Preval 1

Stephanie Preval

Writing 101-019

Nicole Williams

Reviews Analysis

Tyler Perry’s I Can Do Bad All by Myself

Before going to the movies many look up to reviews to give them a sense of direction. Reviews

help them decide whether a movie is worth spending on and worth their time or not. Those reviews can

be found in many places to accommodate the searcher; they are on the Internet, in newspapers, and in

magazines. Those are popular places to find them. However, reviews can also be oral not always written;

imagine telling a friend to watch a movie or not. They also come in different length, and can serve to

promote or destroy a movie. In this case critics are biased and based upon the writer’s taste. As we are

aware, we vary in different tastes.

I have found three reviews on Tyler Perry’s 2009 I Can Do Bad All by Myself. They are from

different sources, one from the Internet, the other from the newspaper, and the last from a magazine. I

have found them all on the Internet however because I do not buy magazines or read the newspaper.

The movie is about this woman who spends her day sleeping with a married man who does not

care about his pregnant wife or four kids. They bond over the fact that children are a bother to people

and preventing them from doing the things they want to do. At night she is a singer at a club. Her world

was turned upside down when her niece and nephews were dropped on her on her doorstep by Madea,

whose house they had broken in. She finds out that her mother is missing, thus is the reason why the

kids were out in another person’s house. Reluctantly she takes them in. As if that was not enough
 Preval 2

trouble and responsibility for her, she is then forced to take a Columbian immigrant man in from the

church. Dealing with a niece who is a miniature of her bad attitude self, she also has to deal with the

sparks flying between her and the Columbian as well as her treacherous lover. With help from kind souls

such as her down to earth best friend, her niece, her new love interest, the pastor, the parishioner and

the church she learns to love herself and others.

Eric Snider is the critic of the Internet review. He puts the grade of the movie at the top of the

page. He gave the movie a C+; therefore we can conclude that he is not overly impressed with the

movie. We know what to expect from, a combination of good as well as bad points of the movie. He

opens with a little background about Tyler Perry is. He clearly thinks that Perry is a good play writer

whose plays will benefit Hollywood. Although he did not grade the movie high he has nothing against

Tyler Perry. He compliments him. However I find “Archeologists are constantly discovering new Tyler

Perry stage plays waiting for their big-screen adaptations” odd. Tyler Perry is not dead yet, so why

archeologists?

Snider then proceeds to give a brief and broad description of the movie’s themes without giving

anything away. He finishes the paragraph by complimenting Perry. This paragraph gives a broad

description of the movie without giving anything away. His style so far is attacking and then retreating;

criticize and then compliments. That way he does not come across as a complete sour and critical

person, commonly termed “hater”. He continues to provide description but narrowing it a bit on the

main characters. He also provides the names of the actors who play the roles in the movie. His style is

like looking through a microscope, analyzing the big picture and then zooming in and narrowing in to

give a more detailed dissection. He also did not fail to acknowledge the singers, Mary J. Blige, and Gladys

Knight and their talent. However he did not like the songs they sang much.

In the last paragraphs he gives reasons to why the movie failed to receive a higher note.

Although he states the failures of the movie, he also comments on the ideals of it. And Snider even goes
 Preval 3

so far as to give suggestion on making it a better movie. His overall style of the movie is of a

professional, and yet he does not use a too serious tone. His vocabulary although broad at times also

uses common words such as “pothead” , “screwed-up people”, “muy caliente” and “slow” as he had put

into quotation marks to describe a mentally challenged person. His character and preference show

through as he makes side comments like “Taraji P. Henson sings, too, and is fantastic”.

The second review of a newspaper. Elizabeth Weitzman is the author of this said review in the

New York Daily News. The first paragraph is eye catching because Weitzman compares Tyler Perry to a

chef; her choice of words to describe him and his movies expansively is also creative. Her second

paragraph introduces all the main character broadly. Like Eric Snider, she also provides the actors’ actual

names as well as the typical Tyler Perry movie equation. However unlike Snider, she gives a very, very

brief description to the reason why the niece’s mother was corrupted; she was a crack-addict. Weitzman

does not go into many paragraphs to explain the characters; even then she describes the major ones

thoroughly. She also adds the pastor that Snider neglected, as perhaps not too important to mention.

As she is concluding, her last paragraphs provide one last perusal of Tyler Perry and his

characters. Her analysis was of them as director, and their performance. This is also something that Eric

Snider had failed to do. She also admires Madea, and compare her role in this movie to others such as

“Diary of a Mad Black Woman”, and “Madea Goes to Jail”. She believes that this movie-unlike the

others can stand on its own without relying on notoriously comical character. Weitzman, unlike Eric

Snider did not give the movie a letter grade. Instead she gave it 3 stars. Perhaps they agree that it was

not the absolute best movie out there. She gave the reasons why the movie was a success; she failed to

provide information as to why it only received 3-stars and none higher.

The very last one is from a magazine, Entertainment Weekly written by Lisa Schwarzbaum. It

differs from the others greatly. For starters, it is very short, consists of only two paragraphs. The

sentences are long aided with many commas. However I do like the last sentence; I feel like it is the
 Preval 4

clearest one of all the others in the review. “See a movie where old-fashioned notions of love, faith,

strength, and the possibility of redemption are taken seriously “See a movie where old-fashioned

notions of love, faith, strength, and the possibility of redemption are taken seriously”. This broadly

describes the movie. She does not go into details about the characters or who play them besides the

very main character Taraji P. Henson and the singers Mary J. Blige and Gladys Knight and of course Tyler

Perry’s characters.

It is informal, pointer was her vocabulary and even tone. She used “crazy-ass” and “ rom-coms”

short for romantic-comedy. Also unlike the others, it is of positive quality. The critic clearly likes the movie,

she give it an A- and yet not say the reason why it did not succeed to achieve an A+. According to the 40

reviews statistics on the page, the majority of the critics give the movie a C. B comes close behind.

As shown from these examples, reviews can be of different size and quality. The Internet one

being the longest and the magazine’s the shortest. Although they all state the good factors of the movie

I Can Do Bad All by Myself, only the Internet succeeded in providing the failures of the movie. There are

positive ones like the magazine. Other qualities are: informal such the magazine, slightly informal such

as the Internet’s, and lastly formal being the newspaper. Other differences are in the grading; some use

letter grading while others use the 5-star standard. As everyone has a different style of writing, there is

diversity in the arrangement of the materials on paper. In spite of the differences or similarities, each

critic states his opinion and provides reason to support it. In informing the reader, the review acts the

same way as a trailer; it entices the audience and yet not reveal too much. It will also introduce

characters, and actors. However good or bad a critic is, it falls to the reader to know whether or not a

movie is worth seeing depending on the actors, director, or plot.

Work Cited

Eric D. Snider. Movie Review- I Can Do Bad All by Myself-www.ericsnider.com-The Official Website of

Eric, Web. 4 Dec. 2010 <http://www.ericdsnider.com/movies/i-can-do-bad-all-by-myself/>

Tyler Perry’s ‘I Can Do Bad All by Myself ‘: His latest redemption story is richer than most. New York

Daily News, 11 Sept. 2009. Web. 4 Dec. 2010

<http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/movies/2009/09/11/2009-09-

11_tyler_perrys_i_can_do_bad_all_by_myself_his_latest_redemption_story_is_richer_th.htm

l#ixzz17JR96Ksc>

Tyler Perry’s I Can Do Bad All by Myself|Movies| EW.com. Entertainment Weekly , 15 Sept.

2009. Web. 4 Dec. 2010 <http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20304060,00.html>.