Critical Defense of NYT Artical

Manohla Dargis, one of the staff writers of the New York Time’s movie section, published a review of the new film, “The Other Boleyn Girl” on February 2008 found on the website, .

She describes this film as a “salacious” story of rich, pretty girls who run around the castle and act as prostitutes to the king. Dargis writes her review in a way that subtlety compares this movie to a reality TV show, where two sisters are set in competition and the audience gets to see their downfall. She calls these girls “more or less the Paris and Nicky Hilton of the Tudor Court. Her language also reflects this type of media. Especially for the New York Times, Dargis uses language that is on the saucy side. She writes, “His sexual wish was their command” and describes one of the sisters as being “passed around from man to man”. She even says that the daughters were “pimped out” by their father.

It’s interesting the language that she uses, sometimes very common and at other times quite confusing. What is the word “pastiche”? Is it a common term in the film world? Another confusing example of her language in her lede, she uses the phrase “More slog than romp”. Perhaps it’s due to a personal confusion, but it seems like this phrase is difficult to understand. Also she writes that “The Boleyn sister were the kind of trouble that can make for bodice-ripping entertainment, but they were also the kind of unruly women who sometimes risked burning”. It’s difficult to understand if Dargis is talking about the real sisters or how they were portrayed in the movie; overall, the sentence is badly constructed.

But she accomplishes her goal at placing her position on the film. From the second paragraph on, she uses descriptions that inform the reader of her point of view. She uses the phrases, “oddly plotted and frantically paced”, “safe and predictable”, “underwritten and unedited”, and “whittled down to the nub” to describe different aspects of the film. She writes that the movie has “few meagerly entertaining moments”. The reader can also know what to expect, without knowing too much about the film or plot. In her kicker, “Ms. Portman’s eyes, Mr. Bana’s hands, and Ms. Johansonn’s chin all receive vigorous workouts” Dargis paints a picture of what the audience should expect, especially if they are familiar with these famous actors.

Overall, she does a good job getting her opinions out and keeping the tone of her piece steady. Her title is lacking and wouldn't attract readers, but perhaps the movie was advertised enough for readers to naturally seek out her review. At some points, it is slightly difficult to understand who her audience should be, because of some of her word use, but she writes an engaging piece about a film she clearly didn’t enjoy.