Hi Year 13s. Your task - in response to this post - is to summarise your essay argument. Answer the following questions:
- What's the question you're answering?
- What does it mean?
- What will you say in response?
I look forward to reading your responses, and getting a sneak preview of what I'll read in detail next week.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Characters in films should be recognizable versions of ourselves. To what extent do you agree with this view?
A texts accessibility and reality lies in the audiences’ relation with characters. Donnesmark uses the arts to show humanity to create a side the audience finds easy to agree with and uses set and costuming, shots and juxtaposition of scenes. This shows the artists humanity and thus accessibility and the stasis’ control and mechanical in human regimes. So when characters are recognizable versions of ourselves we can relate with the characters and ideals the director intends.
I'm doing question 3 from 2006:
"To what extent do you agree that films offer insight into society(past or present). Respond to this question with close reference to a film you have studied."
My argument is that to a certain extent films offer an insight, but often they only show one side of a story.
In the case of TLoO, we see an unfavourable side of the GDR regime, where there is rebellion against the authority and some intense interrogation, which offers us partial insight into Berlin in this time. What we don't see is the amount of people who are perfectly happy living under this type of government, and as Hempf says at the end (as much as I hate to agree with him!) something along the lines of “it was good in our small republic. Many only see that now”
'With close reference to a film you have studied, discuss the various techniques used to manipulate the viewers' attitude to the characters and events depicted.'
My argument is that Donnersmarck manages to manipulate the audience into thinking certain feelings towards different characters at various points throughout the film. He uses subtle techniques, like camera angles, intercutting, costuming and juxtaposition to change how the audience feels not only towards characters like Hempf, Dreyman and Wiesler but stereotypically the different things they represent (the arts, the GDR, 'goodness' etc..)
The principal job of any film should be to please the audience. To what extent do you agree with this view?
Donnersmarck’s purpose in making The Lives of Others is not to leave the audience feeling happy. However this does not mean that the film does not please the audience. Instead, it pleases them by stimulating thought about what it means to be good, and informing them about life under a totalitarian regime.
Explain how a film you have studied depicts conflict, and discuss how this depiction influences the viewers' response to the ideas and characters in the film.
>The obvious conflict in this film is the Arts vs the GDR(corrupted socialsim)
>There is also the internal conflicts within the characters, weisler begins to question wether what he is doing is good/ the right thing. and also christa has an internal conflict, does she betray georg and the arts to abide by the GDR laws or does she follow what she believes in.
Christa Maria's conflict is a small scale version of the obvious conflict between the arts and the GDR. This internal conflict influences the viewers perception on what is good, AND wether staying true to your believes and comitments is more important than abiding by the law albeit corrupt.
Characters in films should be recognizable versions of ourselves. To what extent do you agree with this view?
Like Molly said, we need to be able to identify with the characters so that we get the full blast of the message that the director is trying to send. In seeing ourselves in the characters that we're viewing, we gain a greater understanding of them. For example, with Christa, Donnersmarck shows us through the use of music, shots and dialogue the reality of being blackmailed and the hurt it inflicts on not just the person being blackmailed, but also the people who love them.
To what extent do you agree that films offer insight into society? Respond to this question with close reference to a film you have studied.
My argument is that Donnersmarck portrays characters that cannot be classified as simply victims nor villains, in turn influencing our views on what determines whether a person is good or bad. Initally, Donnersmarck paints a hostile, controlled image of the Stasi, and a more agreeable representation of the 'ordinary East Germans'. However, he goes on to dismantle this initial impression by revealing a heroic side to Wiesler and traitorous sides to the supposed victims of his 'crimes'. Through the complexity of the characters, we are compelled to consider whether it is one's role in society that determines whether they are good or bad, or if it is the lack of justice in society that drives people to act against their morals.
...........
2006, no. 3- To what extent do you agree that films offer insight into society
This is asking me to what extent do i believe that films provide a window into various aspects of society, present and past.
i believe that similar to theatre, films reflect themes ideas or real life circumstances from the society we live in. films can offer insight to aspects of life such as the complexities of human relationships which we see in the bizarre string of realtionships, hempf and christa, dreyman and christa and Wiesler with both dreyman and christa.
Films can also teach many people about an actual historic society, such as western germany. even though it is a one sided portrayal of the society, we are given great insight into the complexities, control, and oppression of this particular society.
also i think that the ethics of society are examined or criticized, but i haven't developed this idea far enough yet.
Post a Comment