" or "I like this story". As a rule you see more of the second kind of review that the first – on anyway. Nobody likes to look like a sourpuss, after all.
How do I think you should write reviews? Here are a few guidelines:
- Be kind. Remember that a story, no matter how short or badly written, represents a creative effort on the part of the writer, who may have put a lot of himself or herself into it. It takes a certain amount of nerve to put your work up for comment in front of the whole world.
- Be positive. Every story has something good in it. Characterisation, plot, dialogue, concept, all or some of these aspects will have something going for them. Praise the good points.
- Be prepared to criticise. Every story can be improved. Perhaps the writer’s spelling or grammar slips in places. How about the characters? Do they have any depth? Do they behave consistently? Can they be readily distinguished from each other? Is one of them called Mary Sue? How about the plot? Does it progress logically; or does it rely too much on coincidences or irrational behaviour on the part of (all too often) the villain? Does the dialogue ring true, or does it sound forced or artificial? And the pacing – does the story move at the right speed? Endings are terribly important too. Does the conclusion (if the story is complete) satisfy the reader?
- Aim to help the writer. The object is to help him or her to write a better story next time. Don’t use your review as an opportunity to do a demolition job on the writer or, alternatively, to do a favour to one of your friends.
- Sign in. There’s no justification for not giving the writer the opportunity to discuss the points you’ve raised.
- Be concise. Sometimes a short barbed review is all it takes, but be careful. Here’s what Dorothy Parker, writing as Constant Reader, had to say about AA Milne’s "The House at Pooh Corner" in the New Yorker:
Tonstant Weader Fwowed Up
Very funny – but didn’t that say more about the acerbic Miss Parker than it did about the book, which has been read and loved by millions?
| Me'shell chapter 1 . 2/15/2005
i really don't know what to say about this so called "story", it was just dreadful. please submit a review about this review.
| lulu fae chapter 1 . 2/5/2005
I didn't read the whole thing cos it's way too long but if you split it into chapters it would be a lot easier to read. You don't have to listen to me or anything, I'm just making a suggestion. What I read was good though. Keep writing
| Danny Barefoot chapter 1 . 2/3/2005
Something like the 'wood for the trees' arguement appeared in 'All Quiet on the Western Front' didn't it? It was a good think Miss Alton didn't appear as fatuous as the civilians in that book did; her character and point of veiw come across well. An honest, strikingly insular, (She could only really understand what Sunny was saying within the context of her job, which is quite alright), but well meaning woman with a sticky task.
Sunny's development is very convincing. 'I am anxious to return to my studies' sounded a bit artificial, but I suspect that was intentional. Good dialogue, and a welcome outside point of veiwpoint on dear olé Sunny.