Film Magazine Reviews - Panic Room (Joe Gilbert)

Here are 3 different reviews of the film 'Panic Room' all within different types of mass media

1. Total Film: Reviewed by 'Total Film' (May 3rd 2002) 
2. BBC Films: Reviewed by Neil Smith (May 2nd 2002)
3. The Chicago Sun Times: Reviewed by 'Roger Ebert (March 29th 2002)

Total Film Review
This review seems to be talking directly at the audience, and strait away the writer uses imperatives such as 'Do not' to address certain 'rules' to the reader. It is clear the the review is written is second person as throughout , the writer uses words like 'you' and 'we'. At first the review seems to be more formal, due to the use of these imperatives, and also through the constant use of strong adjectives, for example, 'bruising masterpiece' and 'another brainscorcher'. However there is also a sense to the review being informal as the writer also asks the reader rhetorical questions, he write 'wouldn't you if you knew it contained a safe, and inside that safe was several million dollars?'. The use of rhetorical questions contradicts the use of imperatives as he goes from command the reader, to asking them a question. The sense of the review being informal continues as the writes uses 'slang' words as he refers to Forest Whitaker as being a 'baddie', and also calls Jared Leto a 'crackhead'


The writer seems to use a lot of content as he switches from talking about the actors, the plot of the story to then talking about the director, the use of camera, and the location. He starts off with describing the plot of the story to the reader, however he then just swaps and mentions how the actors are 'faultless'. He mentions Kristen Stewart, who he calls the 'newcomer', and says how she isn't like other cine-kids, he then refers to her as being 'real'. He then again just changes and mention the director by saying 'this is fincher's movie', literally strait after he says that, he mentions the 'coffee pot shot' which he defines as being 'absolutely mindblowing' He asks the views a rhetorical question when mentioning the use of location, he says 'how do you conjure something cinematic out of a single location'. As you can see this writer has truly packed this review with a large variety of content

Roger Ebert (Chicago Sun Times) Review

Different to the review by Total Film, this review by Roger Ebert is written in first person, as constantly throughout he uses the word 'I'. However even though this review is him talking to himself directly we can strait away see that this review tends to be a more formal review of this film by his use of vocabulary, he uses words like 'scoffing' and 'plausibility. He also uses similes as he compares the movie to a game of chess, as he says 'both sides know the rules' but the 'winner will simply be the better strategist. Throughout this review he always keep comparing the film to a game of chess,this could be because it is a hobby that maybe his readers are interested in, so therefore it attracts their attention more. As the review progress, he also keeps using there more formal words such as 'vertiginous' and 'intriguing'.

However unlike the review by total film, Ebert doesn't go in to the content of the film in as depth how ever he does mention quite a lot. He clearly states that the movie is directed my 'David Fincher', and then further on he simultaneously talks about the actors and their involvement in the plot. Similarly to the Total Film review he mentions the use of camera, which by his description of it seems to be the 'coffee pot shot' that Total Films was referring to, because of this he calls Fincher a 'visual virtuoso' and a 'master of psychological gamesmanship'. Ebert also mentions a little bit of the background of the film as he says 'Nicole Kidman' was originally suppose to play the role of Meg, however despite this he calls Jodie Foster's performance 'spellbinding'. Throughout this review, the writer didn't have one negative comment to say about the film.    

BBC Films
Unlike the other two reviews, this review is written is third person, so its like the writer is reading a story to the reader. The use of language used in this review is much more informal and is probably aimed more at a general reader, where as the reviews by Total Film and Ebert are academic and formal. The writer starts by trying to say a joke, 'They should call it a Don't Panic Room' this clearly shows it is informal. The writer also uses some sense of writing in second person when he asks a rhetorical question, 'But what happens when the very thing the intruders want is in there with you?'. Another reason why it is informal is by the use of vocabulary, the writer uses more general words such as 'slick' and 'criminals'.


The writer makes it clear that David Fincher is the director of this film as he says 'David Finchers's slick new thriller'. However in this review the writer doesn't really mention the actors, except when, like Ebert he brings up the fact that Foster took over the role of Meg from Nicole Kidman. There is some mention of the use of location as he says 'A journeyman director might feel limited by a film where all the action takes place in a single house'. There is also mention to the use of camera as he writes that Fincher takes up the challenge with 'dazzling visual flair'. Like the other writers, Smith also talks about Finchers amazing camera use as it glides through walls and also prowls upstairs, this is talking about the 'coffe pot shot' that both writers also mention in there reviews.

Links to the reviews

Total Film - http://www.totalfilm.com/reviews/cinema/panic-roomm

Chicago Sun Time - http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20020329/REVIEWS/203290304/1023

BBC Films - http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/2002/03/28/panic_room_2002_review.shtml

Film poster annotation - Joe Gilbert (Panic Room)

This is the poster for the film Panic Room. As you can see the layout and style of the poster is pretty simple. It has a simple but effective picture positioned in the centre, which could be used to show the genre of the film to the audience. It shows the main actress Jodie Foster's face at a horizontal angle, this shows how she is laying on the floor, also her facial expression shows how she could be scared or frightened which could suggest to the audience that the film is going to feature the genre or sub-genre of horror or thriller. In addition there is a figure of a man whose identity is not shown, this could suggest some kind of mystery, or an unexpected event. It could also give the audience the impression that the man in the background is going to have to sort of conflict with the character at the front, which could then give the audience the impression that the genre is going to involved action with a sub genre of horror or thriller. Also the clothing and appearance of this man, could also influence the audiences opinion of what the genre of the film is, his face is not shown, and he is wearing all black clothing, which could suggest that he is the villain of the film and therefore gives the impression of the binary opposition good vs bad, which is typical in action/thriller films. The title of the film could also affect how the genre is communicated to the audience. The word 'Panic' gives a sense of danger and threat, and could make the audience think that there is going to be some sense of panic or commotion between the two characters in the picture.

In my opinion the unique selling point of this poster is probably the actress Jodie Foster. Her name is clearly stated at the top of the poster, and her face is shown in the middle of the poster to show how she is the main character in the film. Also she is the only actor/actress who is mention on the poster to a large extent, this could show how she is the most known actor/actress to feature in the film. So having her name clearly stated on top of the poster could attract people who have seen any of her previous films, and may influence them to watch this one.

The title 'Panic Room' is printed just below the picture, it is printed in a bold font to clearly stand out the audience, and is also printed in the colour red. The use of the colour red could of been used to symbolise that there was going to be danger, violence or blood as these things are usually associated with the colour red. This is typical of the horror/thriller genre as danger and violence are also conventions that are associated with them genres. Below the title is the small print which mentions the other actors, the director, producer etc, it also states that it is a film by Columbia Pictures, this could also attract another audience as Columbia pictures are a well known company and may already have a fan base to their films such as Bad Boys, Men in Black and Spider Man. Underneath all of this, it is printed red that the film is coming soon, this doesn't give the audience a clear time when the film is being released.

The poster could give some idea of a target audience, as the title and picture could suggest that the film is an action, horror or thriller. So people who are interested in these particular genres my be influenced to see this film. Also by clearing stating and showing that the main actress in the film is Jodie Foster could also attract another particular target audience as people may have seen her in previous films such as 'Nell' (1994) and 'Contact' (1997), people may have been impressed with her acting and the storyline of them films, and this may influence them to see this one. Lastly, that fact that it states that it is a film by Columbia pictures is a big factor in attracting a target audience, as Colombia pictures is a well known company and has produced big films in the past such as Spider Man, Men In Black and Stuart Little.  

Textual Analysis - Joe Gilbert (Panic Room)

Textual Analysis of a Similar Media Product

Title of film: Panic Room

Date of release: 3 May 2002 (UK)

Director: David Fincher 

Genre: Action

Sub-genre: Thriller, Drama
Trailer:

Jodie Foster and Kristen Stewart

The film is about a women and her daughter who have just bought a new house in New York. On the night they move in, the house is burgled by the previous owners’ grandson and company, in attempt to steal a large amount of cash in a safe located in the 'panic room'.

The equilibrium is portrayed right at the beginning of the film as we see a woman and her daughter looking around a house they are interested in buying. After they buy the house, its shows them settling in to their new home, we then see both of the two characters asleep in their beds. This is where the disequilibrium comes in as we see three men approach the house and start trying to open the doors and look through the windows, one of these men then gets into the house through the roof and lets the others in, this is the disequilibrium as it is not something that the two people in the house would expect to happen. The new equilibrium happens when the police arrive and arrest the only surviving robber, we then see the women and her daughter looking in the newspaper for a new place to live.

There is also a sense of Levi Strauss’s theory of binary oppositions in this film. Binary oppositions is the contrast between two terms e.g. villain/hero. In this film there is the same principle of opposites as we have the contrast between the Innocent and Guilty. The innocent being the two people living in the house, and the guilty being the three men that are robbing the house. Also there are the opposites of a villain/hero, as the three men robbing the house can be seen as the villains and the womans ex husband, who comes to help them can be seen as a hero, as well as the police can be seen as the heroes.

This film ‘Panic Room’ is in chronological order, meaning that the storyline of the film all runs in order in which it happens, this is used because it clearly sets the plot of the film to the audience, which makes it easier to understand. Also it adds to the realism of the film and follows the general conventions of an action film, where the story is told in order the actions happen.



The narrative structure of this film is closed, meaning that their is a clear beginning and ending to their film, whereas a open narrative such as a soap, has the sense of never having an ending, meaning they can go on and on. Also in an closed narrative such as 'Panic Room' there is a small number of main characters which all share the same story line, whereas an open narrative has a much larger amount of characters which all share and follow their own as well as other peoples story lines, this is known as a multi-strand plot. 


In some ways the characters are typical of the genre which in this case is action. Firstly the behaviour of the robbers is typical of the genre as they are seen as being aggressive and violent  towards the owners of he house as well as each other,  we can tell these men are aggressive as we see them with a gun and other weapons such as a sledgehammer, we also see one of the robbers shoot his own friend. They are also aggressive to the women as one of them says to her 'I will fucking kill her! Do you hear me?'. Also the was they speak is also typical of the genre, the men are always swearing and using threatening language, this could show how they are in control and that they are dominant. 'Any other school yard bullshit you wanna settle, or can we get the fuck back to work', this shows that their is conflict between the group, also the word 'wanna' is slang which is usually used in films like these. The facial expressions of the characters go along with the theory of binary opposition, as the owners who are the innocent, are shown to be scared and worried by what is going on, this is shown by their facial expression and body language (eg. In the photo at the beginning, it clearly shows how they are scared of the situation). However the robbers facial expressions and body language show how they are not afraid of what they are doing, and is also shown as being aggressive (except for one of them who seems to be worried about what they are doing). 

Lastly the clothing of the characters is also typical of the genre, as the robbers are wearing dark clothing, and one of them has a balaclava on which is often used in action films to hide peoples identity. This type of clothing is what is usually seen in action films to represent the villains such as robbers.

The storyline of this film is also typical of the action genre, it follows quite a few conventions that you would expect to see in an action film. For example they have the typical good vs bad battle, it also has fights, struggles, plans to escape, and it even has a chase where the robbers try and catch the owners before the enter the panic room. These are all typical of the action genre as they add excitement and  usually adds suspense as the viewer will always want to know what is about to happen. In this film the viewers will always be thinking if the daughter will survive from her condition and will they ever escape from the robbers.