1. Watch the Michael Moore movie, Capitalism: A Love Story. You can find it for free online at a number of sites, or it can be rented through Netflix.
2. Read both of the critiques of the movie, and choose one to critique.
3. After watching the movie and reading the articles, you are to choose one of the assigned articles and critique it. Is it a good, fair review of the movie? Does the writer present a good analysis of Moore’s film? (NOTE: You are NOT reviewing the film itself! You are analyzing the argument of the reviewers.)
The background information of the introduction needs to provide information of the source of the essay being critiqued. Look for its owner and possible political affiliations to determine a possible bias for the article, which could ultimately color the bias of the review.
Be careful when doing this assignment. I chose Michael Moore because most people either like or despise him. You need to try and keep your bias regarding Michael Moore out of your analysis of the article reviewing his movie. ?
No 2nd person voice
700-100 words (Probably longer than 5 pargraphs)
At least 3 quotes from article being critiqued
Works Cited page including citations for the movie and the article
Guidelines for Writing Critiques
(Adapted from The McGraw-Hill Reader, p. 146.)
• Introduce: Provide background material to help your readers understand the relevance or appeal of the movie review. This background material might include one or more of the following: the political stance of the owner of either the Huffington Post or Psychology Today, the bias of the author of the review, of you can find factual information about him.
o Last sentence of the introduction should be your thesis statement, evaluating the review.
? Introduce the passage under analysis and the author. State the author’s main argument and the point(s) that you intend to make about it.
• Summarize: Summarize the author’s main points in his review, making sure to state the author’s purpose for writing.
Note: the summary should be the shortest part of the critique; try to limit the summary to one paragraph.
• Assess the presentation: Evaluate the validity of the author’s presentation, as distinct from your points of agreement or disagreement. Using examples and references from the passage, comment on the author’s success in achieving his or her purpose by critiquing three or four specific points. Use the second source to help support your analysis. You might base your analysis on one (or more) of the following criteria:
o Is the information accurate?
o Is the information significant?
o Has the author defined terms clearly?
o Has the author used and interpreted information fairly?
o Has the author argued logically?
Make sure when you are critiquing this article that you are using elevated language as introduced throughout chapter three – words like validity, fallacy, claims, etc. I expect more than just logical problems. Look at the specific language the reviewer uses to make his points.
• Respond to the presentation: With which views do you agree/disagree? Using specific examples and references from the passage, discuss and explain your reasons for agreement and disagreement; when possible, connect these reasons to assumptions—both the author’s and your own. Avoid using words like “I believe” and “I think;” it is understood that these ideas belong to you as you are the author of the critique.
• Conclude: State your conclusions about the overall validity of the piece—your assessment of the author’s success at achieving his or her aims and your reactions to the author’s views. Remind the reader of the strengths and weaknesses of the passage. Also, in the conclusion, make sure to restate the title and author’s name of the article being critiqued.