My attempt to review Gran Torino failed.

Looking over my Gran Torino review, it's actually rather difficult to find the thesis. It hardly works as one, but I'd have to say it's this - "The idea of a 78 year old man brutalizing a young gang member sounds comical, but seeing razor-sharp Walt unleash his elderly wrath commands nothing but awe-tinged respect." This is the first line of actual praise, and conveys my general idea that Walt is entertaining to watch.

But what it doesn't convey, nor does the rest of my review, is that I actually thought everything except Clint Eastwood was either mediocre or laughably bad. Something about my mixed feelings made me feel like I needed to lean more towards everything being good, and because I didn't completely agree with my writing, it came out sounding vague and uninspired. If I revised it, I would go much lighter on the plot summary and focus more on trashing the script/supporting performances. With plenty of evidence, of course. I was lacking on that. Lots more context would need to be given as well.

I think my review deserves a low-mid B, because the thesis is unclear, I use the cliche "Make no mistake about it", and there isn't enough criticism that's actually supported with detailed evidence.