|
Dr Tim Barnard | History | NUS | Back to GEM2005/HY2243 |
GEM 2005/ HY2243
FILM AND HISTORY
Feedback on Project 1
DOUBLE TICK – Ali: “You Float like a Butterfly and Sting like a Bee!” (Grade 80)
Sharp, concise and to the point, you clearly articulate your impressions of the two films and clearly understood what the question required of you, and bring a whole new level of understanding of the films.
For example; you
addressed the concern that withholding some truths about Ali’s life need not be
detrimental to the film’s credibility.
TICK PLUS – Joe Frazier: good in the boxing ring but not “the Greatest” (Grade 70)
You answered the question well, but did not leave a “Knockout” impression.
You're starting to get it more, trying harder to look at this spectre called
"truth" and considering that no one genre may hold the monopoly on it.
TICK – Sonny Liston: Good but not memorable (Grade 60)
This just means that you submitted one of the many similar essays in class.
There was some attempt to get at this question of "what really is truth?" but it
was not argued well and still seemed focused on differences between the films.
But at least in suggesting that showing more of Ali’s life let us understand his
motivations better you make an argument as opposed to just suggesting that a
longer film somehow is more truthful.
TICK MINUS – George Foreman: “Lean Mean Fat Reducing Machine” version. (Grade 50)
A Film Report. You are just highlighting the differences of the two films. For example, Ali had a longer running time than When We Were Kings; Ali focused on his personal life, When We Were Kings did not. The point is how was that time in the film used and why is that significant. This is not a “Spot the Difference” activity class. Is a film really more likely to be truthful because someone’s friend is involved in the production? Couldn’t this just as likely lead to untruths as well?
General Comments
Answer the Question
Take a stand
Define your terms
For Example: Real, “Live” footage as opposed to “reel” Life actors etc.
Define “truthful” –historically accurate?
Just because Leon Gast won an Oscar for his documentary and Will Smith missing out on his (he was after all facing fellow Black nominee Denzel Washington who was “owed” an Oscar for “Hurricane” from the previous year other nominees: Russell Crowe, "A Beautiful Mind", Sean Penn, "I Am Sam") should not influence you to think that the documentary had to be better. The Academy Awards panel never gets it “Right” on their first try anyway.
Save your word count, no need to footnote.
There seemed to be many answers that pointed to "Ali" as the more truthful, but more so because it was merely counter-intuitive, the less obvious answer. The reasons given for this were not well argued, citing length of film, the time period the movie covered, etc. This is not a trick question, you just need to give better reasons for why you thought what you thought.
Many went to their dictionaries to find out the meanings of words such as "truth" and "documentary" (among others), which is great. However, many seemed to rely on these definitions and go with the first one they found in the dictionary. The point of this project is precisely to make you question the definitions and implied meanings of words like "truth," "documentary" and “Hollywood movie.”
Many cited reasons for their choice based on their assumptions of what they think is important to Ali's life vs. what they don't think is important (such as his marriages), by default arguing that some things are clearly more/less important. However, those assumptions seemed rarely questioned; can we see that it is those very assumptions that could be the basis of different "truth's"?