It also out-casted the entire dragon slaying sequence. The movie and the text both have their strengths and weaknesses. The movie is obviously easier to follow, but the leading role is played by Antonio Bendaras, and he isn’t even the main hero. In reality, would a warrior, such as Bulvine, allow a foreigner, whom he hardly knew, get so much stardom and credit? Also, using such a strange actor, like Bendaras, in the movie was a distraction from the original storyline.
It did not even matter that the motion picture did not contain color, good graphics, or with some, even sound. Today, movies are being shown with 3D image, scientific findings, drama, and if the graphics are not the top quality the theatre is empty. One thing, however, that has not dramatically changed is the view of a hero. According to dictionary.com, a hero is “a warrior- chieftain of special strength, courage, or ability.” With that in mind, we differentiate normal characters from heroic ones. After reading various texts, I have become deliberate with different heroes that share similar characteristics which made them well-known.
Paranormal Activity 2 certainly delivers every promise it has made, capitalizing on our fears of the unknown in the same simplistic fashion as the original. In the following, we will be discussing the film Paranormal Activity 2 directed by Tod Williams, looking for meaning using deeper levels of interpretation. We will decipher all the elements of the film to understand how they come together to realistically portray the film as real footage of real events. Paranormal Activity 2 produces a “strong and inventive” element with the structure of the film(Muir, 2011). “Neither sequel nor prequel, it sort of surrounds the original and so it doesn’t just expand, repeat or continue; rather it reframes Paranormal Activity in a new context(The Fragmented Paradigm, 2010).” With that, we must include information from the original film Paranormal Activity to better understand the second production.
Neither of the previous films had attempted to capture the full impact of the novel’s bleak and uncompromising version of urban America or the unheroic aspects of its hero. John Huston directed it straight, and in the process created a new type of detective for a new genre of film. Sam Spade’s spare, unembellished prose was appropriate to his no-nonsense protagonists. Huston’s use of techniques like high contrast lighting (revealing characters in bright, washed out light while casting others in complete shadow); low angle camera set-ups (Gutman; making the character seem more powerful) and deep focus (new technology at the time allowing cameras to retain focus objects and characters in both
The first movies were produced without sound and even the first talking pictures required that vision and sound be recorded separately. Purists may still prefer to make movies on analogue film stock but today digital recording allows sound and images to be seamlessly integrated. Nevertheless, this split between sound and vision is etched into film’s history. This has important consequences for the analysis of film as an artefact. It is this
Aesthetic, social and technological. From this we shall derive a conclusion as to its relevant interests to the film historian. When we refer to aesthetic film history, we are considering films as an art form. The immediate problem with film history as a study of art is that what constitutes art is subjective in itself. It is very easy to dismiss Titanic as being a ‘formulaic’ Hollywood blockbuster made with the sole intent of making capital, a special effects laden epic combined with a love story.
Critical Analysis on “The Missing Piece to the Gang-Violence Debate.” Dan Gardner’s publish, “The Missing Piece to the Gang-Violence Debate”, is strongly controversial in his position against increasing enforcement of drug laws, and boosting penalties for violators. He believes that you should actually limit enforcement and hardship of sentencing when it comes to drugs. Was his argument persuasive enough in the essay to actually influence his wishes into society? Personally, I don’t think so. Gardner’s ideas are too drastic and I believe he didn’t have enough support in his argument that his plans would actually decrease the murders in gang violence.
Nicole Brouwer 2nd hour Honors English Don’t Judge a Book by its Cover “The discovery of truth is prevented more effectively, not by the false appearance things present and which mislead into error, not directly by weakness of the reasoning powers, but by preconceived opinion, by prejudice.” -Arthur Schopenhauer Stereotyping, superstitions, and being prejudice are all components that lead to misjudging others. Many myths have been associated with different ethnic groups, and it leads to ethnic segregation. An understanding about other cultures may help decrease the negativity and overcomes prejudice. What does being prejudice mean? Why do societies leap at the chance to judge others?
Many a silent film had moved the earth, and created an impact. In my opinion, the most brilliant film produced during that era was Fritz Lang’s 1927 production of Metropolis, of which no full copy is known to exist. Monumental in both scale of production and the themes it addresses, the film is widely regarded as the pinnacle of German Expressionist filmmaking from the 1920s. Before Metropolis, I despised silent films, because I always thought that it was impossible to depict emotions, and forces, and anything and everything without speech and sounds. But Metropolis, truly, left me stunned.
I am interested in why the powerful state decided to abandon any potential benefits they could have enjoyed if they did ally with the weaker state. In investigating this, Great Britain-Czechoslovakia relations, and Georgia-NATO relations are helpful examples. Question: Since not a lot of people focus on why states do not ally, I believed focusing on this side of an alliance, or lack thereof, could help me better understand about what factors most strongly influence a state’s refusal to ally with another state. I wanted to address the question: When do powerful states choose not to ally with a weaker state? Because the denial of a state joining an alliance has not occurred often I would like to clarify the critical reasons why powerful states make the decision to refrain from allying with a weaker state.