The overall language used in the magazine review is quite informal, its coming from someone's point of view and talking on behalf of others, this context suggests that the writer is writing on personal views and how he thinks people will react to this movie.

The writer has given good and bad criticism for the viewers, it states how the movie has been made well, but the actual content and storyline is too familiar, and its something view would have watched prior to “The Cave”.

The layout of the whole film review is quite simple but holds all the information, it has a large image from the film which will attract views, and the text around it is written in good language.

He mentions points that would put off a reader but also interest them into watching it. He states that there are no A-list characters, this comes across as off putting but then he goes onto describe how this meant he didn’t know who would die first, which made it fun.

Timeouts film review on the The Cave shows the rating given by the Magazine, they gave this particular film 2 out of 5 stars this already shows that the film isn't very good and that the review may not be selling the film in a good way. The picture seems to be a picture of the

main character from the film, but in the corner of the picture it says “Katherine (Headery) takes an ill advised dip”, the way the caption is worded indicates that the way she acted throughout the film wasn’t as good as everyone might have anticipated. The picture is quite clear and its from the film, so it gives the readers something to link to the actual review.

The first little paragraph has shows all the main people who made the film, this might show the readers anyone quite well known who they may already know.

The quote in the middle “Borrows so many ideas from previous genre films” is in big bold font bang smack in middle of the whole film review, it indicates to the readers that the film is no original and that they may see similar ideas from previous films.

At the bottom for reference the name of the writer has been given. The way the review has been written is different to how other magazine articles have written there’s. Its not question and answer, he focuses on the main parts of the film, and went wrong in his eyes for the film.

The language used in this review is formal but informing at the same time, it gives readers a way to decide whether they would like to actually watch the movie. The criticism is good and bad, but it gives a over all idea on the movie. The writer embeds his own personal view throughout the review.

This is another page from timeout of reviews, they also like the ones previously show ratings, they are red and white which really do stand out, which will attract the reader straight away.

There is also a image centre of the review and the language used is formal, but gives good and bad criticism throughout the reviews.

This is another film review from Timeout Magazine, it has a relevant image at the top of the review.

There is also a rating in red stars, as seen in previous film reviews from Timeout Magazine, the layout through out all the reviews is constant the whole way through.