I have finally had the chance to see Cloverfield. Well, I was dubious, as it had been dubbed the Blair Witch meets Godzilla (I hated Blair Witch, it bored me stupid). I can see why, but there was much more to hold the attention in Cloverfield . Unlike BW, I did find that ball of anxiety in my chest during the tunnels and exploding friend scenes. However, I didn't think it was amazing. That may have been due to watching it on TV. I can see how the tension could have been built watching it on the big screen. But, I did enjoy it. Not got more to say on it than that.
On the subject of films though, one of my favourite films happened to be on yesterday. What was the film? The Princess Bride. I love it! I have never read the book - a flaw on my part - but I am worried that if I read the book the shiny of the film might be marred. Now, this isn't like me. I would rather read a book than take a film based on the book at face value. The Princess Bride is a different matter though. I love that film so much, I can watch it over and over again, that I don't want to read the book in case it does affect my enjoyment of the film. See, I might have enjoyed Eragon if I hadn't read the book, but the glaring omissions in that film just made me angry. So, I don't know if I will ever get to reading William Goldman's book.
As for returns of essays... I'm still waiting. *Sigh* I'm finding it hard to concentrate on the 60s when I don't know how I fared on the last essay. However, I am slowly trudging through the science section. I think I am quite certain that I will tackle science in the next essay, and possibly music and history, though having done okay with the art sections... We'll see. I think doing the history part is a given, just because to tackle periodisation you can hardly ignore it.
And to finish; the best swordfight (or fencing duel, I'm not sure!) in film!
The Big Idea: José Pablo Iriarte
1 day ago
2 comments:
Morning Ally,I have a sneaky suspicion you will get your tma back today.Let me know.
I am going for science also however not altogether convinced periodisation is necassary with regards to the actual question.Tis interesting but...Normally I would do art but again haven't found stuff that answers the question yet... Think it's easy to fall into the trap of writing something good but does not always answer a specific question.Structure wise I will pick two and if i am short add something else.May also done an overview paragraph on what made the sixties what they were without going all the way on history.Thinking of getting "Hobsbawms" book-hopefully quickly from amazon,this may give a good overview?
Went to the Walker art gallery on Saturday which I will blog about later-if I get roung to it.
I think the periodisation will be necessary, as part of the introduction was focused on it. Also, I remember the Octoberries speaking a lot about periodisation, and I think they were saying something along the lines of using about 150 words for it, so that's what I will do, just to cover the bases.
Dunno about the Hobsbawms book, though it could prove useful. There have been a few suggestions for websites on the forums, so I might do a webtrawl this afternoon. I think I might do a little bit of study now while Princi is bugging her Nanny!
Post a Comment