Micheal Phillips, a movie critic, wrote a "review" on Project Nim for the Chicago Tribune. He gave the documentary a 3.5 star rating however he didn't exactly specify why; Phillips' review was more like a summary than his professional opinion. He left most of his emotions out of his writing, merely stating the facts, and incorporated only a few sly adjectives that expose his opinion whereas my review was only about how I felt. I only covered a few scenes or concerns that really kept my attention when in reality much of the documentary was impacting and interesting. I also went on to discuss the possible concerns or problems with the experiment and added my own questions to what happened and why. Overall, my review was unprofessional and biased compared to Phillips' summarizing review. Also, if I had thought of it at the time, I would have gave Project Nim a 4-5 rating because of how moved I was as well as how James Marsh, the director, constructed it.
The link to Micheal Phillips' review: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-07-08/entertainment/sc-mov-0705-project-nim-20110708_1_project-nim-adoptive-humans-experiment
