The Power Of One :: film essay

The movie was about a boy that wanted every one to come together to understand each other better and for them to have equal rights. P.K was a boy that was thought about many things on the people he was thought by his mother about England and by nanny about the Zulu. When P.K. was a small boy he went to a boarding school for the Afrikaans. He was treated bad he even almost got killed by Jaapie Botha. When he got out of the school he went to live with Doc a friend of his grandfather. Doc goes to jail because he failed to register when he entered the country since he was coming form Germany; P.K. went with him too, to jail. Their he learned to box he was thought by Geel piet a black prisoner that new how to box, as P.K he became more of a boxer. When he got out of jail he went to box at a gym. He went to school. One day in a boxing match P.K fell in love with a girl called Maria Maria's. Maria was Afrikaner and wasn't aloud to date a British boy. They started to go out then decided to get married but that never happened because Maria got killed. P.K. and his friend were teaching the black how to reed and right and that was illegal Maria was teaching too. The Afrikaner army came in and prohibited the school and that started a fight. Maria was running towards P.K. when one of the troops smashed a chair into Marias face and she died. P.K then left because he was searched by the Afrikaners that wanted him. So he left towards Alexandria. The troops were looking for P.K. and could not find him. The troops killed any black person they could see. Jaapie Botha found P.K and he was going to kill P.K but one of P.K.'s friends killed Jaapie Botha. They both escaped from the Afrikaners. There is a lot of south African history in this video because it shows what happen to black people and the British and how they were treated un equal to the Afrikaners. They were all different but that did not mean they had to be treated this way. They were punished by the police real hard for any little insignificant thing. It also shows how they believed that separation was the right thing when it rely wasn't.

Critical Response- George Orwells Shooting And Elephant :: essays research papers

Critical Response Essay I class, we read a short story by George Orwell called Shooting an Elephant. It was a story about courage, judgment, and the pressure of peers. I personally did not like this story. I found it boring, pointless, and just another "hasn’t -this -happened -to -you" story about nothing. However, it was very well written, and if I had to critically respond to this story, I would praise the author on a number of things. The story opens by describing the relationship between the town and himself, a sort of sub-division police officer of the town. Description is definetly not lacking in the opening, as words such as "aimless", and "petty" are used to describe the town, and the way it treats it officers. It descriibes the kind of ignorance the town has to outsiders and anyone they do not "approve of". The story opens well, and clarifies right away, the who, what, where, when, why and how. No questions are asked and all confusions are quickly abolished. The second paragraph describes very vividly how he the narrator feels about his job choice, and his views on the village. He says "†¦I was stuck between my hatred of the empire I served and my rage against the evil-spirited little beasts who tried to make my job impossible". The narrator not only is in a place where he hates, but he also hates the people he works with, and works for! Wow, how’d he end up there? Basically, the story line goes along to tell the tale of an elephant that needs to be killed, because it got out of the zoo and endagers the community. The story describes how the main character feels about himself and the pressures of the community. A showdown climaxes the storyline between the elephant and the narrator, and the entire village is there to witness and entice the main character. Critical Response- George Orwells Shooting And Elephant :: essays research papers Critical Response Essay I class, we read a short story by George Orwell called Shooting an Elephant. It was a story about courage, judgment, and the pressure of peers. I personally did not like this story. I found it boring, pointless, and just another "hasn’t -this -happened -to -you" story about nothing. However, it was very well written, and if I had to critically respond to this story, I would praise the author on a number of things. The story opens by describing the relationship between the town and himself, a sort of sub-division police officer of the town. Description is definetly not lacking in the opening, as words such as "aimless", and "petty" are used to describe the town, and the way it treats it officers. It descriibes the kind of ignorance the town has to outsiders and anyone they do not "approve of". The story opens well, and clarifies right away, the who, what, where, when, why and how. No questions are asked and all confusions are quickly abolished. The second paragraph describes very vividly how he the narrator feels about his job choice, and his views on the village. He says "†¦I was stuck between my hatred of the empire I served and my rage against the evil-spirited little beasts who tried to make my job impossible". The narrator not only is in a place where he hates, but he also hates the people he works with, and works for! Wow, how’d he end up there? Basically, the story line goes along to tell the tale of an elephant that needs to be killed, because it got out of the zoo and endagers the community. The story describes how the main character feels about himself and the pressures of the community. A showdown climaxes the storyline between the elephant and the narrator, and the entire village is there to witness and entice the main character.

MacDonald Essay -- Business, Protective Tariffs Policy

Although they represented differed political parties, Sir John A. MacDonald and Sir Wilfred Laurier pursued the same goals while in office. MacDonald recognized Canada's need for protective tariffs on exported goods, the need of settlement in the west, and the need for a railway to unify the nation. MacDonald immediately implemented protectionism and the establishment of a railway. On the other hand, Laurier took these goals and expanded on them. John A. MacDonald outlined the goals of Canada in the National Policy and these goals were accomplished in the period of the Laurier Boom. The first goal of MacDonald's National Policy was the establishment of protective tariffs on goods. Although formerly a supporter of free trade, MacDonald decided that the current circumstances were favorable to protectionism (Stevenson, 194). His advocacy for protective tariffs had great impact on Canadians, so much that the nation voted MacDonald into office in 1878. For the next eighteen years after the establishment of the National Policy, the Liberals held to a rigid free trade philosophy and â€Å"directed its main attack upon the tariff system and the anti-protectionist case came to enjoy wide acceptance† (194). When MacDonald first implemented protectionism, Laurier, like many other liberals, was against the idea. However, once in power, Laurier was prompted by British preference to maintain the policy of high protection (194). However, the tariff issue was banished once the boom took flight as Canada's export markets were thriving. The country experienced great prosp erity, rapid development as well as expansion, especially for the railways (194). Once the country's prosperity began to slow down, farmers of the west that were â€Å"the chief sufferer... ...s National Policy and Wilfred Laurier accomplished it in his time in office, the period known as the Laurier Boom. This goes to show that the different political parties do not vary so much in their ideas, but more so in the ways of which they execute them. These two men exemplify their political parties; although both parties are equally motivated, when executing their practices, conservatives tend to be more laid back and behind the scenes and liberals are more diligent and in the forefront. For example, MacDonald came up with and outlined the policy, and Laurier took the policy into application. Although their approaches are different, the ideas and actions of these two men together are the reason for the development of Canada as a nation. Therefore, with this in mind, both the Laurier government and the MacDonald government created the nation of Canada.

Firepower Kills

â€Å"Le feu tue† (‘Firepower kills') Henri-Philippe Petain – 1916 Verdun. World War 1 is often called â€Å"the first modern war†. During World War 1 many new kinds of weapons and technology were invented and improved. Some of these weapons included tanks, chemical gases, grenades, and machine guns. Chemical Warfare was used for the first time on a large scale in World War I. many advancements were made during the war; in the air, on the ground, and in the sea. World War 1 started by a conflict and was fought between countries that were equipped with modern weapons. Some of these weapons rose and were very powerful like machine guns and others declined like bayonets. Both weapons and technology made a drastic impact on World War 1.Land battles were mostly fought on both the Western and Eastern fronts. Soldiers were surrounded by new technology and weapons that helped throughout the battlefield but also caused danger/death. Soldiers experienced a great deal of hardship while fighting on the fronts. The western front consisted of small parts of Europe, most of the fighting took over in France and Belgium. The eastern front was made up of battlefields in Eastern Europe, especially in Russia. â€Å"But on the last day, an astonishing number of English field guns opened up on us with high-explosive, drumming ceaselessly on our position, so that we suffered heavily and came back only eighty strong† (1.4). land war started by the use of Machine guns. Machine guns were the first and most famous weapon used in war, they are claimed to be the most dangerous weapon because the killed numerous lives during the war. Machine guns were invented by the Americans, however, the idea was stolen by the Germans. Machine guns at the time could fire up to 500 rounds per minute, but they were very heavy and they were very heavy. They had to be used by well-trained men who knew how to setup a gun and operate it quickly.Tanks were armored steel plated, belt tired, and heavily armed combat vehicles. First use of tanks on a battlefield was the use of British mark 1 tank at the battle of flers courcelette in 1915. The French soon followed the idea and created Renault FT, which established the look of the tank we see today. The Germans never got to producing their own tanks in WW1. The only German design of war was the A7V.Flamethrowers were first invented by a German inventor named Richard Fiedler. The flamethrower was designed to be carried on soldiers backs. It had two tanks, one that carried flammable liquid and the other that carried propellant gas. The squeeze of the trigger would send shooting flammable liquid up to 18 meters away, it was a weapon used to shoot big flames of fire against its enemies. It was used to burn soldiers and wooden obstacles such as bunkers. The Germans used these flamethrowers to attack more than 650 soldiers, mainly the British and French.Small bombs thrown by hand or shot by a rifle attachment were called grenades/bombs. Germans are the ones who created and mostly used these grenades during the war. The British made their own model of a grenade but it needed more work. By the year of 1917, all troops were required to carry extra grenades to capture and hold them against their enemies.Poisonous gas was introduced by the Germans in 1915. It is toxic smoke that can be very deadly if inhaled by humans. When the gas is inhaled it burns and liquidizes your lungs which causes death. If wind currents occurred while soldiers threw the gas at their enemies then it could easily be brought back to them and kill them. The only way to avoid the poisonous gas was to urinate on a cloth and hold up to ur mouth and nose. However, over time gas mask kits were provided to the soldiers. Airplanes were very recent they were invented by the Wright brothers 11 years ago. Airplanes were simple machines, more like to birds than anything else. The first missions were carried out as an observation. Most airplanes at the time were slow/flimsy contraptions with barely enough power to lift a single pilot and perhaps one passenger. Airplanes technology developed throughout war they became very important/useful.At the beginning of the war, most soldiers used the planes to spy on their enemies strategies. These planes usually carried a pilot and a photographer who would photograph the soldier's positions. The use of planes became very popular during the war, it became a crucial part of achieving victories. One of the first contributions in the war was at the first battle of Marne were reconnaissance planes spotted a gap in the German lines. The allies attacked the gap and were able to split the German army and drive them back. Fighter planes came into the war when they wanted to stop the reconnaissance planes. With more planes in the skies, enemy pilots began to fight each other in the air. At first, they tried throwing grenades at each other or shooting with rifles and pistols. It was useless and it didn't work very well. Pilots soon found out that the best way to shoot down an enemy is to mount a machine gun to the plane. However, because the machine gun was mounted to the front of the plane the propeller would get in the way of the bullets. Soon a new invention called the â€Å"interredur† was invented by Anton Fokker, it allowed the machine gun to be synchronized with the propeller, all planes started using this invention. As the war progressed, both sides began to use airplanes to drop bombs on enemy locations. The first planes used for bombings were made by the Russians and could only carry small bombs and they were very powerless to attack from the ground. By the end of the war, faster long-range bombers were built that could carry much larger weight bombs.Germany used zeppelins to drop bombs on targets from far away. These were slow moving but could carry a large load of explosives. Zeppelins were filled with hydrogen, so a small spark could blow up the entire aircraft. Germans used these zeppelins to bomb London and eastern England. â€Å"Germany's enemies, however, soon found that zeppelins, which were filled with hydrogen gas, quickly became raging infernos when hit by anti-aircraft guns† (Spielvogel, McTighe, 331). As the war continued it became useless because of the fast fighter planes that were used. The battles at sea were known as naval battles. These battles mainly took place in the northern sea and the Atlantic. The wars were mainly between Britain and Germany. Britain was trying to stop Germany from traveling or trading with the rest of the world across the north sea. that meant Germany could not receive important resources like food. Germany reacted by using u-boats to attack the ships that were trading and sending resources to Britain. Germany is the first one to create U-Boats and used them to destroy many enemy ships. U-Boats were dangerous and accurate. â€Å"U-boat is an abbreviation of the German unterseeboot and is a synonym for submarine†(Axelrod, 127). On September 1914, a U-Boat sank 3 British ships. In the U.S. U-boats turned its public opinion against Germany. This increased when Germany ordered a new policy of unrestricted submarine warfare, they sank every boat seen on the surface. This eventually made the U.S start sending ships into the war. Later on the British liner, Lusitania was sunk by a U-boat which carried innocent British and American civilians. Then on February 1, 1917, Germany resumed unrestricted submarine warfare effective, But on February 3, 1917, Germany stopped unrestricted submarine warfare. Britain, France, Russia and the U.S had all developed submarine forces before Germany began development on the U-Boats in 1906, but during WW1 submarines were associated with the Imperial German Navy, which used the submarines to try to bridge the gap in naval strength because it struggles compared to Britain's Royal Navy. Longer-range U-boats were developed and torpedo quality improved during the war. Submarines could strike long bombs from beneath the waves with torpedoes but also surfaced them to use as their deck gun. An unsuccessful post-war effort was made to ban submarine warfare.Torpedoes are self-propelled missiles that can be launched from submarines or ships, or dropped into the sea from the undercarriage of planes. The first torpedoes were produced in the 1870s, it ran on compressed air and was slow and inaccurate. By 1914 German torpedoes could travel at up to 75 kilometers per hour over a range of several miles. This gave German U-boats a deadly advantage over the Allied ships. As the war progressed the British made rapid advances in torpedoes and sank at least 18 German U-boats with them. Mines were large explosive bombs planted underground, they were either remotely activated or by the impact of the soldier's footsteps. Navies also used sea mines which floated on the ocean and exploded when in contact with ships. Trench soldiers often dug tunnels to plant huge mines under enemy trenches and positions. One example of an incident occurred at Hill 60 during the Battle of Messines (June 1917) where Australian tunneling specialists exploded 450,000 kilograms of underground explosives, killing thousands of German troops.So it is clear that although the war was very deadly it still inherited many new weapons and technologies that helped throughout the war. Weapons and new technology really did affect the war it changed many lives, it brought innovation, creativity, and originality. WW1 weapons and technology proved to other countries who fought that humans will adapt to difficult environments and strategies that come by.

Pierrot Le Fou, Art, and You

Pierrot Le Fou, Art, and You Jean-Luc Godard's film Pierrot Le Fou is in itself a challenging piece of cinematic art. The film, which experiments with elements of mise-en-scene, cinematography, and editing in an unconventional, intricate, and artistic manner, represents a milestone in the film genre known as the French New Wave, and continues to be important to the history of cinema today. With Pierrot Le Fou, director Godard expresses commentary on such things as mass culture, politics, America, literature, music, art, and cinema itself.These opinions are communicated to us throughout the film not only through the filmic techniques employed, but by the actors themselves; through their dialogue and their acknowledgment of the spectators presence. It is Godard's choices to employ a garish color scheme, references to mass culture, narrative intransivity, and the destruction of the â€Å"fourth wall† that allow for Pierrot Le Fou to highlight the dominant pop art movement occurri ng at the time as well as to confront viewers, express commentary concerning literature and cinema, and break the audience's willing suspension of disbelief.Bright, vivid, and often primary shades of color, in addition to subject matter concerning references and depictions of elements present in mass culture describe the collective term of the artistic phenomena occurring in the 1950's and 60's known as â€Å"Pop Art. † In Pierrot Le Fou, we are made highly aware of such a movement as much of the film is styled according to such. This can be seen as early as in the opening credits, which slowly piece together in shades of bright red and blue (depicting at first a bunch of A's, B's, and C's) a title and credit screen.With such a flashy opening, characteristics of pop art are instantly alluded to; and continue to remain present throughout the remainder of the film. One of the most significant scenes in which this is conceptualized is the sequence in which the main character, Fe rdinand, attends a cocktail party. The party sequence, which is shot entirely on a 2D plain in which the actors are arranged facing each other against the wall, is also filmed through bright, primary colored filters. Throughout this sequence, every cut is marked by a change in color scheme.Beginning in a garish shade of red, the sequence then alternates between shades of bright white, yellow, blue, and finally – in the last shot, a combination of yellow, orange, pink, and purple hues. This sequence, through Godard's choice of color filtering, represents not only colors characteristic in much of the â€Å"Pop Art† produced during this period; but makes reference to advertising and consumer products. This is evident in a shot during the sequence in which we are shown a man and a woman sitting together against a wall within a blue colored frame.During this shot, the woman speaks about her â€Å"hairdo†, which is, â€Å"able to keep it's shape all day thanks to a c loud of Aquanet. † After uttering this, she continues to enthusiastically talk about the Aquanet product to the man as if she were advertising it to the general public. Not only are references to consumer culture made here through such dialogue, but the depiction of her hair after having been sprayed with Aquanet allude to the Pop Art movement of the time in its reflection of consumer culture.Besides making us aware of such a dominant artistic phenomena, Godard's use of episodic structure to separate scenes in Pierrot Le Fou constantly challenges us to re-concentrate and re-focus our attention, as well as explores the notion of cinema as a topic in the narrative. The film, which is divided into different chapters; thus enables for the introduction of interruptions into the narrative. It can be said that such a technique is borrowed from literature – which is a theme that is present not only in this way throughout the film, but implied in numerous other scenes.While chal lenging the viewer with such narrative intransivity – a term used to describe Godard's constant interruptions via his introduction of new scenes as â€Å"chapters† – Pierrot Le Fou also challenges the notion of the power of the cinema to â€Å"capture† it's audience without apparently having done so (in terms of making it think or changing it). i In terms of the narrative and cinema, Godard also introduces to us in Pierrot Le Fou the idea of film as a process of writing in images – and by doing so, raises the topic of cinema itself within the narrative.Throughout Pierrot Le Fou, there are numerous instances in which elements of cinema are dissected, and are representational of what they construct. In one such instance, Marianne is shown looking at the audience in a close-up shot with a scissors literally â€Å"cutting† across the screen to mark the cut that follows. In another occurrence, Ferdinand is shown in a close-up pointing a gun at th e audience – to signify a shot. Representationally, both of these instances convey elements of cinema directly to the audience through the objects that the characters present.Thus, these shots, while raising topics concerning the cinema; also break the narrative surface by allowing for the characters direct engagement with the audience. This intentional destruction of the â€Å"fourth wall†, brought to us in the film by shots featuring a confrontation between the spectator and the characters (where we can observe them observing us), not only breaks that spectator's willing suspension of disbelief, but poses questions about the level of truth in the diegesis but also in terms of cinema itself.Such notions of the misleading and deceiving nature of appearances are constantly touched upon throughout the film, always in a way that is confrontational; and at times, representational. In the scene in which Marianne is asked by Ferdinand about whether or not she will ever leave him, instead of a shot of Ferdinand asking the question, a fox is shown walking around. After the question is asked, a close-up of the fox looking at the audience is presented as Marianne answers, â€Å"Of course I won't. † Immediately after answering, this shot is cut to another close-up shot of Marianne looking out at the audience.These two shots are representational not only of each other, but of such notions of deceit. First of all, it is obvious in the presentation of these two shots that we are to draw a parallel between the creature and Marianne – as they look very similar and both are framed and looking out to us in the same way, one immediately right after the other. The deceptive and cunning nature known to be associated with a fox is also representational of Marianne's expression in the shot, as she appears to look so – and such qualities are further highlighted by the close-up framing of her face.By these two shots alone, notions associated with cin ema and fiction are raised as well. It is as if, by being directly engaged with the fox and Marianne, the audience is asked to actively participate in the formulation of questions concerning such things. By allowing for characters to directly engage themselves with the audience, Pierrot Le Fou, through such shot compositions, challenges the audience directly to engage itself in the film not simply as a spectator, but rather, as active participants questioning and creating meanings.By implementing such elements, with Pierrot Le Fou, Godard has created a film stylized to not only highlight, but to comment upon and furthermore challenge notions of Pop Art, cinema, and literature/fiction. It is through such unconventional means of expressing his ideas in his use of mise-en-scene present in the lighting of the garish color scheme, the cinematography choices he made in terms of framing the characters, and how editing was employed to draw parallels and create meaning, that the film conveys its intentions in a diegesis that is complex, artistic, and confrontational.While the entirety of the diegesis's motives may not be initially apparent, due to the complexity of the narrative and the amount of themes and questions Godard raises with the film; we as an audience can recognize how such filmic techniques employed by the director have come together to create such meanings. After all, the movie, like an intricate artwork, takes some studying to truly figure out. Nichols, Bill. Movies and Methods. Vol. II. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California, 1985. Print.

Travel Broadens the Mind

Travel broadens the mind Traveling broadens our minds in different ways. I had visited a different country for the first time when I was 8. My father lives in Norway with his American wife. I had already tasted the other side of life. I am only 15 and I know life is in front of me, but from my experience I know that traveling does change your point of view. How do you know? You might find yourself by traveling. Traveling does broaden our mind. We meet new people with new ideas .We find different architecture and religions. Other differences are the languages . The unknown languages are being a wall between us and the world. A wall that we break little by little every day being here in English class. Like we already said that travel broadens our mind. When we see how the other people survive we start thinking about our lives . We associate everything with our way of living . We started judging them for some things and being jealous for others.Every time when I travel I find something new, something different. But one thing will always be the same: when you travel you realize what are the most important things in your life. You start appreciating the little things in the big world. You discover that being rich is not to have money, cars or houses but to have friends and family to appreciate you. Whenever I get back from Norway, I am thinking differently. I see the bad and the good side of my country.I begin associating everything around me with the way they live in Norway. Travel broadens the mind, it shows us what are we missing and the important things in life. It does not really matter were you live or what launguage you are speaking, we are all people. We all have brains and bodys. We all have good and bad moments in our lives. Until you see something and get to know it better you can not judge it. Traveling broadens my mind. What about you? †¦

Film Study Prince Essay

(1)According to Prince, what are the three core questions that â€Å"frame the essential attributes of cinema† and why are they important to consider in film studies? (6 points) 1) How do movies express meaning? It is important to consider in film studies because the basic tools of filmmaking help organize design of a film, and the filmmakers are able to express a range of meanings. 2) How do viewers understand film? It is important to consider in film studies because viewers understand film by applying different aspects of their real-life visual, personal, and social experience as well as their knowledge of motion picture conventions and style. Viewers respond to films when watching movies. 3) How does cinema operate as an art and business on a global scale? It is important to consider in film studies because commercial filmmaking operates as part of a global communications industry, which exerts considerable influence on film content and style. At the same time, filmmakers around the world represent their countries, heritages, and styles. Moreover, filmmakers today are greatly affected by the economic and commercial problems. These issues including art and business influence filmmaking greatly. (2)To Prince, what is the difference between film structure and film content? (4 points) Film structure refers to the audiovisual design of a film and some tools and techniques used to create that design. However, film content refers to the description of story, characters and theme of the film. (3)Discuss three factors that make the director the chief artistic authority in the filmmaking process? (6 points) 1) Preproduction is one of the factors because it involves the planning and preparation period such as writing of a script, hiring of cast and crew, production design of sets, costumes, and locals. 2) Production is another factor which includes the work of filming the script and sound recording of the action. 3) Postproduction involves the editing of sound and image in the film, composition and recording of the music score, additional sound recording for effects and dialogue replacement, creation of digital special effects, and color timing to achieve proper color balance in the images. These factors (the production process) make the director the chief artistic authority in the filmmaking process because the director coordinates and organizes the artistic inputs of other members of the production team, who generally subordinate their artistic tastes or preferences to a directors stated wishes or vision. (4)Discuss two reasons why Hunt thinks it’s important to study films. (4 points) According to Hunt, the key reasons to study film are the issues of power and empowerment. Studying film is empowering because the formation of cinema is about identity, such as our self-image, values, beliefs, and world views. When we realize the role media play in defining and shaping our identity, we can begin to more actively take charge of our own identity. (5)What are the three artistic modes of filmmaking and how are they different? (6 points) 1) Narrative fiction mode refers to an historical or cultural event that is familiar to many film-going spectators; however, the characters and the way they act are fictionalized. 2) Documentary mode represents â€Å"real people† participating in â€Å"real life† events; it illuminates the life situation and the situation may represent larger issues and ideas about life. 3) Experimental mode is the arrangement of artistic elements, edit and construct the story in unconventional ways in order to illuminate life experience. (6)Discuss the importance of the shot in the filmmaking process (you can draw from both Hunt and Prince for this answer). (4 points) A shot is important in the filmmaking process because it is the basic unit for constructing a film. A film is built on shot by shot basis like a book is constructed sentence by sentence. Films are composed of many shots that are joined together in the process of editing. In a completed film, a shot is the interval on screen between edit points, and it is important in the filmmaking process. (7)Explain how it is that human beings are able to see still images as moving. (5 points) Under the right conditions spectators will see apparent motion when no real movement has occurred. If a series of closely spaced light bulbs are illuminated in rapid sequence in a darkened room, a spectator will see a single light source moving across the room rather than a series of lights illuminated one after another. This phenomenon is called beta movement. When the intervals between a series of illuminated light are very small, the eye’s motion detectors encode this information as movement. The viewer sees a single travelling light or a galloping horse on screen.