Analysis of film Reviews

Analysis of 'The Sixth Sense' review by 'The Guardian' 

http://www.theguardian.com/film/News_Story/Critic_Review/Guardian_review/0,,99731,00.html

In analysis of this review it is clear that this is a very straight forward and brief critic of The Sixth Sense. Bradshaw uses a chatty tone by starting the review with a rhetorical question ‘Is Bruce Willis in danger of becoming a type cast as the intense academic psychologist?’ this immediately grabs the reader’s attention but the question itself implies that the reviewer sees Bruce Willis as a one trick pony therefore suggesting that Willis is only able to play one type of character. This automatically highlights the path of which you expect the review to follow; to me it was evident that the reviewer was not going to completely paint a good picture of the film. The reviewer uses formal/academic language however some of which the way sentences are phrased show that the review is directed towards a non-specific/general audience. 

It is clear that the reviewer does not think too highly of the film, in my opinion much of what the reviewer says comes across as sarcastic for example ‘and finally as another gore- splattered spectre wanders shyly into shot there is a terrible temptation to giggle' suggests that the reviewer is mocking the continuous use of jump shots used throughout the film almost as if to say they are cringe-worth and expected. The content of the review outlines the basic plot of the film but makes sure to not give too much away. This review omits any information about director, use of camera, special effects and editing as much of the content is based upon the reviewer’s general perception of the film. However the reviewer does mention the actors in the film with reference to Bruce Willis in particular and the similar portrayal of his character in The Sixth Sense in comparison to another Bruce Willis film The Colour of the Night. The reviewer does inform readers of how the film received a positive response from the US stating that the film ‘had them gibbering with fear in the aisles in the US’ so he is not completely trying to discredit Willis as an actor. In the final paragraph the reviewer mentions the plot twist stating that it ‘stops it from being the classic chiller it could have been’ the closing sentence sums up the reviewers overall opinion of the film which is clearly not that great.
Analysis of 'The Sixth Sense' Review by 'New York Times' 

http://www.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9802E3DB1430F935A3575BC0A96F958260

This review by Stephen Holden is very thorough and not something that would be an easily digestible read for a mainstream audience.  From the opening sentence of the review it is clear that the reviewer is not keen on the film. The use of quotation marks in the first line of the review illustrates the irony and distaste Holden has in an attempt to mock the film ‘And this year's ''Touched by an Angel'' award for gaggingly mawkish supernatural kitsch goes to Bruce Willis's newest film’. The reviewer goes onto outline the plot of the film in great depth, pointing out specific events that happen within the film, the reviewer does give a lot of the film away but it is apparent that much of the review remains his personal opinion.

The reviewer mentions the key actors in the film Haley-Joel Osment and Bruce Willis. It becomes noticeable that the reviewer is not fond of Bruce Willis’ work as he explains in the second paragraph of the review that Willis only has one facial expression in all his films, to me this statement clearly indicated that the reviewer does not like Willis as an actor. The reviewer also mentions the director M. Night Shyamalan, to which he makes clear he does not see him as a credible director. The reviewer goes on to mention Shyamalan’s previous work ''Wide Awake'' to which he names an ‘insufferable coy drama’ which again highlights he does not like Shyamalan’s work. However the reviewer states that The Sixth sense is only slightly better ‘but that isn’t saying much’. The reviewer doesn’t mention anything about the use of camera, special effects and editing a lot of the content in this review is negative, but the reviewer remains true to themselves being very honest. The reviewer predominantly uses a formal speech code but now and again he converts to an informal tone which suggests to me that although this review is not one I think would be easily understood by mainstream it is clear that the reviewer has tried to target a non-specific audience.

The language the reviewer uses throughout the entirety of the review illustrates that the he is not impressed by the film and on the whole feels the film is a poor attempt at a horror film.