I'll start with the negative review which was hard to find since I first checked metacritic, but all of the critics had given it good reviews. I then checked rotten tomatoes and found a negative review from Jonathan Rosenbaum of the Chicago Reader which can be found here: http://www.jonathanrosenbaum.com/?p=6550 I liked his layout of the review in which he started with the things he enjoyed in the movie and progressed to the larger chunk of things he dislike about the movie, breaking each of his paragraphs with a screen shot of the movie. Rosenbaum's main argument focused on his disbelief that The Truman Show would really be entertaining and watched in the real world. He brings up that people would never watch him while Truman was sleeping, and personnel aspects of his life such as using the bathroom, his sex life etc. would never be shown on television. Rosenbaum's tone is very skeptical, and his vocabulary was very readable to the average person. His reviewed mainly revolved around the plot of The Truman Show, but also included his review of Jim Carrey, and how he did a much better job in this non-comedy than in The Cable Guy. Rosenbaum mentioned a variety of others movies and critics in his review. These include comparing The Truman Show to other movies of similar plot lines (living in a controlled world) and by quoting an Esquire editor.
Another review that I read on The Truman Show, was by James Berardinelli was much more positive and approving in tone. Found here http://www.reelviews.net/php_review_template.php?identifier=178 Beradinelli argues that while it may not have hit its full potential, overall The Truman Show was very well-done. Berardinelli vocabulary was a little more advanced than Rosenbaum's but still relatively easy to read, and I thought read better. Beradinelli has a fuller reviews focusing on many different aspects of the movie such as plot, actors, style, and offers his critiques of the movie. He enjoyed the plot and was glad that The Truman Show was very original idea and enjoyed the mockumentary style the movie was shot in. As well as Rosenbaum, Beradinelli also mentioned past movies similar to The Truman Show, and mentioned how Jim Carrey did well in his first non-goofball movie.
In Rosenbaums review I really agreed with that we should, "applaud Jim Carrey's determination to move beyond his rubber-faced antics...especially since he was slapped down for presuming to do that in The Cable Guy" As a kid, Ace Ventura: Pet Detective was always one of my favorite movies, and recently fell in love with him in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, I might have a bias towards enjoying Jim Carrey's work. I caught the end of The Cable Guy and it looked like a super weird movie from the last fifteen minutes, but I like how Rosenbaum thought that Jim Carreys performance was good, and still gave him a shot after Carrey failed taking a more serious role in The Cable Guy. I thought Jim Carrey was great as Truman, he was very believable in his reaction of finding out his stardom, and relatable from the opening scene. I agreed with Beradinelli's line that "Most movies today run far too long, but The Truman Show ran too short." He goes on to say he was left curious how certain aspects of Truman's life would be televised, and he wished it went further into that. I totally agree I would have liked to seen maybe ~20 minutes more of him growing up, more "normal days" etc. These where the things that made the plot of his own television show people walked everyday interesting and funny to see. Its a little ironic that I agreed with a positive thing in the negative review of The Truman Show and more of a negative thing in my positive review.
I would have thought Beradinelli's review would have been more convincing. It was short, and sweet he got right to the point. While he does mention some things it fell a little short in, Beradinelli frequently says things like "[The Truman Show] deserves high marks" and is a "welcome surprise". Phrases like those make me want to watch a movie instantly, as it shows the movie is good. His diction also won me over, as he wrote in a style that I enjoy. I didn't like how Rosenbaum focused mainly on plot flaws of the movie and how uninterested the world would really be in a show like The Truman Show, because its a movie so the writers can have some creative leeway with it.
In a review I look for a spoiler-free summary of the plot that only hits the basics, since I like to know as little as possible going into watching a movie. A review of how the prominent actors did compared to previous movies they have been in. If applicable a analysis of hidden meanings or messages the director was trying to hint at, as I often overlook these. Then the opinion of whether or not the critic enjoyed the film or not and what parts they liked/disliked. This creates a good review of the movie that allows me to become interested in the movie, and then can go back to the same review later after having watched said movie.
