What are the style conventions for Little White Lies? - Zoe Cameron-Waller

Each review in the Little White Lies magazine uses a similar style, including a similar amount of words, paragraphs and content.

The content of the paragraphs/review appears to have a running theme of:

• Contexts for the film - eg literary, director's previous films, historical or cultural events
• Summary information about protagonist/s and key players (traits; issues of representation where appropriate; key aspects and evaluation of performances)
• Key themes, issues and plot (what it's about, without spoilers)
• Narrative devices (+evaluation of these)
• Use and adaptation  of genre conventions (+evaluation of these)
• Reviewer's experience of the film (suggesting LWL's target audience's likely responses)
• Summary sentence evaluating the whole film

The language tends to be complex and chatty at the same time which allows the review to carry undertones of seriousness but also to seem friendly and engaging to read. Little White Lies likes to use a variety of styles when writing in order to appeal to their target demographic. The style can vary from:

• Nouns/complex nouns
• Complex sentences
• Restricted Codes in language
• Adverbs
• Metaphors
• Puns
• Adjectives
• Rhetorical questions
  
    
  The review for Krampus demonstrates a few of these language styles:

 

1. In the spirit of Gremlins and other, lesser alternative festive fare, Krampus concerns a white bread family whose Christmas descends into chaos after they unwittingly summon dark forces. Though it lacks the ingenuity and wit of that particular cult classic, it’s a fun and occasionally thrilling seasonal stocking filler which boasts a game cast in the shape of Adam Scott, Toni Collette, David Koechner and Allison Tolman from TV’s Fargo.
2. According to ancient German folklore, the Krampus is a horned demon that visits naughty children on Christmas bearing not presents but punishment (think of it kind of like the anti-Santa). One issue with Krampus the movie is that the eponymous antagonist is largely restricted to the shadows – instead a small army of sadistic gingerbread men, bloodthirsty teddy bears and other anthropomorphised merry minions are sent to carry out its evil bidding. In principle this absence should create suspense and build intrigue; in practice it achieves neither.
3. The main problem here, though, is that it’s never entirely clear who the film is for. While older genre fans will most likely dig the Joe Dante vibe, Krampus is ultimately far too intense for younger viewers. A dash more comedy might have resulted in a solid piece of family entertainment. As it is, director Michael Dougherty has succeeded in delivering a curious creature feature that’s more unwanted gift than surprise package.

 Paragraphs

For some reason, this review appears to be shorter than others as it only consists of 3 paragraphs and 281 words, whereas others I have studied in class have consisted of mainly 5 or 6 paragraphs. However it's still clear what the paragraphs are aiming to convey.

• Paragraph 1 delivers the synopsis of the film and introduces the main actors.
• Paragraph 2 contains context about the film and talks about the antagonist, including a few elements about the genre.
• Paragraph 3 talks about negative issues with the film and includes audience observations. The review ends talking about the director and how he's successfully portrayed the antagonist in a thrilling way, which allows the review to end on a slight positive. However, the negative critisism is reflected in the tripartite ranking system.