The author clearly makes fun of these secret agencies through his humor. This can be seen when he introduces the almost fictional novel by stating that “This is a true story” (1). By the time the reader reaches a few pages in, he/she can clearly see that this is most likely false and is simply criticizing the secret agencies in the US government. 2. I believe the author, Jon Ronson, uses humor most effectively.
What could have been considered a clichéd and callous prison yarn about cartoonish caricatures under the shock value banner of racism is actually an inspired and wacky yet shrewd comical commentary on fear and ignorance. The pacing is energetic and the film is well-written and audaciously insightful. Baget’s direction is refreshingly bouncy and the performances are devilishly carefree. True, Cellmates does not bring a
It provides the audience with a vivid understanding of time and the image it creates. Also, the remarkable language indicating Macbeth’s insanity, and it’s lasting effect throughout the play. The passage also brought into a clearer explanation Macbeth’s tragic flaw, which was his weakness towards his ambition. Through these clever themes and images, much can be determined of the play, therefore making it the most gorgeous scene within
Selling the Race: Culture, Community, and Black Chicago, 1940-1955. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007 Alexander, George. Why we make movies: Black filmmakers talk about the magic of cinema. New York: Harlem Moon, 2003 Jerry Cudlip to Al Perlmutter, NET interoffice memo, June 26, 1968. Gant, George, “Television: Black Journal Premiere,” New York Times, June 13, 1968 Gent, George.
An effective piece of satire “seeks to create a shock of recognition and to make vice repulsive so that the vice will be expunged [...] whenever possible this shock of recognition is to be conveyed through laughter or wit”(Harris, 1990). Dr. Strangelove is an effective piece of satire because it targets a very serious topic, the Cold War, and pokes fun, belittles, and degrades it through use of sexual, macho imagery and dialogue. Kubrick’s targets are the egotistical testosterone-pumped generals, while the vice that he is attempting to “expunge” is the Cold War and its ridiculousness. Although Kubrick doesn’t provide a cure for the vices, he doesn’t necessarily need to. He portrays them so outrageously that the viewer finds them repulsive.
Shindler and Goeth. The performance by Goeth really shows what a real Nazi acted like back then. The film is also very graphic and I like that it has a beauty mixed with its gruesome side. Shindler really was a great character because he was funny, mysterious, flirtatious, but he had a darker side that he showed superficially. Gattaca was the best in terms of entertainment.
Yet Moore's ego is entertainingly punctured when he is shown as a smug liberal martyr attempting to destroy Team America's headquarters - by rigging himself up as a suicide bomber. Again, a breathtaking moment of offensiveness: a veritable chain-mail fist through the paper-screen of celebrity correctness. It wasn't that long ago that Michael Moore, in his anti-gun documentary Bowling for Columbine, was interviewing Matt Stone, and generally praising him to the skies as a fellow satirist. And this is how he is repaid? Oh
To what extent is ‘The History Boys’ a comedy of Tragicomedy? Comedy is a subjective genre, one which can be light and humorous or satirical in tone, and usually contains a happy resolution in an attempt to uplift the audience. Due to being subjective, comedy can be split into many different types; black comedy, tragicomedy, spoof comedy or arguably found in this play, satirical comedy. Comedy is created by Bennett throughout The History Boys through several techniques including the contrasting of characters, clever juxtapositions and intelligent metaphors. Although I am convinced about this play fitting to the genre of Satire, tragicomedy is my main focus of which The History Boys fits in as it contains a lot of it, maybe to appeal to a wider audience.
I'm much more of a "genre" fan, and I much prefer fantasy, surrealism and absurdism to realism. My preconceptions were throwing me off of the film initially. The realist drama stuff seemed to drag on, and it made much of the film a hard sell. I loved the touches of weirdness, but they were too little, too far between--at least until I reached my personal interpretation of the film around the halfway mark. The film is also odd in that it's so retro.
I find Moliere’s play, Tartuffe, to be entertaining for the underlying message of historical hypocrisy which it sheds to light. After reading the comedy of Tartuffe, I can only agree that it is an intellectual whirlwind of classical genius which tantalizes even the modern mind by echoing to us the importance of scrutinizing the narratives and analyzing the flaws and follies alike which are evident even within our own era. Tartuffe stands out to me because of the power that resonated from the creation of this societal satire and the fact that unlike other works of the era which were forced to fall in line with a strict code of adherence generated by the aristocracy of the classical era, this piece served as a direct challenge to the narrative