Textual Analysis: Film Review 1

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/film/blackfish/review/

This review appears on The Telegraph website; The Telegraph is a globally recognised newspaper that has expanded through the use of intertextuality and web 2.0, therefore allowing it to take a more digital and easily accessible approach.

The title of the review is straightforward and to the point, "Blackfish review: 'coldly compelling', appearing in bold text (possibly times new roman) in a large font. The use of alliteration is effective as the reader is drawn in almost instantaneously as it enforces a more dramatic tone. The language is somewhat juxtapositional, this causes the reader to question the opinion of the critic and provokes them to continue reading in order to gain a sense of clarification.

Directly underneath the introductory title is a star rating of 3/5 -presumably given by the author. The star rating system is commonly used within the film and book industry as a way of classification as the media text is then categorised via the given ranking. This gives the reader a guideline as to which direction the review is going to take in terms of opinion bias- if the rating is high the reader will expect to go on to read a positively accredited review, however, if the rating is low than the reader can expect some sort of criticism or negative feedback.

Below this, a large image is positioned central to the screen; it is apparent that this still is taken from the documentary footage as the blurred pixelation and lack of detailed focus implies that the image is taken from a live action clip. Due to it being a review of a documentary, this is effective as it reinforces the concept of realism due to portraying real life events rather than superficial imitations via professional photos. Beneath the photo a short caption and photo credit is given in a much smaller font; this is not as eye-catching but assuming the reader is already engaged by this point, it gives the necessary acknowledgement and contextual background knowledge behind the image itself.

The next piece of information visible to the viewer is the name and icon of the author- Robbie Colin. The reader is informed as to when the review was written (date, time etc.) and given a hyperlink to the authors social networking page, in this case, his Twitter account. They are also given the opportunity to share the review online via social network- this is an example of intertextuality and self promotion via different platforms.

There is a grey box to the right of the frame consisting of the key information linked to the film, e.g. the cast, the synopsis, the name of the director, the genre, the release date, the age rating, the duration of the film and the country of release. This offers the reader a solid understanding of the film in which the review is based, as well as displaying good contextual knowledge of the product itself.

A short summary of the documentary itself is given just above the first paragraph of the review- "A startling documentary about a trainer's death at SeaWorld shows the fatal consequences of keeping killer wales in captivity". This is highly effective in my opinion as the reader is then made aware as to what topics of controversy may be addressed within the review; as well as this, they are also being informed about the running narrative behind Blackfish which may be useful if they have not watched it themselves. This short summary is typically the 'make or break' moment in terms of keeping somebody engaged; this information has the power to either provoke the curiosity of a reader and keep them engrossed or lose somebody's interest entirely, depending on the reader's individual differences and what they were originally looking for. For example, if an animal rights activist came across this review, the summary may appeal to them and their own beliefs and cause them to read onwards; however, if somebody who did not care for animals were to read this summary, they may then decide that they do not wish to read further.

Similar to many magazine articles and newspaper features, the first letter of the introduction appears in a bigger font than the rest of the text; I plan to follow this traditional convention within my own review. This review does not take form within the traditional newspaper structure of a columns divide but appears as a lump sum of text separated via paragraphing.

About half way down the page, another image is used in order to separate the two blocks of text; this image is also positioned central to the frame and a small credit appears underneath it. This image helps to shape the text as not only does it prevent it from appearing too long in hindsight, it also provides depth to the review itself as it links in with the content and allows the reader to visualise the ambience.