The most common thing I see in texts by young authors is assessments without arguments. "The acting is magnificent", "the script is brilliant", "the atmosphere is amazing" — this is emotion without factual support. It's as pointless as trying to explain the color magenta to someone blind from birth.

Let's take Joaquin Phoenix's role in "Joker" as an example.

⛔️
"Joaquin Phoenix played brilliantly — his acting is mesmerizing and doesn't let go"

❇️
"Phoenix barely speaks in the first half of the film — he exists through his body: hunched shoulders, a nervous laugh that he himself tries to stifle with his hands. When Arthur Fleck finally starts speaking at full voice, you understand why silence was more important than words"

Do you feel the difference? The second option is a specific observation, not a baseless assessment.

So how should you write then? What should you rely on? Try this scheme: statement → example from the film/series → why it matters.

If you write "played well" — stop and ask yourself: what exactly is good? The physicality? The gaze? The pace of speech?

For fun, take your last text and pull out an evaluative adjective from a sentence. If the meaning doesn't suffer, then it wasn't needed there. And what if you clean up the entire text?

#СоветыРедактора@the_rrated