Post 3: Review

Ebert, Roger.  “The Fifth Element.”  Rogerebert.  May 9, 1997.  Web.  January 4, 2013.  <http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19970509/REVIEWS/705090303/1023>

Mr. Ebert talks about how the movie was obviously written by a teenager due to how garbled the story line was.  He goes on to say that the movie could have been greater if it had a more “discipline” story line, however he does give the movie some praise for its visual effects.  He states that Star Wars has a well more developed story that has background meaning instead of The Fifth Element that has none of that, this is all his opinion.  But this science fiction movie is not like the traditional Stars Wars/Star Trek style science fictions according to Mr. Ebert.  This unique feel makes that movie decent over all except he recommends people only to see it for its visual effects.  He gives a summary of the movie in his article which he criticizes some throughout his summary but he seems to be missing how the acting was fairly good by the actors or the humor that accompanied the film.