According to either The Debt, how is the reviewer approaching the film? To what degree does the review acknowledge the public perception of the film? What evidence does each review provide to illustrate main points and claims? Do any words or phrases capture the essence of the reviewer's attitude toward the film?
Please share with me exactly which sources you rely on, as a member of the general audience, to evaluate whether or not you will see a movie. In regards to approach, here are a few. Formalist approach, Contextualist approach, Culturalist approach, Feminist approach, Marxist approach, Psychological approach, Dualist approach, etc.
Welcome back to BrainMass.com! Please rate 5/5 for my ideas. Please ask for me again soon as a Special Request. I appreciate your business and am honored to assist you! I offer my notes and references for brainstorming ideas for you.
In the first place, I used a solid review on The Debt from the New York Times at http://movies.nytimes.com/2011/08/31/movies/debt-with-helen-mirren-review.html
To me, the reviewer is approaching the film more from the perspective of a comparison to the 20007 version as well as from a Psychological approach. Scott suggests, "it probes, with perhaps more energy than clarity, the ethical and psychological complications that can lie hidden beneath a story of simple heroism."
However, there is ...
This solution finds a movie Review for The Debt to assess its merits.