Most recent public comments by Khrystyna Melnyk https://nowcomment.com/users/12968 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=339950 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=339950 I would have liked more technical reviews rather than just emotional ones. Sat, 16 May 2015 00:13:48 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=339949 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=339949 If I have a phone that texts, but I know that when I am crossing the street, I need to be careful so I don't text and I act responsibly, but a driver doesn't do this and hits me because he was texting, how should this crime be seen. In my opinion, this should be seen as manslaughter if the person dies because this was a preventable accident that was caused by the person who was distracted. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:47:05 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=339948 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=339948 They kept talking about people killing others because they were texting and distracted. But I don't know if I ever could forgive something like that because that is something one can control. You can control whether or not to look at your phone. You aren't forced to do it. Sat, 16 May 2015 00:06:05 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=339947 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=339947 When you are driving, texting and playing with the radio distract you from the road, but what about pressing the button to answer the Bluetooth call? That also takes your attention away, if only for a moment. Sat, 16 May 2015 00:03:01 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=339946 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=339946 Fri, 15 May 2015 23:59:01 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=339945 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=339945 It shows shattered glass on the sidewalk and a doll that is dirty and run over. The words read "she was looking when she crossed the street. The driver wasn't. Keep alert behind the wheel." It doesn't show anything too bloody or violent, but the viewers know what this ad is referring to. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:47:05 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=339944 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=339944 With a film like this, I think it is best to include some of what was spoken by the people in the documentary so that if the viewer hasn't seen the documentary, they would at least be able to get some sort of idea. Fri, 15 May 2015 23:53:28 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=339943 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30609?scroll_to=339943 I agree that the writer picked a strong moment from the film and used it to his best advantage. However, was this professional? The documentary is very emotional and I do understand that is one of the things the writer wanted to convey, but I didn't like the manner in which he did it. Fri, 15 May 2015 23:49:37 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338921 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338921 Although I believe that statistics can be manipulated, not including any statistics in the documentary would greatly undermine the credibility of the filmmaker. The viewer would then be able to argue that this is just one case and that it is rare and doesn't happen everywhere so why should we listen to Spurlock? Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:47:03 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338919 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338919 In the words of one of the nutritionist, fast food, does not have to be a trashy as it is today. The reason for this kind of negativity towards fast food is that the companies are not willing to spend more money to make it a little healthier and would rather just add preservatives and hormones to make the food last longer and generate a higher profit. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:47:04 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338918 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338918 Spurlock takes the cameras with him through most of his day. The viewer sees the negative affects of the fast food on his body, his sex life, and his daily routines. This becomes a chapter in his autobiography because he decided to do this experiment as a perfectly healthy individual and now has gained about 30 pounds, 65 points in cholesterol, and has damaged his kidney, heart, and other organs. The next step for him would be to start eating healthy again, get more exercise, and take vitamins to combat the damage. However, as we heard from his doctors, some of this damage may be irreversible. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:47:04 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338917 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338917 Statistics are not always credible. If you poll people walking into McDonald's every evening, you would run into bias from the people who are there for the first time in months versus the people who go there every day. You need to also look at the fact that many people would lie when it comes to surveys and wouldn't admit to the actual number of times they eat fast food since we all know it is bad for us. Fri, 08 May 2015 01:41:20 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338916 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338916 Ebert pulled statistics from the film to make his review seem more factual than it actually was. In the end, he ended up being a spokesperson for this film rather than a critic. Even when he did bring up arguments that others had with the documentary, he always downplayed them and used phrases like "this is both true and not true" to show two sides of the debate. But when it came to praising the film, it seemed as though he felt this documentary was the greatest discovery and would change the way everyone looks at fast food. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:47:04 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338915 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338915 Just think about Kirstie Alley, who was a spokesperson for Jenny Craig, then gained back all the weight she lost and lost her position, then lost the weight again and gained her roles as spokeswoman back again. If you do not change your lifestyle and only follow the latest fad to lose some extra pounds, you will gain back everything you worked so hard to lose if not more weight. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:47:03 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338914 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338914 However, no amount of diet can be helpful without the exercise to support it. In order to respect your body, as you mention, you need to also include the exercise. As we saw in the documentary, the children in the schools were not only being fed unhealthy foods, they were also not getting the right education about the foods nor the right amount of exercise recommended, which is at least 30 minutes every day. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:47:03 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338913 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338913 As the documentary showed, just because you choose the salad, it doesn't mean that it is that much healthier. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:47:03 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338911 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338911 The people ordering these fries will take one look at the sad paper sac that contains maybe 30 fries and will automatically want to get at least the medium, which is a visually appealing cardboard box that holds much more french fries. Fri, 08 May 2015 01:19:10 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338910 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338910 Even Morgan himself said that he craved fast food, more and more with the passing days. The nutritionist himself said, there is no need for fast food to be so bad for you. Fast food can be nutritious, but without adding the hormones and additives, the cost of making these foods, would be pricier for the company. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:47:03 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338909 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338909 If they did, they would see that one appetizer is more than enough calories for an entire meal. The commercial calls for two appetizers and an entree, as well as unlimited soup, salad, and breadsticks. Now that is a meal that could feed an entire sports team. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:47:03 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338908 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338908 The commercials for these places show that it is a much healthier place than fast food. The salads look fresher in the commercials, they are unseasoned and without dressing, the bread sticks have grains and are not the plain, bleached white bread you get when you order them. The description of the food itself, begs the question, "look how healthy this is, why wouldn't you get it." Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:47:03 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338907 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338907 We all know that McDonald's is bad for you, but we go there anyway. Even Spurlock, who got sick after a day or two of the food, later on became addicted to the food and his mood would soar after eating a meal from McDonald's. We need to keep in mind that McDonald's is cheaper than going to a restaurant or buying something healthier. The lower class is especially susceptible to this and they might be forced to eat the fast food just because it is the cheaper food source. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:47:03 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338906 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338906 I think that this documentary proved the point for the need of reforming the way we look at food in this country. I thought it was interesting that everyone in the film, even the professionals, agree that not enough is being done to protect the children and teach them about what they are putting into their bodies. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:47:03 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338905 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30608?scroll_to=338905 When watching this documentary, I thought back to the many times I had eaten at McDonald's. However, I have never eaten daily three-times there. Spurlock proves how bad it is, but the man in the documentary who ate 19,000 Big Macs, didn't look fat nor sick and he might now be affected this much by the meals. I think the greater point that should have been focused on, was the school lunches and the lack of exercise. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:47:02 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30607?scroll_to=338902 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30607?scroll_to=338902 The definition for charlatan is "a person falsely claiming to have a special knowledge or skill; a fraud." Therefore, Welles is admitting he is a liar and therefore, he cannot be accountable for anything he says later on because we are supposed to assume he might be lying. However, by saying he is a charlatan, it makes us believe that Welles can look critically at himself and admit the truth about his own personality and character. Therefore, couldn't the idea he is trying to show, be just as candid as his criticism of himself. Fri, 08 May 2015 00:36:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337193 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337193 I think that with this argument, it would be hard for Riefenstahl to deny this interpretation. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:59 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337191 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337191 The plurality of promised land shows that everyone has a wanting for a different promised land and therefore, there will also be different means in achieving this promised land. The film's title is another example of Sontag as a dialectician because again, she incorporates both arguments even in her title. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:59 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337190 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337190 Even the names, Allies and Axis, show a clear winner and a clear loser. This can be seen especially with Listen to Britain because it shows how the people of Britain are "peaceful and only defending themselves". With Promised Lands, it becomes much harder to establish the definite roles of who was right and who was wrong. As Yoram Kaniuk said, "They were right and we were right." Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:59 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337188 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337188 This film is dialectical because it shows the two sides of the argument being made. However, it does not include the opinions and voices of the Palestinians. By focusing so much on ordinary Israelis and not including ordinary Palestinians, it makes the viewer generalize what an ordinary Palestinian thinks and what an ordinary Israeli thinks. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:59 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337186 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337186 However, what this does it "show rather than tell". Instead of making her argument with the use of people's words, she makes it with the use of footage. This documentary is more modern so there are more clear ways for Sontag to make her argument. She can simply show the burnt bodies and the man reading from the book, and we already know how to feel about what is happening and how Sontag feels. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:59 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337184 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337184 Sontag, on the other hand, wants the viewer to know that she understands there are different interpretations of this situation that it happening. To call a film like this a documentary would mean that Sontag has all the answers on how to proceed with the situation and her truth and interpretation are the only ones that are correct and accurate. By calling it a lamentation, which I feel is the best word she could have used, she allows more room for the viewers own interpretation. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:59 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337179 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30606?scroll_to=337179 Lim is trying to show that Sontag is a veteran of the film industry because she is a film buff, film critic, and film maker. He is trying to explain the circumstances under which the films were made and the locations to show Sontag as a well-rounded individual and that her documentaries deserve to be watched. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:58 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30602?scroll_to=321827 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30602?scroll_to=321827 Uniformity almost implies no differences or wavering from the common goal. Unity to me is coming together and being stoic in a common cause, but not being forced. We unite to become a stronger force for achieving our goals. If the goals change or we do not agree with it, we can break the unity and go away from the group. On the other hand, if we have uniformity, there is no room for disagreement: one opinion that is given to you and you have to accept it. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:37 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30602?scroll_to=321826 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30602?scroll_to=321826 It is interesting that the comparison between something evil and dictatorial and a filmmaker can be made in the first place, but it is arguable that both of them had the same goal. The Axis powers wanted their countries to be the "best darn" countries ever and Capra wanted to create the "best darn documentary films ever". However, what Capra truly did was create a documentary film that unified the American people, as the reviewer argues, for the first and last time. By showing how evil the Axis powers cruelty in his blunt way, Capra got the support of the American people for the war. By showing that the British were unprepared, Capra proves to the American people that they are needed because the other top power at the time couldn't be entrusted with "saving" the Allies, America needed to step in. Also, as the reviewer mentioned, Stalin and Chiang Kai-shek were made to be heroes because Capra knew that the Americans needed to come in on the Allies side so you cannot really show the cruelties of Stalin and gain support for his side. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:37 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30602?scroll_to=321825 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30602?scroll_to=321825 Riefenstahl's Triumph of the Will shows how one person can take power and make thousands of people support him. Capra showed the efficiency of the people to grab power and put it towards what they feel is best for the people, rather than a specific person. As we had discussed in class last week, Triumph of the Will shows a leader that would not be able to come into power in America because we never view ourselves as subjects. It goes back to the debate of a democracy rather than a dictatorship. Because of this, when Capra borrowed from Riefenstahl, it seemed as though it was to poke holes in the argument rather than encourage it. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:37 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30240?scroll_to=314054 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30240?scroll_to=314054 However, if we agree with the quote "the ends justify the means, then we should be okay with how the seal hunt was structured and controlled and just accept that in the end, a seal was caught. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:16 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30240?scroll_to=314052 https://nowcomment.com/documents/30240?scroll_to=314052 this scene because not many people know what it means to hunt a seal. I, for one, did not know that a seal comes up every 20 minutes to breathe. Furthermore, when Ebert goes into great detail to discuss how the hunter hovers motionless over the hole for the 20 minutes and waits, it starts of his review with a sort of admiration for the Nanook. Many of us have not experienced this and it says a great deal about the patience and character of the Nanook just by describing their hunting habits. Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:46:16 -0500