A review is one of the Part 2 options, written for a newspaper, a magazine or a website with an educated readership. You might review a book, a film, a restaurant, a course, a study trip or an online platform, and some tasks ask you to compare two things or to judge something against a particular criterion.
The register is usually neutral to semi-formal: confident, expressive and insightful. At this level description is only the starting point; the examiner wants critical evaluation in sophisticated, precise language, leading to a clear recommendation.
C2 review tasks often list several aspects: the atmosphere, the staff, the service and value for money, or the itinerary, educational value and organisation. Each one must be addressed in depth, not ticked off in a phrase.
Some tasks add a twist: explain why it would appeal to young people today, compare it with the original. That extra requirement is often what separates a strong answer from an average one.
Keep description brief and purposeful: enough for readers to understand what you are reviewing, and no more. Plot summaries and menus consume words without showing critical ability.
Spend most of your words on insightful evaluation: why something works or fails, how it compares with expectations or rivals, what it reveals about its creator's aims. Specific details make your judgements credible.
Your readers use reviews to decide, and they enjoy good writing. Your voice can be personal and witty but must remain controlled: no slang, no gushing, no sweeping claims you cannot support.
Open with a hook that establishes your angle, and close with a nuanced verdict: who it is for, who might be disappointed, and whether it is worth the time or money.
A clear shape helps: a title, an introduction that sets the context, body paragraphs organised by aspect or by strengths and weaknesses, and a final verdict. Paragraphs need not be equal; spend words where your evaluation is richest.
If the task asks you to compare, weave the comparison through the review with whereas, unlike, by comparison, in much the same way instead of describing each item separately.
C2 reviews reward precise critical vocabulary: understated, overwrought, deftly handled, uneven, a tour de force, together with apt idioms and the occasional metaphor.
Vary your structures for effect: inversion (Seldom does a debut...), cleft sentences (What lingers is...), concessive clauses (Flawed though it is, ...). Every flourish must be accurate; a misused idiom costs more than a plain phrase.
Content: every aspect addressed with insight, plus a clear recommendation. Communicative Achievement: engaging and pitched at an educated reader. Organisation: logical, well-linked paragraphs. Language: sophisticated range with precision.
Common traps: a long summary with a one-line opinion, praise or criticism without reasons, ignoring one of the named aspects, and a verdict that simply repeats the introduction.
A literary magazine is inviting reviews of a novel that has recently been adapted for the cinema. Write a review comparing the book with the film and saying which you would recommend.
The Salt Road: page versus screen When a novel as quietly devastating as Helen Marsh's The Salt Road is handed to a major studio, readers are entitled to feel nervous. The book, which follows an elderly fisherman retracing the coastal journey he once made with his late wife, is built almost entirely on memory and silence. How, one wonders, could that possibly survive the move to the big screen? The answer, surprisingly, is better than expected, at least visually. Tom Avery's film is beautifully shot, the windswept coastline rendered with such tenderness that the landscape becomes a character in its own right. Peter Hale, in the leading role, conveys decades of grief through little more than a glance, and several scenes, notably the old man's reconciliation with his estranged son on the harbour wall, are genuinely moving. Where the adaptation stumbles is in its handling of the past. In the novel, memories surface unpredictably, blurring with the present in a way that mirrors the fisherman's fading grasp of time. The film, by contrast, relies on conventional flashbacks, neatly signalled by warm lighting and gentle music. What was subtle and unsettling on the page becomes, on screen, merely sentimental. The decision to invent a romantic subplot for the son, presumably to appeal to a younger audience, only reinforces the sense that the filmmakers did not quite trust their material. Flawed though it is, the film remains a thoughtful and handsomely made piece of work, and those unfamiliar with the book will find much to admire. Yet it is the novel that lingers. Marsh's prose achieves an intimacy no camera can replicate, and her refusal to explain everything leaves the reader with far more to ponder. Watch the film by all means, but read the book first: you will see the screen version through wiser eyes.
304 Wörter