A blog for students to engage, discuss, and learn.
Monday, September 10, 2012
Discussion Prompt #3
What do you think might be similar about analyzing a film instead of a written text? What do you think might be different? Use an example from An Education to help illustrate your response.
Similar to analyzing a film, I believe, would be very much like analyzing fiction - as there is a plot, characters, scenes, etc. Also, there could be a theme or thesis to the film as there is in some fiction. What I believe would be different is that the characters are not figments of our own imagination, where we can create them as we understand them; rather the actors portraying the characters are burdened with the task of doing convincing job of portrayal. Also, the scenes are very much like the characters in their need to be accurate and believable. An example of similarity from the movie is that there is a central plot, which seems to be importance of an education, especially for young women around that time and also around a central character, who we know as Jenny, a young schoolgirl, could be written fiction using that description if we were not already aware of the movie. However, in the portrayal of creating a convincing setting, one might notice is around the 1 hr 6 minute mark is the 1990's lighting in the background (this among a few other incongruencies is also mentioned on Wikipedia) but also knowing that they filmed it not in the place it was meant to represent quite convincingly would be something significant to only a film analysis.
I think that analyzing a film and a movie really are about the same, in terms of finding the deeper meaning. I personally think that analyzing a film would be much easier, as it is presented to you in a way that more than one sense can pick up. For example, in a movie, you hear what is going on, as well as see what is going on. With a book, you must read, and hope that you do not miss out on any details as you go along. As far as being different, I really think that reading allows the reader to use more of an interpretation to decide what all the characters look like, and what they are surrounded by. For example, when you watch the movie, you know the main characters like Jenny and David from the way they look. If this were a novel, however, you might not have the same idea of what all the characters looked like, and have to take in, for example, the character's actions to use as a form of characterization, and learn them in that manner. Overall, I think that watching a film takes the majority of the work away from analyzing anything, whereas reading a novel requires a little more thought power to really get down to.
In comparing a book and a screenplay, there are many similarities and differences. The similarities are: they both have a plot, characters, and scenes. The differences are: books let you use your imagination to create the characters and scenes while films portray those things for you. Many times, the book is much more descriptive than a film can be, because you invest more time into reading than you do a film. As in An Education, I can imagine reading the memoirs the film is based on and understanding more of Jenny’s emotions about her life than Carey Mulligan could portray as the character of Jenny in the film. At times I thought the film was a little slow, while at others it seemed to go too fast. Such as the part when Jenny argues with the Headmistress about whether anything is worth doing with or without a degree. I believe the emotions were portrayed well by the actors, but in reading the memoirs you would have more of a “connection” to Jenny and what she was feeling. -Ann Reagan
Around the 1 hour, 9 minute mark, film and literature both seamlessly intertwine: a student in Jenny’s English class is reciting lines from one of Shakespeare’s plays and reads aloud a stage direction. The teacher abruptly stops her, stating, “And when it says sing, you sing the line.” Like the characters in Shakespeare’s stories, actors carry out stage directions. There are always minute details in both literature (structure, form, style) and film (stage direction, acting, lighting) that help individualize and make the subject a piece of art. In both genres of media one must always pay attention to the deeper meaning; there are always characters, scenery, and plot that help thicken and deepen the overall message.
Obviously, there are major differences between the two. A movie, for example, relies on images to tell a story. The images include the actors, setting, props, lighting, etc. and rely heavily on a director’s vision. In order for a movie to be believable, every portrayal has to seem natural and realistic. In literature, however, people are able to use more of their own perceptions; they analyze the characters and find their own meanings and faces for characters and don’t rely on a director to do so. If someone watches a film they have to be physically looking or hearing for details to deduce a meaning, while in literature one has to evaluate the symbolism, word choice, etc. all the while imagining the scenes in their heads. While both are technically very visually stimulated, film doesn’t allow much room for imagination.
I don't really see much for similarities in analyzing movies and analyzing written text. The only real similarity I found was simply looking at the title, and what type of an education was being referred to. In this case the movie was more about a life education instead of an actual school education. Other wise, with movies, you look at whether it has a strong plot and quality acting, and critique that. Movies don't usually leave much to the imagination or analyzing. They pretty much spell that out for you. Written texts, on the other hand, require more thought, imagination and analyzation to find the deeper meanings, or hidden agenda of the writer. With this movie, the plot was simple but strong, the acting was good quality, and the story line clearly showed Jenny's life lesson she had to learn to bring her back down to the young girl she was instead of the adult she longed to seen as. She had to learn she was not nearly as smart as she thought she was. She may have had the knowledge of education from books, but she had to learn wisdom to go with it. This is the lesson she definitely learned with her relationship she had with David.
Books and films both tell stories. They have plots, characters, themes, setting, tone – all of the things that make up a good story. The key difference between a book and a film is in how they tell that story. The book is a medium that is expressed in a series of words while film is a medium that is expressed in a series of pictures. Books are more concerned with telling their reader what’s happening. The reader is expected to form a picture and understand what’s happening from these words. Films show the viewer what’s happening. The reader then puts these images together into a cohesive story. Films can also incorporate the sense of hearing in a way a book cannot. One scene in An Education (Scherfig, 2009) that illustrates the way a movie can use both images and sounds is the montage where Jenny and David are in Paris. Everything about these shots contributes to the overall atmosphere of the scene – the lighting, the clothing, the music, etc. In a book, you would get words describing certain parts of this scene, and the reader could then picture it for themselves. The two media are clearly very different in this regard, but just because they are different, that doesn’t mean that one is “better” than the other or that one requires less thought. A film can be just as difficult to analyze as a book, and in some cases, it could be more difficult.
Analyzing and reviewing written fiction to films require many of the same principles. One has to take into account setting, characters, plot, and structure to determine the theme and tone. Instead of examining structure, one examines lighting and sets to get the idea of a film's tone. Vibrant colors and chaotic sets could indicate a more light hearted film. More realistic and organized sets could create a serious tone and theme. Often times, novels and films need to be read more than once to catch everything. Analyzing how the characters act in both media reveals something about the theme. In fact, characters' actions in novels often tell more of the story than the presentation. Starting at 53:10--the "birthday scene"--David arrives with an armful of gifts. David effectively chases off Graham, a young man vying for Jenny's attention. She gets into an argument with her father and packs the gifts off to the living room. The audience may interpret her actions as ones of selfishness: they may not be wrong.
In a film, much like a fictional novel or short story, there must be a interesting plot, deep characters, and strong theme to create an entertaining and worthwhile watch or read. However, I feel that the similarites stop there. In analyzing a film we look at individual actors, the costumes and various sets, and overall production quality. In a fictional written text, all of the above mentioned are truly left to the reader's imagination with a little guidance by the author. In the case of "An Education", Jenny's appearance points to her being a very innocent and naive girl. Unless otherwise noted by the author, a reader could imagine Jenny as appearing as a much older looking girl and more than likely much less innocent looking.
I think finding similarities between analyzing written text and film would be relatively simple because while film is eventually produced to be seen in motion, the script was initially written to be read, just like a novel, poem, or more likely a drama. In fact, several movies, including An Education started as written text. Therefore, the similarities between analyzing film and written text would be with qualities the two shares, such as character development, setting, and dialogue. For example, the development between Jenny Mellor and David Goldman in An Education would be analyzed the same way as it would in the book or movie. However, the differences would lie in what a film is able to accomplish that written text can’t. The best instance I can think of this is the choices actors will make for their characters. Since this is up to the creativity of the actor, we are able to analyze not only the script or the characters themselves, but the choices the actors made in portraying them.
I believe analyzing a film and written text are very similar. Just as with analyzing any written text, watching/analyzing a film takes careful attention to small details. One must look for specific tones, themes, settings, character development, etc. You can analyze the same things in both, yet when analyzing a written text, there is room for more free interpretation and exploration in regards to the author's intentions with the text. A film can allow for some interpretation, but written texts do not always provide the same clear image to each reader. With films, the image is directly given to you, so audiences are essentially seeing the same thing. They may be able to interpret meanings differently, but the image will always be the same. For example, in The Education, David was shown as elegant, charming, and handsome for everyone to see. The entire audience could view him as this person. Yet if he was described in written text, I could very well see him as being deceitful from the beginning and not realize that he was meant to be charming at first, as he was in the film. Jenny's emotions were very visible in the film, but it was her facial expressions that showed us how she was feeling. A written version of her emotions would allow us to see deeper into Jenny's character.
I find that in comparing written texts to the film production there are both similarities and differences. The reasons that the two are so similar in comparison is because the film production of the text brings the characters to life before our eyes with the qualities and character traits we expected them to have by their descriptions in the texts. The plots and characters in the films are portrayed by their original descriptions and the film can be analyzed in the same way in this aspect. By knowing the character background and seeing the setting and plot developed as well, the audience can analyze more about the story’s meaning and relate it back to the actions of the characters. However, in analyzing the text, we see more inside the character’s minds and see their thought process along with their actions, when in the film we only see their actions and their dialogue being played out. In the film, An Education, the characters are developed through their actions with others and dialogue that reveal their true selves. This allows the audience to get to know them. For instance, Jenny in the beginning of the film is portrayed as a young and nervous school girl that blushes around a boy in her orchestra class. By the end of the movie and after the epiphany is presented we see that Jenny has matured into a young adult and been exposed to much more than before meeting David. We see this in the way she carries herself as a more rebellious, confident and driven young girl who falls in love, loses her dreams for college, gets hurt, and then decides that knowledge really is power. We see this more through her actions with others, her dialogue, her dress, and the way her character portrays herself in even the small things, like smoking cigarettes and talking back to her teachers. In the end we see her heart change where in the text we would see it more through her thoughts and descriptions throughout the scenes.
A similarity between analyzing a film and analyzing a text is that both a text and a film will have a plot, characters, setting, etc. Someone that analyzes both of them will also, obviously, form an opinion about the product as a whole. However, I believe that one cannot compare the two because they are two completely different forms of media. There are numerous differences. In a book, a reader creates an image in their mind about how THEY portray the characters and the story. That could be totally different from how something is portrayed in a film version of a novel. Another difference is that in films, you have actors that literally "bring the story to life". You have emotions, background music, physical actions, etc. An example from 'An Education' that stood out to me was around the 1:24:00 mark. Jenny is in her room while her father is talking to her through the door. It is a very emotional scene and she is hysterically crying. It would be one thing to read how she was feeling at that point in the memoir that the film is based on, but actually SEEING her break down really resonates with an audience and helps the viewer understand exactly how she is feeling.
Analyzing a film is similar to analyzing a written text because most of the time the film is based on a book, so the main character can still be going through similar events. When it’s not based on a book the film still has to be written out. This is to make sure there are concrete ideas to see if the film makes any sense. What I think is different about analyzing a film and a written text is that with the written text the reader has to use their imagination to see the so called charm of a certain character in the written text. Then with a film a human being with real emotions is bringing out the charm with mannerisms and facial expressions that a book cannot show or a person cannot even imagine a person doing. For example before I watched the movie, I read the Wikipedia article saying David was a charming guy all I thought was okay he is charming, but when I saw the movie it brought his charm to life: the way he carries himself with confidence, always up beat, the suave look with his hair, and how he speaks to certain people. -Christopher Catlett
The process of analyzing a film in comparison to analyzing written text, may be very similar. However, I have found that analyzing written text can be a much more tedious process. Written text will present you with a sentence like, “I loved that lemonade,” and reader's are expected to see that sentence as some life-altering epiphany that the speaker was experiencing. Often times, that is not the case for readers like me. I commonly make the mistake of reading something and thinking that it actually means what it says. I was the student in AP English that debated with the teacher about symbolism and whether or not it was something that people with large imaginations made up to torment English students. It is much easier for me to pick up on symbolism and deeper meanings when I watch films. I don't have to try to figure out if I'm viewing the film from the same perspective as the director because I am actually viewing their vision. For example, when I was viewing An Education, it was much easier for me to make mental note of themes I felt were repeating throughout the movie whether it was the repetition of particular words or different cues I picked up on from the characters. One of the themes that continuously presented itself was conventional education vs. non-conventional education. This theme played out in David and Jenny's relationship, as well as Jenny's relationship with her studies and her instructors. As Jenny spent time with David she began questioning the importance of her academic education leading to a battle between the path David felt Jenny should take and the path that Jenny's instructors felt would be more beneficial for her. Films are more open to interpretation and they are much less intimidating to analyze, than text.
When you analyze a written text or a film, you are basically looking at the same elements. How are the characters developed? Are the character traits plainly stated or does the audience slowly learn their character through observation? How does the plot unfold? Many of the literary devices you can find in a book can also be observed in a movie. For example, in the movie An Education, there was an example of irony when the David turns out to be a middle class thief instead a rich business man. Irony can be evident in nearly any story line. With a book, though, you can go through the text and pick out all of the literary devices better. Another thing I will say is that a book will almost always have more literary devices than a movie and the characters and plot will always be more intricate than those of a movie due to time and money restraints. However, there are advantages to a movie too. Obviously, the visual aspect helps to get ideas across much faster and clearer. In a book, a scene might require a whole page to describe, but in a movie it might only take a second or two to show it to the audience and have them understand. For this reason, it might be easy to gloss over the details, though, if one were analyzing a film. Another thing that movies have that books do not is a soundtrack. The soundtrack helps set the tone for a scene. Setting the tone in a written text can be much more difficult.
I think when analyzing a film and a written text you examine the language that is used, and determine if it effectively conveys a point. Both can incorporate literary devices of all sorts (i.e. metaphor), so you can also look for the meaning hidden in the language. The major difference between the two though is that film is a medium that actively invoves more of our senses. The reader in a story may think of certain music or picture a vividly described scene in their mind, but in film that work is done for you. In film you have to analyze the way not only the language effects you, but how the music and images do as well. For example the scene where Jenny and David are in Paris, there is a montage that shows the viewer that they are enjoying themselves while playing music in the background. In order to analyze this scene you have to analyze the visual and musical effects it has.
Analyzing films and text are similar in the fact that either way you are looking for a deeper meaning in a work of art. You are seeking out what the artist(s) intentions were with wither the film or the literature that you are analyzing. The interpretations differ in the mediums that each forms of art have to offer. With literature there are only words that we can analyze. In order to find out the intention of the author one must look at their word choice, sentence structure, diction and other things having to do with written word. However, with film we have many different mediums from which to work with. The sounds, set, costumes, dialogue and acting all contribute to what one can interpret. They affect each other as well as the story line, making the artists intention more clear. In An Education, there is a scene where David, Jenny and David's two friends go to dinner. All of these elements I listed before contribute to the way that we are supposed to interpret this scene as well as how one should interpret the lifestyle that David lives. During this scene there is a lot of chatter and a jazz singer insinuating that this is a popular club. Every one in the scene is lavishly dressed suggesting that they have a lot of money. Jenny is not lavishly dressed and seems quite fascinated by the whole crowd, which juxtaposes Jenny with these new people she has met.
When we analyze written text or films, we focus on the story and all it's literary components (symbolism, metaphors, foreshadowing, etc.). In written texts, however, we analyze to find a deeper meaning and we have more ways to interpretate what author is saying. In films, we analyze the film in a more technical sense (lighting, camera angles, acting, etc). This leaves little room for intrepretation. In each we use the analysis to critique the piece being presented to us. In "An Education", we see how the character is positioned and the different camera angles give the audience a certain impression about the different men that Jenny brings home and her father's reaction to them both. We cannot get the same effect if we were reading just the story behind it though. But in other literary works, we would not be able to gather the author's true meaning of the story if it were made into a movie, because we would not be able to focus on the literary devices being used and would have a preconceived impression of what the work should look like, based on the imagery given in written texts.
A fairly simple contrast I see between analyzing written works versus film is that in written media there are no pictures; typically anyway. How is this significant? Well, in a written work we tend to scour over the text looking for extra meaning, messages, or morals hidden inside of it. In contrast, in a film you, or at least I, tend to watch the movie while not necessarily taking everything in at once. What I mean by that is that movies actually have pictures presented to you, and there can be many more “hidden” layers of information inside a few frames than you may observe at first. While I suppose you could argue that a text is capable of having many “hidden” meanings inside a sentence, or even just a word or two, there are many thousands of frames per film, and from each of those frames or (sets of frames) you could extrapolate many, many things, even in the most mundane of film. To provide a counter-argument for that, again, there have been many members of academia who have slaved over and likely written entire books on only a few lines of poetry. I almost feel as if my argument hinges entirely on the phrase “a picture holds a thousand words”.
Similar to analyzing a film, I believe, would be very much like analyzing fiction - as there is a plot, characters, scenes, etc. Also, there could be a theme or thesis to the film as there is in some fiction. What I believe would be different is that the characters are not figments of our own imagination, where we can create them as we understand them; rather the actors portraying the characters are burdened with the task of doing convincing job of portrayal. Also, the scenes are very much like the characters in their need to be accurate and believable. An example of similarity from the movie is that there is a central plot, which seems to be importance of an education, especially for young women around that time and also around a central character, who we know as Jenny, a young schoolgirl, could be written fiction using that description if we were not already aware of the movie. However, in the portrayal of creating a convincing setting, one might notice is around the 1 hr 6 minute mark is the 1990's lighting in the background (this among a few other incongruencies is also mentioned on Wikipedia) but also knowing that they filmed it not in the place it was meant to represent quite convincingly would be something significant to only a film analysis.
ReplyDelete-- Leslie Fox
I think that analyzing a film and a movie really are about the same, in terms of finding the deeper meaning. I personally think that analyzing a film would be much easier, as it is presented to you in a way that more than one sense can pick up. For example, in a movie, you hear what is going on, as well as see what is going on. With a book, you must read, and hope that you do not miss out on any details as you go along. As far as being different, I really think that reading allows the reader to use more of an interpretation to decide what all the characters look like, and what they are surrounded by. For example, when you watch the movie, you know the main characters like Jenny and David from the way they look. If this were a novel, however, you might not have the same idea of what all the characters looked like, and have to take in, for example, the character's actions to use as a form of characterization, and learn them in that manner. Overall, I think that watching a film takes the majority of the work away from analyzing anything, whereas reading a novel requires a little more thought power to really get down to.
ReplyDelete--Jordan Cole
In comparing a book and a screenplay, there are many similarities and differences. The similarities are: they both have a plot, characters, and scenes. The differences are: books let you use your imagination to create the characters and scenes while films portray those things for you. Many times, the book is much more descriptive than a film can be, because you invest more time into reading than you do a film. As in An Education, I can imagine reading the memoirs the film is based on and understanding more of Jenny’s emotions about her life than Carey Mulligan could portray as the character of Jenny in the film. At times I thought the film was a little slow, while at others it seemed to go too fast. Such as the part when Jenny argues with the Headmistress about whether anything is worth doing with or without a degree. I believe the emotions were portrayed well by the actors, but in reading the memoirs you would have more of a “connection” to Jenny and what she was feeling.
ReplyDelete-Ann Reagan
Around the 1 hour, 9 minute mark, film and literature both seamlessly intertwine: a student in Jenny’s English class is reciting lines from one of Shakespeare’s plays and reads aloud a stage direction. The teacher abruptly stops her, stating, “And when it says sing, you sing the line.” Like the characters in Shakespeare’s stories, actors carry out stage directions. There are always minute details in both literature (structure, form, style) and film (stage direction, acting, lighting) that help individualize and make the subject a piece of art. In both genres of media one must always pay attention to the deeper meaning; there are always characters, scenery, and plot that help thicken and deepen the overall message.
ReplyDeleteObviously, there are major differences between the two. A movie, for example, relies on images to tell a story. The images include the actors, setting, props, lighting, etc. and rely heavily on a director’s vision. In order for a movie to be believable, every portrayal has to seem natural and realistic. In literature, however, people are able to use more of their own perceptions; they analyze the characters and find their own meanings and faces for characters and don’t rely on a director to do so. If someone watches a film they have to be physically looking or hearing for details to deduce a meaning, while in literature one has to evaluate the symbolism, word choice, etc. all the while imagining the scenes in their heads. While both are technically very visually stimulated, film doesn’t allow much room for imagination.
I don't really see much for similarities in analyzing movies and analyzing written text. The only real similarity I found was simply looking at the title, and what type of an education was being referred to. In this case the movie was more about a life education instead of an actual school education. Other wise, with movies, you look at whether it has a strong plot and quality acting, and critique that. Movies don't usually leave much to the imagination or analyzing. They pretty much spell that out for you. Written texts, on the other hand, require more thought, imagination and analyzation to find the deeper meanings, or hidden agenda of the writer. With this movie, the plot was simple but strong, the acting was good quality, and the story line clearly showed Jenny's life lesson she had to learn to bring her back down to the young girl she was instead of the adult she longed to seen as. She had to learn she was not nearly as smart as she thought she was. She may have had the knowledge of education from books, but she had to learn wisdom to go with it. This is the lesson she definitely learned with her relationship she had with David.
ReplyDeleteBooks and films both tell stories. They have plots, characters, themes, setting, tone – all of the things that make up a good story. The key difference between a book and a film is in how they tell that story. The book is a medium that is expressed in a series of words while film is a medium that is expressed in a series of pictures. Books are more concerned with telling their reader what’s happening. The reader is expected to form a picture and understand what’s happening from these words. Films show the viewer what’s happening. The reader then puts these images together into a cohesive story. Films can also incorporate the sense of hearing in a way a book cannot. One scene in An Education (Scherfig, 2009) that illustrates the way a movie can use both images and sounds is the montage where Jenny and David are in Paris. Everything about these shots contributes to the overall atmosphere of the scene – the lighting, the clothing, the music, etc. In a book, you would get words describing certain parts of this scene, and the reader could then picture it for themselves. The two media are clearly very different in this regard, but just because they are different, that doesn’t mean that one is “better” than the other or that one requires less thought. A film can be just as difficult to analyze as a book, and in some cases, it could be more difficult.
ReplyDeleteAnalyzing and reviewing written fiction to films require many of the same principles. One has to take into account setting, characters, plot, and structure to determine the theme and tone. Instead of examining structure, one examines lighting and sets to get the idea of a film's tone. Vibrant colors and chaotic sets could indicate a more light hearted film. More realistic and organized sets could create a serious tone and theme. Often times, novels and films need to be read more than once to catch everything. Analyzing how the characters act in both media reveals something about the theme. In fact, characters' actions in novels often tell more of the story than the presentation. Starting at 53:10--the "birthday scene"--David arrives with an armful of gifts. David effectively chases off Graham, a young man vying for Jenny's attention. She gets into an argument with her father and packs the gifts off to the living room. The audience may interpret her actions as ones of selfishness: they may not be wrong.
ReplyDelete-- Jacky Killian
In a film, much like a fictional novel or short story, there must be a interesting plot, deep characters, and strong theme to create an entertaining and worthwhile watch or read. However, I feel that the similarites stop there. In analyzing a film we look at individual actors, the costumes and various sets, and overall production quality. In a fictional written text, all of the above mentioned are truly left to the reader's imagination with a little guidance by the author. In the case of "An Education", Jenny's appearance points to her being a very innocent and naive girl. Unless otherwise noted by the author, a reader could imagine Jenny as appearing as a much older looking girl and more than likely much less innocent looking.
ReplyDeleteI think finding similarities between analyzing written text and film would be relatively simple because while film is eventually produced to be seen in motion, the script was initially written to be read, just like a novel, poem, or more likely a drama. In fact, several movies, including An Education started as written text. Therefore, the similarities between analyzing film and written text would be with qualities the two shares, such as character development, setting, and dialogue. For example, the development between Jenny Mellor and David Goldman in An Education would be analyzed the same way as it would in the book or movie. However, the differences would lie in what a film is able to accomplish that written text can’t. The best instance I can think of this is the choices actors will make for their characters. Since this is up to the creativity of the actor, we are able to analyze not only the script or the characters themselves, but the choices the actors made in portraying them.
ReplyDeleteI believe analyzing a film and written text are very similar. Just as with analyzing any written text, watching/analyzing a film takes careful attention to small details. One must look for specific tones, themes, settings, character development, etc. You can analyze the same things in both, yet when analyzing a written text, there is room for more free interpretation and exploration in regards to the author's intentions with the text. A film can allow for some interpretation, but written texts do not always provide the same clear image to each reader. With films, the image is directly given to you, so audiences are essentially seeing the same thing. They may be able to interpret meanings differently, but the image will always be the same. For example, in The Education, David was shown as elegant, charming, and handsome for everyone to see. The entire audience could view him as this person. Yet if he was described in written text, I could very well see him as being deceitful from the beginning and not realize that he was meant to be charming at first, as he was in the film. Jenny's emotions were very visible in the film, but it was her facial expressions that showed us how she was feeling. A written version of her emotions would allow us to see deeper into Jenny's character.
ReplyDeleteI find that in comparing written texts to the film production there are both similarities and differences. The reasons that the two are so similar in comparison is because the film production of the text brings the characters to life before our eyes with the qualities and character traits we expected them to have by their descriptions in the texts. The plots and characters in the films are portrayed by their original descriptions and the film can be analyzed in the same way in this aspect. By knowing the character background and seeing the setting and plot developed as well, the audience can analyze more about the story’s meaning and relate it back to the actions of the characters. However, in analyzing the text, we see more inside the character’s minds and see their thought process along with their actions, when in the film we only see their actions and their dialogue being played out. In the film, An Education, the characters are developed through their actions with others and dialogue that reveal their true selves. This allows the audience to get to know them. For instance, Jenny in the beginning of the film is portrayed as a young and nervous school girl that blushes around a boy in her orchestra class. By the end of the movie and after the epiphany is presented we see that Jenny has matured into a young adult and been exposed to much more than before meeting David. We see this in the way she carries herself as a more rebellious, confident and driven young girl who falls in love, loses her dreams for college, gets hurt, and then decides that knowledge really is power. We see this more through her actions with others, her dialogue, her dress, and the way her character portrays herself in even the small things, like smoking cigarettes and talking back to her teachers. In the end we see her heart change where in the text we would see it more through her thoughts and descriptions throughout the scenes.
ReplyDeleteA similarity between analyzing a film and analyzing a text is that both a text and a film will have a plot, characters, setting, etc. Someone that analyzes both of them will also, obviously, form an opinion about the product as a whole. However, I believe that one cannot compare the two because they are two completely different forms of media. There are numerous differences. In a book, a reader creates an image in their mind about how THEY portray the characters and the story. That could be totally different from how something is portrayed in a film version of a novel. Another difference is that in films, you have actors that literally "bring the story to life". You have emotions, background music, physical actions, etc. An example from 'An Education' that stood out to me was around the 1:24:00 mark. Jenny is in her room while her father is talking to her through the door. It is a very emotional scene and she is hysterically crying. It would be one thing to read how she was feeling at that point in the memoir that the film is based on, but actually SEEING her break down really resonates with an audience and helps the viewer understand exactly how she is feeling.
ReplyDeleteAnalyzing a film is similar to analyzing a written text because most of the time the film is based on a book, so the main character can still be going through similar events. When it’s not based on a book the film still has to be written out. This is to make sure there are concrete ideas to see if the film makes any sense. What I think is different about analyzing a film and a written text is that with the written text the reader has to use their imagination to see the so called charm of a certain character in the written text. Then with a film a human being with real emotions is bringing out the charm with mannerisms and facial expressions that a book cannot show or a person cannot even imagine a person doing. For example before I watched the movie, I read the Wikipedia article saying David was a charming guy all I thought was okay he is charming, but when I saw the movie it brought his charm to life: the way he carries himself with confidence, always up beat, the suave look with his hair, and how he speaks to certain people. -Christopher Catlett
ReplyDeleteThe process of analyzing a film in comparison to analyzing written text, may be very similar. However, I have found that analyzing written text can be a much more tedious process. Written text will present you with a sentence like, “I loved that lemonade,” and reader's are expected to see that sentence as some life-altering epiphany that the speaker was experiencing. Often times, that is not the case for readers like me. I commonly make the mistake of reading something and thinking that it actually means what it says. I was the student in AP English that debated with the teacher about symbolism and whether or not it was something that people with large imaginations made up to torment English students. It is much easier for me to pick up on symbolism and deeper meanings when I watch films. I don't have to try to figure out if I'm viewing the film from the same perspective as the director because I am actually viewing their vision. For example, when I was viewing An Education, it was much easier for me to make mental note of themes I felt were repeating throughout the movie whether it was the repetition of particular words or different cues I picked up on from the characters. One of the themes that continuously presented itself was conventional education vs. non-conventional education. This theme played out in David and Jenny's relationship, as well as Jenny's relationship with her studies and her instructors. As Jenny spent time with David she began questioning the importance of her academic education leading to a battle between the path David felt Jenny should take and the path that Jenny's instructors felt would be more beneficial for her. Films are more open to interpretation and they are much less intimidating to analyze, than text.
ReplyDeleteWhen you analyze a written text or a film, you are basically looking at the same elements. How are the characters developed? Are the character traits plainly stated or does the audience slowly learn their character through observation? How does the plot unfold? Many of the literary devices you can find in a book can also be observed in a movie. For example, in the movie An Education, there was an example of irony when the David turns out to be a middle class thief instead a rich business man. Irony can be evident in nearly any story line. With a book, though, you can go through the text and pick out all of the literary devices better. Another thing I will say is that a book will almost always have more literary devices than a movie and the characters and plot will always be more intricate than those of a movie due to time and money restraints. However, there are advantages to a movie too. Obviously, the visual aspect helps to get ideas across much faster and clearer. In a book, a scene might require a whole page to describe, but in a movie it might only take a second or two to show it to the audience and have them understand. For this reason, it might be easy to gloss over the details, though, if one were analyzing a film. Another thing that movies have that books do not is a soundtrack. The soundtrack helps set the tone for a scene. Setting the tone in a written text can be much more difficult.
ReplyDelete-Daniel Dutton
I think when analyzing a film and a written text you examine the language that is used, and determine if it effectively conveys a point. Both can incorporate literary devices of all sorts (i.e. metaphor), so you can also look for the meaning hidden in the language. The major difference between the two though is that film is a medium that actively invoves more of our senses. The reader in a story may think of certain music or picture a vividly described scene in their mind, but in film that work is done for you. In film you have to analyze the way not only the language effects you, but how the music and images do as well. For example the scene where Jenny and David are in Paris, there is a montage that shows the viewer that they are enjoying themselves while playing music in the background. In order to analyze this scene you have to analyze the visual and musical effects it has.
ReplyDelete-Zachary Ecton
Analyzing films and text are similar in the fact that either way you are looking for a deeper meaning in a work of art. You are seeking out what the artist(s) intentions were with wither the film or the literature that you are analyzing. The interpretations differ in the mediums that each forms of art have to offer. With literature there are only words that we can analyze. In order to find out the intention of the author one must look at their word choice, sentence structure, diction and other things having to do with written word. However, with film we have many different mediums from which to work with. The sounds, set, costumes, dialogue and acting all contribute to what one can interpret. They affect each other as well as the story line, making the artists intention more clear. In An Education, there is a scene where David, Jenny and David's two friends go to dinner. All of these elements I listed before contribute to the way that we are supposed to interpret this scene as well as how one should interpret the lifestyle that David lives. During this scene there is a lot of chatter and a jazz singer insinuating that this is a popular club. Every one in the scene is lavishly dressed suggesting that they have a lot of money. Jenny is not lavishly dressed and seems quite fascinated by the whole crowd, which juxtaposes Jenny with these new people she has met.
ReplyDeleteWhen we analyze written text or films, we focus on the story and all it's literary components (symbolism, metaphors, foreshadowing, etc.). In written texts, however, we analyze to find a deeper meaning and we have more ways to interpretate what author is saying. In films, we analyze the film in a more technical sense (lighting, camera angles, acting, etc). This leaves little room for intrepretation. In each we use the analysis to critique the piece being presented to us. In "An Education", we see how the character is positioned and the different camera angles give the audience a certain impression about the different men that Jenny brings home and her father's reaction to them both. We cannot get the same effect if we were reading just the story behind it though. But in other literary works, we would not be able to gather the author's true meaning of the story if it were made into a movie, because we would not be able to focus on the literary devices being used and would have a preconceived impression of what the work should look like, based on the imagery given in written texts.
ReplyDelete~Leta Summers
A fairly simple contrast I see between analyzing written works versus film is that in written media there are no pictures; typically anyway. How is this significant? Well, in a written work we tend to scour over the text looking for extra meaning, messages, or morals hidden inside of it. In contrast, in a film you, or at least I, tend to watch the movie while not necessarily taking everything in at once. What I mean by that is that movies actually have pictures presented to you, and there can be many more “hidden” layers of information inside a few frames than you may observe at first. While I suppose you could argue that a text is capable of having many “hidden” meanings inside a sentence, or even just a word or two, there are many thousands of frames per film, and from each of those frames or (sets of frames) you could extrapolate many, many things, even in the most mundane of film. To provide a counter-argument for that, again, there have been many members of academia who have slaved over and likely written entire books on only a few lines of poetry. I almost feel as if my argument hinges entirely on the phrase “a picture holds a thousand words”.
ReplyDelete