Category: Film studies

Your paper should be written in a narrative format, in a formal composition style, and be constructed clearly with an introduction, body and conclusion. Format: 12-point Times New Roman (or similar) font, 1” margins, double spaced, and at least 3 pages in length. Your paper should: evaluate the effectiveness of the production elements in performance with specific examples. answer the questions: did it achieve its goal to entertain, to stimulate thought, to raise social concern, and/or to provoke emotion? not give me a plot summary! I do not need the storyline repeated. If you think a simple introduction is necessary to set up your ideas, keep this at a minimum of a few sentences. Writing your paper: Think about each of the production elements: acting, directing, and design. Which were effective and why? Acting: which actor stood out to you as the best? Why? How did they demonstrate their understanding of the character? How did the actor’s physical and vocal choices (posture, movement, gestures, tone, volume, diction, accent) communicate the nature of the character? Directing: did the performance’s pace, tone, and casting make sense? Why or why not? Which moments were the strongest? Weakest? Why? What images from the production were you left with? How was the scene, lighting and costume design able to create the setting? Were their stronger aspects than others? Why? Which moments on stage were the strongest/most interesting and why? Which were ineffective? Why? What could have been done to improve this production?

Your paper should be written in a narrative format, in a formal composition style, and be constructed clearly with an introduction, body and conclusion. Format: 12-point Times New Roman (or similar) font, 1” margins, double spaced, and at least 3 pages in length. Your paper should: evaluate the effectiveness of the production elements in performance with specific examples. answer the questions: did it achieve its goal to entertain, to stimulate thought, to raise social concern, and/or to provoke emotion? not give me a plot summary! I do not need the storyline repeated. If you think a simple introduction is necessary to set up your ideas, keep this at a minimum of a few sentences. Writing your paper: Think about each of the production elements: acting, directing, and design. Which were effective and why? Acting: which actor stood out to you as the best? Why? How did they demonstrate their understanding of the character? How did the actor’s physical and vocal choices (posture, movement, gestures, tone, volume, diction, accent) communicate the nature of the character? Directing: did the performance’s pace, tone, and casting make sense? Why or why not? Which moments were the strongest? Weakest? Why? What images from the production were you left with? How was the scene, lighting and costume design able to create the setting? Were their stronger aspects than others? Why? Which moments on stage were the strongest/most interesting and why? Which were ineffective? Why? What could have been done to improve this production?

Only need help to correct my grammar and make it look more professional (words, transition words etc). No links or anything need to be added.

“Explain It” is an essay in MLA format on a film topic of your choice. You may pick a film that we have already covered in class, or a film outside of class. The only parameters are that it be a documentary, it may be a film or a documentary series. If you choose a documentary series then you need to watch the entire series and that needs to be clear in your analysis. You need a lens of analysis in which to discuss your topic. For example, if you would like to discuss Michael Moore’s influence on documentary cinema by analyzing a couple of his films like Roger & Me (1989) and/or Bowling for Columbine (2002). Or if you would like to discuss sensationalistic documentary biographies, like Mucho Mucho Amor: the Legend of Walter Mercado (2020) directed by Cristina Costantini and Kareem Tabsch, Dolly Parton: Here I Am (2019) directed by Francis Whately and Navalny (2022 directed by Daniel Roher and how they shape public opinion. For your works cited you need at least 3 academic sources (which means peer-reviewed) in addition to the film(s) you will cite. (50 points)

ONLY need help to correct my grammar/better quality of my work. No links or anything need to be added.

There’s 3 options of books you may write a report on:
– Vito Russo, The Celluloid Closet: Homosexuality in the Movies
– Donald Crafton, The Talkies: American Cinema’s Transition to Sound, 1926-1931
– Mary Ann Doane, The Desire To Desire: The Woman’s Film of the 1940s
In the report you should summarize the book’s argument in detail. You should also address the following questions:
How is the book organized?
What are the main factors at work in this historical account? What people/institutions/events are the most significant shapers of the history?
What are the strengths of the book?
What did you learn from the book?

For this week’s Assignment, I’d like you to discuss what you feel are the differences and similarities between the character Dren, in Splice, and any of the Na’vi characters (or these “digital peoples” in general) from Avatar (if need be, just Google video clips of the films to jog your memory).
In particular, what I’d like to read from you is not only how the two characters (or types of digital beings) are different (that’s the easy part), but how are they similar as well? What kind of generalized cultural fantasies or “subconscious” issues do we project onto these two types of digital beings? Do they perform these (subconsciously assigned) roles successfully (i.e., if they are frightening in some way, how so and what does that say about us as humans)? Why do you think most alien-like digital creatures in movies (whether from outer space, or from a genetic lab) are often monster like, and do you feel that the “sweet” and “lovable” Na’vi are a radical departure from this tradition? Also, a more difficult question: do you feel that the Na’vi are portrayed in such a way that their portrayal induces (disrespectful) “pity” in the viewer for the “Other” (Na’vi)? If so, do you think that the (subtextual) goal of the film’s narrative may have been to induce such “pity”, or is it a “natural” outcome for any film which engages difficult issues such as colonialism?

For this week’s Assignment, I’d like you to discuss what you feel are the differences and similarities between the character Dren, in Splice, and any of the Na’vi characters (or these “digital peoples” in general) from Avatar (if need be, just Google video clips of the films to jog your memory).
In particular, what I’d like to read from you is not only how the two characters (or types of digital beings) are different (that’s the easy part), but how are they similar as well? What kind of generalized cultural fantasies or “subconscious” issues do we project onto these two types of digital beings? Do they perform these (subconsciously assigned) roles successfully (i.e., if they are frightening in some way, how so and what does that say about us as humans)? Why do you think most alien-like digital creatures in movies (whether from outer space, or from a genetic lab) are often monster like, and do you feel that the “sweet” and “lovable” Na’vi are a radical departure from this tradition? Also, a more difficult question: do you feel that the Na’vi are portrayed in such a way that their portrayal induces (disrespectful) “pity” in the viewer for the “Other” (Na’vi)? If so, do you think that the (subtextual) goal of the film’s narrative may have been to induce such “pity”, or is it a “natural” outcome for any film which engages difficult issues such as colonialism?

Both Memories of Murder (Bong Joon-ho, 2003) and Pan’s Labyrinth (Guillermo del Toro, 2006) can be described as genre films that have met with both critical and box-office success. At the same time, both films also deal with real-world historical traumas and the fraught politics of memory they bring with them.
For this essay, analyze 1-2 specific shots or scenes from each film that best demonstrate the unique ways that del Toro and Bong use cinematic storytelling to meditate or comment on the process of collectively recalling past historical traumas in Spain and South Korea, respectively. What are the most important similarities and differences that shape their respective cinematic reflections on remembering the traumas of the past?

_______________________
Essay guidelines and evaluation:
Answers should be approximately 250-300 words and include close analysis of at least 2 significant images from the relevant films (i.e., at least one from each film).
Essays will be evaluated for their: accurate and effective use of relevant terms and concepts; ability to demonstrate understanding of key cinematic concepts and strategies through close formal analysis of specific images and techniques from course films; depth and detail of analyses.
A-range response= 72-80
B-range response= 64-71
C-range response= 56-63
D-range response= 48-55
F response = 0-47

Both Memories of Murder (Bong Joon-ho, 2003) and Pan’s Labyrinth (Guillermo del Toro, 2006) can be described as genre films that have met with both critical and box-office success. At the same time, both films also deal with real-world historical traumas and the fraught politics of memory they bring with them.
For this essay, analyze 1-2 specific shots or scenes from each film that best demonstrate the unique ways that del Toro and Bong use cinematic storytelling to meditate or comment on the process of collectively recalling past historical traumas in Spain and South Korea, respectively. What are the most important similarities and differences that shape their respective cinematic reflections on remembering the traumas of the past?

_______________________
Essay guidelines and evaluation:
Answers should be approximately 250-300 words and include close analysis of at least 2 significant images from the relevant films (i.e., at least one from each film).
Essays will be evaluated for their: accurate and effective use of relevant terms and concepts; ability to demonstrate understanding of key cinematic concepts and strategies through close formal analysis of specific images and techniques from course films; depth and detail of analyses.
A-range response= 72-80
B-range response= 64-71
C-range response= 56-63
D-range response= 48-55
F response = 0-47