Chapter 5 Exersice 1

Julie Charlip refers to the views of another writer right off the bat in the passage. She refers to Marx and Engels when they said "Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two greater classes directly facing each other - the bourgeouisie and the proletariat." Then she goes into her own views by talking about how easy it would be if that were true. Now there are tons of different social classes, and that makes it even more difficult on people. Then she goes on to use her sociology professor's view about the working class. He stated that everybody is middle class, there can be many different situations that classify people as the same class. So Julie Charlip uses a combination of both her own words and views, and the views and opinions of other people in her passage about economical classes.

Chapter 4 Excersise 1

She first talks about the issue that is on hand. Then she gives two separate examples to sort of combine her idea of summarizing and disagreeing. She talks about Bowles and Gintis, and she also talks about Basil Bernstein, Pierre Bourdieu, and Michael W. Apple. She gives examples of each, and explains. This is why she is somewhere in the middle of summarizing and disagreeing with the article.

7.j What Difference Does Design Make?

1) What kind of writing does this paper most resemble - in terms of layout and design?

This papers layout looks the same as a newspaper or an informative paper would be layed out. It has a bold heading at the top of the paper, the words are carefully arranged in colums on the page, and there is usually a picture located in one of the columns with a caption under it.

2) How might the appearance (layout or design) of this paper influence the way an audience reads it?

The appearance of this paper affects the way an audience reads it in a major way. Since it has a lot of pictures many people might only skim over the words, and look at the pictures. Where if it were a formal paper with no pictures, people would have to read it more carefully.

3) How would the paper change if you removed the images and re-formatted it to look more like a typical college research paper?

In my opinion the paper would not be as interesting. It also wouldnt grab the reader as much. With its big bold titles and pictures, the article gets the readers attention and makes them want to read it. If it were formatted to look like a typical college research paper many people might think that it is boring, and not even want to read it in the first place.

Persepolis Movie Review #2

After watching Persepolis I have a completely different view on comic book movies. I was never very into comic book type movies, but this one was unique. It wasn't flashy, fake, or completely unrealistic like superhero comics. The main thing that made it unique was that they didn't cast real actors to play in the movie. The same comic book characters that were in the book, were in the movie. They were just animated. Also the setting was very plain and basic. This added to the movie, because I felt like I already knew the characters, and it made the setting easier to comprehend. A.O. Scott agrees that the characters and drawings of the setting added to the movie when he writes, "Its flat, stylized depiction of the world - the streets of Tehran and Vienna in particular - turns geography into poetry."

The one thing that this film could do a little better would be to have a better transition between slides. Especially at the beginning. The slides at the very beginning of the movie seem very choppy and fast. However, there could be a reason that they were like this. At the beginning of the story, the main character, Marjane Satrapi is very young. She is only six years old when the story starts, so the choppy slides could symbalize her not remembering or recalling her childhood now that she is much older.

Overall, the story is a very good one. It informs people of the horrible regimes and wars that were going on in the Middle East. As much as this might sound like a documentary on the Middle East, or sound extremely boring, it't not. It has just the right amount of information, comedy, romance, and just about everything else someone could think of to make it interesting. It tells the story of Marjane Satrapi and her journey through life. She has been through a lot of hard things, and this movie summarizes them really well. This was definatley a great movie, and I would recommend it to anyone. Regardless of if they like comic books or not.

Persepolis: Movie Review from class

In my opinion “Persepolis” is what an informative movie is supposed to be. It gets the information to the viewer, but it keeps the audience interested by using comic relief. I have never really been interested in politics, global issues, and especially the wars going on in the Middle East. However, “Persepolis” got me interested in how these things really do happen, and how terrible wars like this can be on a country and it’s people.
Marjane Satrapi depicts what life is like in Iran during her life. It shows how her family, friends, and the general pubic react to all the events going on in their lives. The characters are depicted very well in the movie. It shows how much her family really does care about her through all the things that they do. They buy her all the books she could ever want so she can be knowledgeable about the events that are happening in her life. They also eventually send her out of her home country of Iran, because that is the safest thing to do, and the best for Marjane.
Another reason that the movie was good is that is depicted the original “Persepolis” book very well. Not only did it have all the same characters, but they were in the movie exactly the way that I saw them in the book. Usually when I read a book I have an imaginary picture of what the setting is, and what all the characters look like. However, every time I go see the movie I am disappointed because the characters are nothing like I imagined them. That’s what set “Persepolis” apart. The movie had the same comic book characters as the book, but they were animated. So I already had a picture in my head of what was going on.
After reading the book and watching the movie I instantly became a fan of “Persepolis.” I would recommend the movie to anyone, even if they aren’t into comic books. I never really liked comic books, or animated movies, but this one was different. It had just the right mixture of information and comedy to make a very good movie.

Suggestions for Writing #2

After reading both of the reviews for Spider-Man 2 it was interesting to see how much detail people really do pay attention to in a movie. Both Gilchrist and Ebert agree and disagree about things throughout the movie. Many options come to play when reviewing a movie, and a lot of times it comes down to personal preference as to whether someone is going to like it or not.

One thing that they both tie their reviews into is how closely depicted Spider-Man 2 is to the original spider man what was created by Stan Lee. Todd Gilchrist compared Spider-Man 2 to the first Spider-Man movie that came out. According to him, the first Spider-Man was depicted more the way that Stan Lee created him. Another thing that Gilchrist and Ebert agree on is how well the visual effects are. In the movie Spider-Man swings from building to building with such realism, even though everyone knows this is impossible. Another thing they talk about is the tentacles that look so real on Doc Ock.

The biggest and most important thing that Gilchrist and Ebert disagree on are the movie in general. Gilchrist says that he would not recommend the movie to anyone that was not into comic books, or that did not already enjoy the adventures of Spider-Man. However, Ebert said that the overall movie was great, and that he would recommend it to anyone. Other things that they disagree on are how confusing the plot is, and how well the story moves. Ebert says that the story flows smoothly and sets up for a good movie. Gilchrist says that the plot is confusing, and hard to follow.

Persepolis: Movie vs Book

On Wednesday when we started watching Persepolis in class I was very surprised by the film. I already knew that it was going to be in French, but I thought that it was going to have French actors and be in a real place. However, it was the actual comic book figures being animated on the screen. I thought this was really cool, and I had never seen that done in a movie before.
It was also interesting seeing how much different a book can be from its movie. There were many parts left out, just like it is with any book that is made into a movie. The main difference is that while reading the comic book you have to imagine what is happening between the boxes. The book tells you most of the information, but some of it is still up to you to decide what is really going on. You cant do this in the movie. It shows you exactly what is going on all the time. This is why I think I personally liked the book better than I liked the movie.
One cool part about the movie was that we got to see what happened in the second book in the Persepolis series. This book shows what happens when she comes back to Iran, and how things have still changed even more. The movie was very interesting for this book, but I would still like to read the second book. That way I could compare and contrast what happens in the movie and what happens in the book.