Suggestions for Writing ex. 2

Both critics seemed to have extremely different ideas about the movie "Spider Man 2".  Todd Gilchrist thought that the sequel did not deserve any of the praise that it received, while Robert Ebert thought that the movie was absolutely amazing.  They mainly disagreed on many things, but there was a couple times where they agreed.  For the majority of both of these reviews, both critics gave an overall summary, talked about the characters, and then gave their own view on what the movie should do in comparison to the actual comic book.  Todd Gilchrist thought that although the movie was not terrible as a whole, it needed areas of improvement.  He went about explaining this by tearing apart the film piece by piece.  In a way I guess you could expect this from a critic who did not really like the movie.  Of course someone who loved the movie wouldn't want to intentionally find flaws that made it not as perfect as they thought it was.

In the summary, Gilchrist seems to think that the main character, Peter (Tobey Maguire), finds his life becoming not as exciting in the sequel, while Ebert thinks Peter thrives due to additions in the script.  Probably what stood out the most to me when reading the second critique was how Roger thought that "Spider Man 2" was unlike the other comic book related movies, which veered away from the original comic books.  He thought that these movies should not only focus on superpowers and the main points people think of when they think of super-heroes, but instead focus on what the original books thought was important.  He felt that the effects were not over the top and actually contributed to the movie, making you feel that the objects were real and not just "robot" like.

Overall you could say that the two critics differed in their opinions on how a sequel should evolve.  Gilchrist thought that they should be exciting and keep you on your toes by adding new emotions and deepening the plot, while Ebert thought that the sequels should be less high tech and more like the original books.  If i was to pick someone to agree with, I would say that I would want to take both sides and make them into one.  Agreeing with Gilchrist that these kinds of movies should not be dragged on, but also agreeing with Ebert that they should not be over packed with special effects and over the top characters.  When reading the two reviews we see how the critics use similar methods to review the movie, which leads us to seeing their different viewpoints.  Not everyone is going to agree that a movie is perfect, but the only thing that can be taken out of these response is the fact that there is always room to change, even when someone thinks it is the best piece of work.