Conventions (Magazine Review)

When analysing existing magazine reviews, there are certain textual conventions which consistently appear throughout. These are:

• a section title
• a headline
• a byline
• a strapline
• columns
• graphics and logos
• pictures (with image sublines)
• pull-out paragraphs/boxes
• a call to action
• and issue information.

Font and typography is also something that needs to be considered; generally varied according to which body of text it is applied to. Certain magazines may have a 'house style,' in which the font and typography will be consistantly the same from issue to issue.

(Click on image for full-size)

Taken from Prevue, the above magazine review meets the majority of conventions, apart from a tagline. There is a section title, issue information and a call to action, but these have been cropped out. As an in-house publication, it wants to promote film sales, rather than give any particular, individual viewpoint. This review hasn't tried to be clever in any way; being very formulaic. The fact that there isn't a byline shows that it isn't an academic review; probably being from a combination of writers/press releases.

(Click on image for full-size)

Sight and Sound gives a much more academic viewpoint on film, and this more serious approach is reflected in the number of columns and amount of writing. This review contains all of the expected conventions as it doesn't have a direct promotional aim, unlike Prevue. The level of detail reflects on the expected target audience and the fact that there is a piece from the director shows the credibility that the magazine has.

(Click on image for full-size)

This review from Empire also complies to all of the technical codes of a magazine review. However, something important to notice is the inclusion of a star rating, and the humourous image subheading which gives an indication as to the audience. There is less text than Sight and Sound, and it is broken up by boxes which contain simple, concise information.

By Daryl Finch