In the final chapter of the text book, the author talks about the multiple major motion picture companies. These companies include Universal, Miramar, Paramount, and others. These companies are the Hollywood companies that that have achieved global success due to the way that they broadcast their films. They broadcast there films all around the world instead of just sections of the world. In the past chapter, the authors talked about movies being made in other countries that have not been able to get out to a global viewing field. The companies that a part of Hollywood seemed to have all been able to get their films out to the world. This is because of the notion that Hollywood films are among the elite when it comes to film making. These films are positively seen as ones that can effect the world, which is what Germany tried to do when Hitler was in charge, but he tried to effect the world in a negative way than in a positive way.

In chapter 11 of the text book, the writers talk about German cinema. They talk about how it was recreated after World War 2. During the war, the German cinema was controlled by their government because of Hitler. He used the media in an attempt to take control of the country and to persuade people to follow him. Once the war was over, Germany experienced a "rebirth" in cinema. They believed that the German people had to be re-educated in film and media in order to get rid of the Nazi ideology. The films that were shown to the German people were screened and checked to make sure they did not have and Nazi material in them. The people from Germany who worked in the media and fled because of the Nazi propaganda were welcomed back. These people helped create films that were not part of a Nazi background. All of these things helped the Government get Germany back to the way it was before Hitler took over and began corrupting peoples minds. To a certain extent, you could say that this was re-corupting peoples minds but at least it was for the good of the people instead of for the bad.

In chapter 4 of the text book, the author talks about different kinds of formalism. The author defines formalism as a name often ti film criticism concerned with matters of structure and style in a movie, or with how features discussed in chapter 3 are organized in particular ways in a movie. The author talks about different examples of how a formalist might investigate a narrative differently.

 One example is through the film, His Girl Friday. In this example, the author says that a writer might look for stylistic or formal repetition in the editing or writing because they would be able to describe how they work to the rest of the film. This type of formalism is directed towards the audience. The critic would study how each screen, color, sounds, or anything else in the film has an effect on the audience watching the film.

The second example that the author gave was for the movie, Shane. In this example, the author says to choose a visually complex scene and describe how it works and why it is important to the movie. In the movie there is a quick and involved look between the four main characters, this set up a social relationship through the remainder of the film. This was important for the movie because it developed the characters of the movie into who they were for the rest of the movie

 
    













As I look at the horror movie covers from the 50's, I notice that they used much more color than the horror movie covers that have been made in 2014. The covers in 2014 seem like the creators of the cover were trying to be as terrifying as possible. The colors from the 50's seem as if they film makers were trying to take advantage of the new technology of using color rather than to make them look scary. As we look at them now, the reason they don't look scary could be because current media has desensitized the things that we once thought was scary.
Most of the covers in 2014 also use faces with their mouths open, many of them have blood in them or coming out of them. These covers in 2014 make it seem that the person in the picture is screaming for their life while they are in the act of dying. In the pictures in the 50's, more of them have pictures of the villain rather then the person being attacked.

As I look at the horror movie covers from the 50's, I notice that they used much more color than the horror movie covers that have been made in 2014. The covers in 2014 seem like the creators of the cover were trying to be as terrifying as possible. The colors from the 50's seem as if they film makers were trying to take advantage of the new technology of using color rather than to make them look scary. As we look at them now, the reason they don't look scary could be because current media has desensitized the things that we once thought was scary.
Most of the covers in 2014 also use faces with their mouths open, many of them have blood in them or coming out of them. These covers in 2014 make it seem that the person in the picture is screaming for their life while they are in the act of dying. In the pictures in the 50's, more of them have pictures of the villain rather then the person being attacked.

As I watch the football games, and also listen to my father and how he yells at makes statements about the ability of the players, I find it possible that the media is the reason for his arguments. As I watch the games, the reporters well always say that a team is either a good team or a bad team depending on how they play in that one game. This type of reporting ends up making its way into the news and newspapers. I personally do not let it affect the way that I see the game, because I know that players will have bad games. The media tries to change the way you think about it by saying that the only reason that they had a bad game was because the team is not good and the team will continue to loose unless they change the way they play. This information that is reported changes the way that people think about the game, my father is one of those people. He seems to believe that just because one person has a bad game, then he will have a bad game every week because he goes along with everything that the reporters say during the game. I, myself, would personally enjoy watching a football game with nobody reporting the game, it would allow me to think on my own about how the game and players are playing without any possible bias being heard from any other people or media outlet.

Chapter 4 of, A short Guide to Writing About Film, is titled, Six Approaches to Writing about Film. In this chapter, the author talks about national cinemas. He says that a writer should know something about the society and culture India to be able to correctly analyze an Indian film. Once this is said, the author says that once an individual is able to understand the culture of other societies, then they will be able to understand there culture and be able to analyze it. If a person criticized a certain film or any type of cultural aspect from another culture, then they would never be able to do it without being biased. They would be biased because they would only have their own personal culture to judge the films too. They would compare it to what the critics culture says is what and how a film is made, and how it is composed. I feel that for a person to be a successful critic, if they want to pursue it as a career, then they must first have a great understanding about how many different types of cultures there are in the world.

In chapter three of, "A Short Guide to Writing About Film", the author has a section titled, "Film and the Other Arts". In this section the author talks about the critical language of the other literary and visual arts. These arts that the author mentions are plot, character, and point of view. These three literary terms are things that critics critique. They look at these three things and decide how well each of them are in their mind. Each critic will have their own input on what they believe they see or feel while they are watching the film. Similar to what I said in a past post, each critic will have there own point of view of what the film will be like before they even watch it. I think that that is the worst way to critique a film, I believe that a person would have to watch a movie with a, "blank slate", so to speak, while they critique a film. If a person went in with an idea of the film before they watched it, then there idea of what the plot, character, and point of view will be skewed as they watch the film.

In the middle of chapter two, there is a section that is titled, Subject Matter and Meaning. In this section, the author says that "the previously mentioned preliminary question should remind you that the images you see are the product of certain influences and conditions, not just the world seen through the frame" (T. Corrigan, 2015, pg. 24) This means that the images that you view in a film are not just what is being shown. The things that you see are a result of previous actions or situations. The certain image that you see in a film or video is not just the image you are viewing, it is also the past. What I mean when I say this is that the present is only there because of the past. If the past was different or changed at all, then the present image you see would be different as well.
The author also states that you need to be prepared with a questioning mind while analyzing a movie. This means that you can't go into a movie, as a critic, and expect one thing to result from the film. If you were to do that, then you would criticize every little thing in the movie that is not what you original thought of the film was. As a critic, you need to go into a movie with a "open mind", so to speak, and start from scratch while criticizing a film


Corrigan, Timothy, and Graham Corrigan. A Short Guide to Writing about Film. 9th ed. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print.

In another section of chapter 2 the author talks about memory and reflection. The title of the section is, Visual Memory and Reflection. The author mentions a man named Jean Mitry. The author said that his most important asset was an unusually precise visual memory. He was a renowned French film historian. His ability to remember details precisely was what made him so good at his job.
In another part of this chapter, the author talks about the horror film Psycho. The author mentions that taking notes while watching a horror movie such as psycho while you are first watching it could be different notes if you take notes after you watch the movie. I agree with what the author said about this. I do because the movie was a horror film, so peoples emotions will be raised while they are watching the film for the first time. These emotions would be clear in a persons writing, if they wrote while they were watching the film. Waiting until the movie is over and taking time to settle down will help your emotions go away and you have a steady mind while you criticize a film.

As I read chapter 2, I went back and thought about a certain section of the chapter. The section that I am referring to is the section titled, "Subject Matter and Meaning." In this section, it says that the movies are not just about a subject but the rendition of that subject for particular reasons and create certain meanings. When I thought about this, I thought about how the book is saying that when you are watching a movie, you are the one who creates the subject of the movie. An example of something like this would be a movie where there is a good guy and a bad guy. Most people would agree that a certain person in the movie is the good guy, but there can always be that one person who sees the movie in the opposite way. An example of something like this would be a film such as the movie, "Blow". The main character is a drug dealer so he should be viewed as a bad guy.I believe that most people would see him as a good guy caught up in bad situations. That could just be how the writers envisioned the movie to be like though.This is the idea that is mentioned in the book, that it is up to the viewer to develop the meaning of the film.

As I read the beginning of chapter two, it shows some things you should be able to do after studying the chapter. It shows five notes about how you should go about taking notes and analytically taking a movie apart while you watch it and review it. I myself have done each of those notes except for the first note, which is to present some preliminary questions about a film that help you begin to think analytically about the film. I have never taken any notes while watching movie to critique it, I always just critique them in my head. If I were to right things down instead of just thinking about it, then I would be able to analyze the film more thoroughly.

As I skip up to the last paragraph of the chapter, I noticed that it talks about taking notes while watching a movie. the book states that taking methodical notes allow a viewer to map accurately what happens in the movie. I believe that this tactic would be much more efficient then the way I do it, by just questioning the film in my head. If I were ever to go into a career in movie reviews, then I would use this tactic to get my job done correctly.

In the beginning of chapter 2, the author talks about how Hollywood began to rule and triumph out of the US and move throughout the world. The movies have not always been an around the world tip of thing, it took innovations and lead actors to get out. The US was a starting off place for Hollywood. Fans would see stars such as Charlie Chaplin and from that the directors created story lines to draw people in to see the movies. From that, the movie industry had its break and began becoming popular not only in the US, but also around the world.
Today it seems as if the movie industry and Hollywood is one of the most profitable industries to be in. When movies first started off, they needed to find a way for people to see their movies. Not only this, the venue that the movie was showed in also helped Hollywood grow in popularity as well.They were able to hold thousands of people. Over time, as the popularity of the actors and actresses and as technology grew more advanced, Hollywood began to rule the world.

Post 2

In the first chapter, I read a section titled, “The Critical Essay”. This paragraph states that the writer presumes that the reader has seen or is at least familiar with the film under discussion. This kind of essay would be similar to a critical review of a piece of work. It is a review of a movie. A critical essay is different than just a review because the critical essay is much more specific. People like to read critical essays because they have the ability to enlighten people of new materials or topics within the film, even if they have seen the movie already. The critical essay is a more in depth review.

As I read further into the first chapter, I got the the section titled, "Opinion and Evaluation". The first paragraph says that when you write about film, personal opinion and taste will necessarily become part of your argument. When I read this I think that it means that the opinion of the writer is the reason for the topic of the essay or story. I think that people might view the writers piece in different forms but the writer will be the one that will be able to clarify what it means. 

As I entered this film class, I have entered this class under what I believe is a basic understanding of how to create a film. In the first chapter of the text book, the author talks about many things that helps to know about before you begin to create a film. One thing was the audience and the different kinds of critisism that you must think about while creating your film. I knew about these kinds of things before entering the class, but the book elaborates more about how the writer must distiguish about the different kinds of audiences that they are trying to reach.

When I chose this class, I knew that writers needed to worry about the critics and critisism as they wrote. I did not think about the fact that they needed to reach a certain forum. These forums would be a screening report, a movie review, a theoretical essay and a critical essay. These four distinctions are huge into deciding what to say to your audience. The fact that the internet now broadcasts your information to everyone instead of a certain group of people is certainly a problem to these people. I believe that the writers need to worry less about focusing on a certain group and to focus on every group in order to keep the readers, reading.