REVIEW OF THE REVIEWS

http://www.vulture.com/2011/09/movie_review_warrior.html  -Positive review
http://entertainment.time.com/2011/09/09/warrior-movie-review/ - Negative review


              The positive review is structured first giving a very detailed summary of the movie characters and previous films they've been involved in to almost every little detail of the movie.  David Edelstein the author of the review makes an argument that is somewhat tricky to comprehend. First he stated how the motion picture is way to corny and could never have been a serious movie. So corny that he was embarrassed of the story. Later he describes how you couldn't tell that the actors were acting and it actually felt like they were the people portrayed in the movie.  Edelstein made reference to how good all the actors were and it really brought the movie together.  Edelstein's tone alters throughout the review because he first sides with a negative approach. Saying thats it's to corny and if he didn't
 know the actors would be that good he wouldn't have seen it.  But he then changes to positive as he goes on to say how they really hit their roles perfectly.  His tone also comes on stronger with the vocabulary he used a lot of words that I will most likely never use. I think he uses the vocabulary that he does to try and represent the tone he was shooting for.
         the Authors focus was explaining every little detail about the movie from their character and what they were as a person in the movie to the plot of the story not leaving out a detail. He also hit on the conflicts and themes explaining the situations that the characters were in and how they responded in the movie.  the movie was referenced to similar movies such as The Fighter with Mark Whalberg, and how they were similar with both having dark stories but a good ending.
           The negative review's structure is very similar to the positive's, the first 3 paragraphs are dedicated on explaining the summary, the characters, and getting deep into the plot, but then finishing with what she thought of the film.  I will say the author Mary pol's argument sucks, she claims the movie jumps around to much going in irrelevant directions but to me everything makes sense. Her tone was difficult for me to understand because she seemed positive about the whole movie as she was describing it but once she got to her opinion on it she then turned negative.  like Edelstein's review Pol's uses strong vocabulary which helps the tone she was using.  the focus was also the same as the first hitting on the characters and just the story the movie was telling, the beef of both reviews was the movies characters and plot.  Pol's review also referenced to the movie The Fighter,  saying how they had similar traits.
       a quote that i agreed with from the first review is "the brutality is an extension of the brothers’ inner turmoil: Tom must wreak vengeance, Brendan must be beaten down before he can rise." when you watch the movie you can feel the hate and angry tommy carries with him throughout the movie.  where i agree with the reference to brendan because he was like they say a rocky where he would get tired and strike when you least expect it.  a quote from the negitive review that i can agree with is "Hardy wears Tommy’s emotional bruises all over his face, but he goes so far into the wounded-animal act that he becomes remote." i already mentioned this in the last quote but you can see the sadness in his face and his actions, in the movie also the heavy anger he carries with him from postwar in iraq.  
         The negative review would be more convincing just because the positive one takes both sides of the argument. both did a great job of explaining what the actual movie contains and has in it but where they explain their opinions on it is what got me to side with the negative review.  I want to agree with the positive review but i'm not sure he agrees with himself.  where as the negative review sticks with its opinion through out the whole paper.  even though i love the movie, without seeing it i would choose the negative review on that alone.  
      Writing my own film review i would keep the first couple paragraphs like the authors.  i would thoroughly explain the characters and their actors, giving information on them as a person and what their trying to portray in the film.  Then i would give a very detailed paragraph on the story and plot of the movie, just like the authors did really filling you in on what takes place during the film. instead of putting my opinion of the film at the end like the 2 reviews i read i would put it at the front so the reader knows my stance on the movie from the first sentence.  i wouldn't take anything out of the reviews because everything that was in them served a purpose to the authors opinion and the description of the movie.