My Criteria for Film Evaluation There are three major standards through which I decide whether or not I will watch a film: reputation, and genre. Reputation is inclusive of friends and ratings of the film. Usually my friends and I have similar tastes and we are aroused or repulsed by the same films. Reputation is a strong and stable standard for deciding which film to go to, because with such a large population of movie watchers, major biases don't affect the reputation and ratings are fair and accurate. Also, people are inclined to give high ratings to movies that touch them or really make them think regardless of the actual film taking quality.
This works and then Pandarus tries to get the two of them in bed together. Troilus is very nervous about this and h... ... middle of paper ... ...gin with. They did nothing traditional. Even though the story of Troilus and Criseyde is said to be a courtly romance, I believe it’s a tale of lovers whose love did not last because of decisions made by them and others. Even though at first Troilus I don’t think believed in love he had found it in Criseyde but their love didn’t last because of many circumstances.
For a play about marriage A Doll’s House does not have much love in it. All of the characters claim to love each other, but are really concealing other emotions. The expectations of society have forced them into love that they do not feel. This false love is what causes them to fall apart in the end. The play is riddled with marriages that are born out of convenience or expectation rather than love.
The witches could see the future, they could add temptation, and influence Macbeth, but they could not control his destiny. No one can change the destiny of ones life nor can anyone tell the destiny of ones life. Macbeth creates his own sadness when he is driven by his own sense of guilt. He realized what he did was immoral and he cant stand the thought. This causes him to become insecure about his actions which causes him to commit more murders.
I am more willing to watch a black and white film but only if it is directed by Alfred Hitchcock or Orson Welles. The same goes for foreign films. I have also changed the way I analyze films. Now when I critically looks at a movie I find that I judge a movie based on more than the story and acting. I will looks and what goes on to getting that shot or how hard it must’ve been to edit some of the scenes.
No It’s More Than That: Analyzing the p¬¬revalence and significance of objects and symbol in films such as “El laberinto de fauno,” “Tesis” and “Te doy mis ojos” By Mac Beckwith Objects and symbols can be a lot more than what they appear in films. The actual definition of a symbol is a physical representation that stands in for another object or idea. They can hold hidden meaning that the director is trying to show without using words and obvious actions. The subtly of the objects and symbols can vary from film to film, showing viewers what the director’s real message was when he created his piece. Things like this can make seemingly harmless thriller movie like “Tesis” into a serious statement about how sick and twisted our society.
The viewer will watch what is happening, trying to get a sense of the plot, but the plot, really, is unimportant. The very nature of plot demands a sense of linearity, and this movie lacks such a characteristic. However, the plot is also the most important aspect of the film, because, ultimately, almost everything each character does seems to be part of a dream in the mind of the central character, Fred Madison. Consequently, what happens is not merely manifest content to be brushed aside. Hidden within it is the latent content which will give the viewer an understanding of what is happening in the mind of this man.
Comparison of Ethan Hawke and Kenneth Branagh's Versions of Hamlet Modern day directors use a variety of methods to hold ones interest. Ethan Hawke and Kenneth Branagh’s created versions of Hamlet that shared some similarities, but ultimately had many differences in respects to an audience’s appeal. An appealing movie is one that has an alluring ambiance and an intellectual stimulus. With these two movie versions, a setting and a mood forced an audience to acquire specific emotions, but Ethan Hawke’s version generated emotions more strongly and effectively. Also, these movies had extremely different uses of music and visuals, but both movie versions incorporated them well for the ambiance it tried to obtain.
Due to the nature of movies, there are some large disadvantages to using film as a medium for historical portrayal. Movies tend to play up certain character traits or moments in time to further the plotline. The destructiveness and greed of certain characters in this movie, like Aguirre, was certainly exaggerated. These exaggerations often over dramatize the situation, which as a filmmaker is not necessarily a bad thing. In a historical drama, as opposed to a documentary, you have the unsung responsibility to keep the audience interested and entertained.
First, the psychic storyline in Ringu seemed farfetched and rather ridiculous. There are three characters in the movie with powers, and it seems to be more of an episode of X-Men than a realistic story plot. It seems as though, with this plot, that this movie would fit better into the fantasy section of your local movie store rather than in the horror section. In The Ring however, the characters of Samara and Anna Morgan are a little more involved in the storyline. Using the horse plot made the story seem easier to believe and also to relate to.