This is a considered and focused review, in which you look critically at a limited range of aspects in the film - and this is good; you attempt to say 'more' about 'less' - and often students faced with the new challenge of academic writing + critical thinking sometimes fall into the trap of spreading their investigation of a subject too thinly - which always has the effect of making the discussion too general. Just a bit of advice re. using sources for which you can find no author/and or date. A general rule of thumb (but not a hard and fast one) is that a reputable published source WILL have a named author and a publishing date. Sources without these, may be interesting, but can they be said to be reputable/credible/reliable evidence. Imagine that you're calling a star witness to testify, but you don't know their name or anything about them. You would be leaving yourself vulnerable. I suggest that, as you read around and research your subject prior to writing your reviews that you always keep your eye out for reputable published sources and perhaps avoid those that are just 'floating' around - like snatches of conversation in the pub. Sometimes you might WANT to use sources for which there is no date or author - because that is the point of using that evidence in your argument - but generally, keep to sources with a reliable backstory.
Well done for getting this review published so immediately after the screening; really, it's the only way to go... :D
Thanks for the feedback, I should have spent more time on my research prior to writing the review, I'll keep this in mind for future reviews...might make the writing A LOT more easier when I get to it :)
and you should also google search 'concept art/Avatar/Pandora - because many of those images will encourage a more filmic 'larger-than-life approach to depicting a largely organic world.
Hey Akinbiyi :)
ReplyDeleteThis is a considered and focused review, in which you look critically at a limited range of aspects in the film - and this is good; you attempt to say 'more' about 'less' - and often students faced with the new challenge of academic writing + critical thinking sometimes fall into the trap of spreading their investigation of a subject too thinly - which always has the effect of making the discussion too general. Just a bit of advice re. using sources for which you can find no author/and or date. A general rule of thumb (but not a hard and fast one) is that a reputable published source WILL have a named author and a publishing date. Sources without these, may be interesting, but can they be said to be reputable/credible/reliable evidence. Imagine that you're calling a star witness to testify, but you don't know their name or anything about them. You would be leaving yourself vulnerable. I suggest that, as you read around and research your subject prior to writing your reviews that you always keep your eye out for reputable published sources and perhaps avoid those that are just 'floating' around - like snatches of conversation in the pub. Sometimes you might WANT to use sources for which there is no date or author - because that is the point of using that evidence in your argument - but generally, keep to sources with a reliable backstory.
Well done for getting this review published so immediately after the screening; really, it's the only way to go... :D
Thanks for the feedback, I should have spent more time on my research prior to writing the review, I'll keep this in mind for future reviews...might make the writing A LOT more easier when I get to it :)
ReplyDeletesaw this - thought of you!
ReplyDeletehttp://spungella.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/tarzan-3d-teaser.html
and you should also google search 'concept art/Avatar/Pandora - because many of those images will encourage a more filmic 'larger-than-life approach to depicting a largely organic world.
Thank you! I was just looking at some of the Avatar concept stuff, and it really does have a lot of the stuff you spoke about today
ReplyDelete