Most recent public comments by Julissa Soriano https://nowcomment.com/users/12959 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=338036 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=338036 Besides the film being about the harmful effect of texting while driving, I think the film uncovers the impact that a car accident leaves on close family members and even the suspect. The film shows you how life could change in seconds. It also shows you that the victim has a good life before the accident. Another thing that arises in the film is the costs of the hospital bills not being met. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:47:05 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=338035 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=338035 I don't know when this film was created but I would have really liked it if they included alternatives to texting and driving. I know that pulling over or waiting until you reach a destination to text is obvious, but what siri voice text messages, FaceTime, or even the new gadget that lets you record your voice and send it? Are those affective alternatives, or are those dangerous too? Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:47:05 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=338034 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=338034 Knowing that all of these cell phone providers are in on this and want to help spread awareness to is really refreshing. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:47:05 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=338033 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=338033 This video not only made a huge impact on the community by receiving 1.9 million views, but it also left a lasting impression on me. So much so, that I emailed this video to a couple of people in my family that I know who text while driving. I am also a victim of texting while driving and I could honestly say that this film has changed my perspective and encourages me to never text and drive again. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:47:05 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=338032 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=338032 I really like how this video included both victims and the sufferer and both the people who survived and where killed. It allows the viewers to get perspectives from both sides which is really interesting because both sides mourn and are traumatized. I also think it was necessary to include when a victim did not want to be documented and for what reason. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:47:05 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=338030 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=338030 This is a great way to start off a review, by including somethings really emotionally driven as this paragraph. including that he does not even remember what he texted is a very strong start Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:47:05 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338025 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338025 I agree with you. Fact over opinion. Opinion is used to fluff a film and make it more relatable. It also creates a mental break because if the entire film was numbers numbers numbers none of us would continue watching, unless your into that kind of thing. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:47:02 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338024 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338024 I highly agree with Ebert and I think the way he ended the review of Super Size Me is very true. It is true that if you plan on "dieting" then you are setting yourself up for extreme failure. The key is living a better lifestyle, and balancing. It is about finding healthy alternatives that fulfill you and occasionally cheating. The key to healthy eating is not using food to please you but using food to respect your body and keep it at its healthiest stat. You truly are what you eat. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:47:03 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338023 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338023 If Spurlock's story was not a part of the film then there would be no direct evidence of what McDonald food really does to a persona body. His story references the direct harm McDonald food does. Is more show and less tell, which is a more effective way of speaking to a general audience. Especially when it comes to health. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:47:04 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338022 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338022 Spurlock makes this film personal by adding personal aspects to the film such as his wife and her perspective, his apartment building, his own apartment, and phone calls between him and his wife and the doctors. Also because this is a documentary that is being filmed in a diary style it gives is a much more personal feel. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:47:02 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338021 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338021 The reviewer speaks about his own life because he too is trying to gain a healthier lifestyle. The reviewer mentioned how her lost 86 pounds by going on a nutritional program. This film must hit close to home. The review must include statistics because that is the basis of this film. It is based on numbers revolved around the body, and food companies. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:47:02 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338014 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338014 Even though this documentary is based on the truth, I think that the aspect of having to get the meal super sized when it is asked is not as practical. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:47:02 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30607?scroll_to=338002 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30607?scroll_to=338002 Welles is interesting in Irving because they share the same interests, which is trickery. Welles is documenting a film on trickery, and Irving wrote a documentary called "Fake" on De Hory in Ibiza. I think that the reviewer is not as enthusiastic about Irving as Welles because they are less important to him than Welles. This is clearly expressed as Canby refers to him as a small potato. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:47:00 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30607?scroll_to=338001 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30607?scroll_to=338001 F for Fake by Welles is about deceit and how deceit was actually accepted in the 20th century. The movie uncovers how two extremely famous men became famous for being scammers. This film is overall about the art form of deception in real life and in film. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:47:00 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30607?scroll_to=338000 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30607?scroll_to=338000 To piggy back on the comment I just wrote I want to add that obviously the movie is a real one about fake people and actors. But what I think he really means by "and is F for Fake not a real movie" is is Welles actually being real or fake? Is he truly being himself, or is he just acting? I like how the Canby lets you think on your own terms and doesn't impose his own opinion here. Wed, 29 Apr 2015 03:26:43 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30607?scroll_to=337999 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30607?scroll_to=337999 I think the reviewer is capturing the trickery of Welles's film and including it in the review. He himself might not even know if the film is a set up or if it is real. Or maybe he does know and wants us to figure it out for ourselves. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:47:00 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30607?scroll_to=337998 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30607?scroll_to=337998 The first four paragraphs tell us the Welles is planned, fixed, meditated, masterly, and a deceiver perhaps. We know by the first four paragraphs that Welles's scenes are obviously staged and so is the narration. Canby imposes that it is sometimes fun to be fooled and know that you are being fooled. This suggests that it could sometimes be less fun to know that you are fooled. So all in all the mysteriousness of Welles's film adds excitement and also evokes questioning. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:59 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30607?scroll_to=337996 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30607?scroll_to=337996 I personally think this documentary is just as fake as the people in it. So when Vincent Canby says Welles is accountable for everything, I think what he means is that he has to choose one side or another and stick with it. Meaning if he is a fake and the people in the film are fakes he can't go ahead and confess all of it because then there will be no mystery and he will be held accountable for nothing. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:59 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337372 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337372 So we know that Sontag was a witness to horrors like tanks and corpses, and I think this is what makes this such an incredible film. Its raw and vulnerable. She risked her own life to capture the desert combat. I really like how Lim included her quote "Anything about any war that does not show the appalling concreteness of destruction and death is a dangerous lie. " This reassures us that she was willing to pay the cost of risking her life to get to the truth. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:59 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337370 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337370 This means that as a film maker Sontag is skilled at discussion, debate, dialogue, logical argument, or reasoning. The film is a discussion about Palestinian rights and culture in Israel. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:59 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337369 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337369 The lack of narration allows the viewer to think for themselves. It also allowed Sontag to really be creative with the audio sounds, which seemed to evoke an emotional response from viewers. A narration would definitely make the film seem more documentary, and we know from this review that Sontag was clearly avoiding the documentary style of film. With a narration is would be harder to keep a viewers attention throughout the entire movie. However, without narration a viewer can really absorb the images and the interviews. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:59 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337367 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337367 Sontag would resist the term documentary because it seemed too cookie cutter. In other words it restricted the real essence of her films. Documentary films are about documentations of events or people, whereas this film is more creative, and expressive. Especially with the use of audio, and imagery. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:59 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337365 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337365 I also thing Lim depicts her as a hard worker. For example when he says that she was a film buff until death, and that she made movies in between novels, plays, and essays. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:59 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337364 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337364 The first three paragraphs of the review written by Dennis Lim mentions Sontag's accomplishments in her film career. It then begins to speak about her independence as a film maker. Lim makes it seem like Sontag's work was good yet unaccessible. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:59 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30605?scroll_to=337279 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30605?scroll_to=337279 I think he is trying to let the viewer know that the film is fabricated. Theater evokes some kind of emotion and I think with the use of each character, their tone of voice, and what dialogue, thats's what were getting in Point of Order. Entertainment with a mixture of politics. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:47:06 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30605?scroll_to=337276 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30605?scroll_to=337276 Supporting the claims of communist infiltration would work against his opinion on McCarthy, which he seems to be in favor of. I think he should have added the claims because this is a review which includes his opinion in a subtle way. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:47:06 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30605?scroll_to=337274 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30605?scroll_to=337274 Kenneth Starr is mentioned because he too was attacked for "having secret." The only variation is that McCarthy was politically accountable and Starr was not. Starr is mentioned because it is similar to what McCarthy experienced in a sense that they were both accused on a highly controversial level. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:47:06 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25280?scroll_to=331055 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25280?scroll_to=331055 Likely is less passive than perhaps. Due to the pattern of her lifestyle in the story and the reoccurring depressing moments in Mildred's life, Likely is more fitting. Likely is used to express a pattern of occurrence, specifically in Mildred's behavior. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:52 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25280?scroll_to=331048 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25280?scroll_to=331048 This is one of the moments in your story where I could vividly imagine a little girl sitting on an interviewers lap with a coconut in one hand and a hammer in the other. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:52 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25280?scroll_to=331041 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25280?scroll_to=331041 Do you ever question your wife when she edits your work. Let me restate that. Do you guys ever bicker over what should and should not be included? Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:52 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25280?scroll_to=331038 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25280?scroll_to=331038 I am really impressed with your writing Professor! You are talented. So being that the story is based on a real person, it is okay to add things into the story that are completely made up? I know that is kind of a dumb question, but isn't that a fabrication issue, or can't people get into trouble for adding things that are not true. Maybe I am comparing writing to reporting in a literal sense. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:52 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25280?scroll_to=331029 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25280?scroll_to=331029 Lets keep in mind that everything is probably made up about the four year old girl. Fri, 27 Mar 2015 19:16:07 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30604?scroll_to=330996 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30604?scroll_to=330996 Building off of what another classmate has already said, it is sort of considered as local news. While people of Plymouth can relate and understand what happened in their hometown, there is only one angle here. None of this film speaks from a perspective of someone outside of the area, which makes it very one sided. This is probably why people were so bored with the film. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:51 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30604?scroll_to=330993 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30604?scroll_to=330993 The reason why the film is considered insufficiently commercial is because it only comes from the Plymouth standpoint. How will people in other countries be able to identify with this film? Yes other countries have experienced triumph and retaliation but it does not speak to a generation of people, it only speaks to Plymouth. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:51 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30604?scroll_to=330991 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30604?scroll_to=330991 I will state the obvious first. The march in The Way We Live are a group of all woman, whereas in Triumph of the Will it is a group of all men. This may not seem like a big deal, but women marching is a form of expression in this film and is not something you see often in films during this time. In Triumph of the will the march was masculine, powerful, and symbolized hierarchy and strength. In The Way We Live, the march was a protest, which is a huge difference. In Triumph of the Will the march was mandated, in this film it is a choice. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:51 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30604?scroll_to=330989 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30604?scroll_to=330989 It is 2015 and the film is still boring. I get it, it is supposed to be the conquerable "this is where we were, and here is where we are now" type of film, but honestly who can sit for an hour and four minutes to watch this? It is not a shock to me that in Plymouth the film broke all box-office records. If there were three thousand people taking part of the film, of course they are going to head to the theater to see themselves on the big screen, or to watch the turnout of the film. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:51 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30604?scroll_to=330988 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30604?scroll_to=330988 It is very clear that her own views were imposed. For example during the scene when the young man shows up to an all womans meeting to find out if "plans are remote or not" and the man walks into the room and says "I'm interested in woman." This scene rubs me the wrong way. I mean of course a group of working woman would admit to enjoying their new living arrangement. (No brainer) Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:52 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30604?scroll_to=330986 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30604?scroll_to=330986 The review states in the forth paragraph that "Craigie didn't want to impose her own opinion on the film. She saw herself as an interpreter of the ideas." However, in the last paragraph is states that Craigie refused to compromise her feminist and political ideas." I think that the film does impose he own opinion in a sense where she sets up her sequences. The film is almost a cry out for sympathy. Her views might be expressed through the people of Plymouth in a subtle way. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:52 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25283?scroll_to=325728 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25283?scroll_to=325728 I would not necessarily say the entire journal entry has a positive tone. I think the beginning is uplifting, the way you describe the difference between Americans and British. I would not say the tone is cheerful or positive, it seems to be more like eager. Towards the end of the entry you become anxious or worried, especially during the catalog number situation at the front desk, or when you used a pen instead of a pencil. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:44 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25283?scroll_to=325727 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25283?scroll_to=325727 I think the beauty of this journal entry is that although it was edited, it does not seem like it was because of the way it was written. I think what Vony meant by "unpolished" is it is not arranged to accommodate the reader, rather it is genuine and calls things how it sees it with no fluff. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:44 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25283?scroll_to=325726 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25283?scroll_to=325726 A diary suggest "come into my world and get a glimpse of my life, or a moment that I want to share with you." London Diary includes your thoughts, and do not necessarily have to be shared with anyone but yourself. A memoir and autobiography has a more narrative feel. In my opinion autobiographies are and memoirs have different mechanics. For example rising action, falling action, and climax. A diary does not have to have any of those aspects. Anything goes. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:44 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25283?scroll_to=321663 https://nowcomment.com/documents/25283?scroll_to=321663 The language is reflective, it's like your talking to the reader and yourself at the same time. It especially sounds like a diary when you say things like "NOOOOOO!" or "I hold my tongue" or even at the very end when you say "go figure." Also including the time makes it really feel like a diary. You also almost always start off each paragraph with your location which makes it a diary too. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:44 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30602?scroll_to=321662 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30602?scroll_to=321662 Capra used narration in his film, whereas, Riefenstahl did not include narration in Triumph of the Will but included voice overs of speeches. I think Capra revisited a lot of techniques that Riefenstahl used such as shots from a plane overseeing the ground, a shot of an eagle statue which was also a symbol of power in Riefenstahl film, and also shots of actual events occurring in both still and moving shots. Capra also shot sequences where he would go entirely around an object or person like Riefenstahl did. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:34 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30602?scroll_to=321661 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30602?scroll_to=321661 I agree with you on the fact that viewers shoudl decide what course of action they want to take while watching history film. However, lets imagine what is was like to watch films during World War II, these poor people probably where so helpless and scared that theater seemed to be the only truth for them. Fri, 06 Mar 2015 11:06:04 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30602?scroll_to=321660 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30602?scroll_to=321660 Protofascism is a political movement or program tending toward an organized society where the government is ruled by dictatorship and where people are not allowed to disagree with the government. Collectivism on the other hand is a political or economic system where government owns businesses,lands, and companies. Capra can be both a protofascism and a collectivist because as a film maker he is part of an organized dictatorship society that controls the people through his film, and he could also be receiving help producing the film from a political cooperation or affiliate. The following sentence says "but war and talent transcend consistently," and that seems to is the case with Capra. Society was '"movie mad" and they believed whatever they saw on theater which made room for Capra to be both a protofascist and a collectivist. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:34 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=319896 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=319896 What he is saying here is that some time or another almost all of these men have felt alone, and view the water as a place of serenity. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:37 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=319895 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=319895 There would be no story telling if Ishmael killed himself, obviously. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:36 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=319893 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=319893 Ishmael is the first person narrator. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:32 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=319892 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30622?scroll_to=319892 Ishmael need to go to sea because he seems to be sick of himself and/or society. He sounds like he is really bored with himself and prefers to die, by the way that he mentions coffin warehouses and funerals. The sea is is escape plan from society where all there is is him and nature. Fri, 27 Feb 2015 05:37:14 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30601?scroll_to=319889 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30601?scroll_to=319889 The power of the media allowed Leni Riefenstahi to go from a film star to a filmmaker. The media is powerful and allows viewers to become present in a world that is not tangible. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:31 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30601?scroll_to=319887 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30601?scroll_to=319887 This sounds a lot like Fidel Castro being "transubstantiated" in Cuba. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:31 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30601?scroll_to=319884 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30601?scroll_to=319884 The Pavlovian response is exemplified throughout the entirety of this film. Hitler raises his hand, everyone else raises their hand. Hitler speaks in front of the crowd, and the crowd screeches back. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:31 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30601?scroll_to=319872 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30601?scroll_to=319872 It gives me a better understanding of where she came from. She started out starring in films. So I am assuming that her passion for film starting during that time. Also the fact that she is a woman is interesting, especially since literally every scene in this film is overruled by men. Adding beautiful, strong, and self-confident seems to match her role as a filmmaker in Triumph of the Will. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:31 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=315685 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=315685 I must say after reading toolbox by Nichols it reminds me of all the passive and adverb filled writing that he says erks him. I feel like a moderate or even high level reader would have a hard time understanding what the author is conveying. This piece is way too poetic in my opinion. Sat, 21 Mar 2015 11:44:56 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=315683 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30619?scroll_to=315683 The title gave me the impression the writing would be about a man who is traveling to some place, or maybe a romance of a different kind, meaning not romance of nature and scenenaries. Fri, 13 Feb 2015 06:11:20 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30600?scroll_to=315040 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30600?scroll_to=315040 The camera is a machine much similar to other machines like binoculars or telescopes. They both have are a lens, tripods, lens adjustments, power buttons, and USB ports. A camera differs from other machinery because it is one of the few machines that can capture visual ongoing action. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:21 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30600?scroll_to=315035 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30600?scroll_to=315035 After the frames are shot you conceptualize them and format them in the sequence that most fitting, to deliver the message the producer is trying to convey. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:21 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30600?scroll_to=314999 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30600?scroll_to=314999 A scene allows viewers to rest their eyes a bit more, whereas this film filled with shots does not allow the audience any visual break. This makes he film give off a more frantic vibe. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:21 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=314037 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=314037 I strongly agree with King's when he says "the most valuable lessons of all are the ones you teach yourself." Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:19 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=314036 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=314036 I feel like television is a total waste of time, and although I don't have my face plastered to a book every hour of everyday, I get where he is coming from. What he is suggesting is that television cannot possibly promote imagination. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:18 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=314035 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30612?scroll_to=314035 I am learning how to remove the unnecessary. Writing adverbs for me felt like I was sprucing up an article or story in other classes and projects, but in reality it can add ambiguity. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:18 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30240?scroll_to=314033 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30240?scroll_to=314033 The reason I say that is because he argued that you cannot stage a walrus being capture. He also credited his work by mentioning the fact that Flaherty only had one camera, no lights, and was in the blistering cold and still managed to make a knock out film. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:16 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30240?scroll_to=314031 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30240?scroll_to=314031 You cannot start the review off with something that would less likely grasp the readers example. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:46:16 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30240?scroll_to=313942 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30240?scroll_to=313942 Flaherty is presenting the biography of Nanook in a narrative style. He adds really interesting facts, for example, when he mentioned that seals form funnel-like holes to breath within twenty minute intervals and when he shows Nanook detecting these holes for hunting. The narration seems almost poetic in my opinion. In this film, the biographical mode is the best way to the story because it captures the most details. A biographical mode allows Flaherty to capture raw footage it also allows the viewer to form a deep connection with Nanook, his family, and even the dogs. This to me is fascinating! Details like Nanook licking the knife in order to cut the snow for his igloo, or when how it takes just one hour to complete an igloo is something we only get to see because the film is a biography. Fri, 06 Feb 2015 11:33:55 +0800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30240?scroll_to=313940 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30240?scroll_to=313940 Fri, 06 Feb 2015 09:32:42 +0800