3-4pages film analysis paper, about Animals and the Nonhuman

Description

The article in attachment must be incorporated in support of argument, please find more about the topic.Besides Grizzly Man, select one more film you would like to compare in terms of character portrayal. You don’t need to address both films equally, and rather than list all similarities and/or differences, focus on the one or two aspects (key character traits, his/her relationship to the narrative, ways in which the character is visually/acoustically presented) that are most unique to the film and relevant to your argument. Present your topic and method in your thesis paragraph. This should indicate the specific points of difference or similarity between the two films you would like to explore, along with how your supporting texts provide certain concepts, theoretical frameworks, or conceptual tools to help you with your comparison. For instance, you may want to compare two films of the same genre but of distinct time periods and address these in terms of genres of order and the ways in which masculinity and the law are connected in each case, or look a particular kind narrative structure seen in European art cinema and in a contemporary indie film, and what this might say about the situation of a female protagonist struggling for independence. Your argument must demonstrate an informed understanding of the lecture notes( I’ll provide later) and should thus showcase your ability to apply relevant vocabulary about the film’s style, narrative structure, historical context, etc. Avoid listing every possible difference or similarity. Rather, focus on a key aspect that reveals an interesting pattern or distinction. In other words, it is essential that the paper develop a precise argument that can be explored and supported in a few short pages. Precision and clarity with both the texts and examples is paramount. Whether you paraphrase or quote, include in-text citation, footnotes, or endnotes, you must cite accordingly. Be sure to also include a bibliography (if not providing complete footnotes or endnotes). You do not need to do any additional research—and, in fact, should not incorporate other sources for your interpretation of the academic text or film. A strong analysis demonstrates how particular formal elements convey meaning or position the spectator in relation to the characters, narrative, or conflict in a way that reflects a cultural or social perspective. A rich thesis also wrestles with some of the ambiguities or paradoxes of its representations or messages. For instance, several queer theorists have noted how Brokeback Mountain (Ang Lee, 2005) is ultimately conservative when it comes to its treatment of homosexuality, as it fails to imagine queer desire unconstrained by repression and punishment. Use the following questions as a starting point, and then pursue the one or two responses that promise to unveil some new or unexpected insights into how and why the film addresses such issues: Animals and the Nonhuman Animals and other non-human figures (monsters, aliens, and androids) are often presented in films as reflections of, or distinct from, human characters and characteristics. To what degree, and in what ways is the animal anthropomorphized or presented as unknowable or inhuman? What appears to be the intention of this depiction? How do human characters interact with the animal? What might this say about particular cultural perspectives with regard to pets, livestock, and/or wild animals? In what ways might the animal signify particular stereotypes or conceptions of class, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc. (i.e. a “junkyard dog” = white trash, masculine, violent; a lapdog = effete snobs, feminine, queer) and how might this contribute to how the audience is intended to read particular characters or the narrative?

1 attachmentsSlide 1 of 1attachment_1attachment_1

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Why
Look at Animals?
For Gilles A illaud
John Berger, “Why Look at Animals?”
in About Looking (New York: Pantheon, 1980), 1-28.
ISBN: 9780394739076
The 19th century, in western Europe and No rth America,
saw the beginning o f a process, today being completed b y
20th century corporate capitalism, by which every tradition
which has previously mediated between man and nature was
broken. Before this rupture, animals constituted the first
circle o f what surrounded man. Perhaps that already suggests too great a distance. They were with man at the centre
of his wo rld . Such centrality was o f course economic and
productive. Whatever the changes in productive means and
1
1
W H Y L OOK A T A NI M A L S ?
who, th ro u g h o u t h ist o ry, h a s re ma in e d f a milia r w i t h
animals and maintained the wisdom which accompanies that
familiarity: the middle and small peasant. Th e basis of this
wisdom is an acceptance of the dualism at the very origin of
the relation between man and animal. The rejection of this
dualism is probably an important factor in opening the way
to modern totalitarianism. Bu t I do not wish to go beyond
the limit s o f th a t unprofessional, unexpressed b u t f u n damental question asked of the zoo.
The zoo cannot b u t disappoint. Th e public purpose o f
zoos is to offer visitors the opportunity of looking at animals.
Yet nowhere in a zoo can a stranger encounter the look of an
animal. A t the most, the animal’s gaze flickers and passes
on. Th e y look sideways. Th e y look b lin d ly beyond. Th e y
scan mechanically. T h e y have been immu n ise d t o e n counter, because nothing can any more occupy a central place
in their attention.
Therein l i e s t h e u l t i ma t e consequence o f t h e i r
marginalisation. That look between animal and man, which
may have played a crucial role in the development of human
society, and with which, in any case, all men had always lived u n til less than a century ago, has been extinguished.
Looking at each animal, the unaccompanied zoo visitor is
alone. As for the crowds, they belong to a species which has
at last been isolated.
This historic loss, to which zoos are a monument, is now
irredeemable for the culture o f capitalism.
1977
26
USES OF P H O TO G R A P H Y

Purchase answer to see full
attachment

Tags:
film

animals

User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool’s honor code & terms of service.