For my two critical reviews this week, I dove into a book review about Anthony Bourdain and David O. Russell’s film “Amsterdam”.

I’ll begin with the review that I gravitated more towards, the New York Times New Anthony Bourdain Biography: Light on Subtlety, Heavy on Grit. This review goes into detail about the new biography that was recently released, “Down and Out in Paradise: The Life of Anthony Bourdain,” by Charles Leerhsen. The particular biography is different than other memoirs, tributes, and documentaries for its rougher portrayal of Bourdain’s lifestyle and habits.

This review didn’t give the exact plot and details away in the review, but he does go into the overall structure of how the book is set up, and how, “Leerhsen sacrifices weight for speed” with the biography.

I think this review does the biography justice. It takes a critical view of what was well-done, and what maybe is a step too far in the wrong direction. I also enjoyed how the author of the review mentioned how he would have loved this gritty, rock-inspired biography if he were 17 and reading it. He then contrasts that statement by saying that now, in his older age, he wishes some different aspects of Bourdain’s life and legacy were highlighted instead. It was a form of both criticism and praise that adds to the value of the biography.

The review gave me a general idea of what to expect from the biography, but still left me curious and wanting to read the book for myself.

The second review I read came from the Washington Post, titled, ‘Amsterdam’: True-ish shaggy-dog tale from 1933 (with echoes of 2022). I’ve been wanting to see this movie for myself, but I haven’t heard great things so I thought this review would be perfect to read.

It’s a fairly decent review. It goes into the plot, talks about the director, and credits or discredits certain actors for their performances. I felt like it leaned a little too much into the actual plot of the movie. I wish she would have talked a little bit more on the supporting actors and their performances not just their storylines in the movie; or about, “the crack design team”. The main thing I took away from this review, was the wording. It was a bit excessive and distracting in places.

I’m all for big words used in the right circumstances, and I’m aware I have a fondness for comas in my writing but getting through this article was a bit of a struggle for me. The author at the end of the review states, “such are the distractions of “Amsterdam,” whose curlicues and circumlocutions are genuinely interesting but grow more self-conscious and indulgent with time.” This ironically is how I felt about the review.