You are going to write a film review on a documentary you will choose from the selections from eCampus. You will need to watch the documentary then write a review on the film. A review is not just a recap of the film. Instead, it is a detailed analysis of the film from many perspectives. When writing a review, these are the things you need to focus on:- Introduction- What is the film? What is the main point the film is trying to make? This is also where you would give a brief description of the documentary.
- What evidence does the film use to justify their point? In other words, what kind of information does the film utilize to make its conclusion?
- Does the evidence presented in the documentary make a convincing point? How effective is the evidence? Why or why not? This should be the bulk of your paper.
Here is the link for the video
https://dcccd.kanopy.com/video/nation-torn
Sample Solution
seeingâ and âknowingâ, sharing as they do a common etymological stem. For Greek âseeingâ, the state of knowing (oida, â I knowâ) is both linguistically and conceptually inseparable from the experience of seeing for oneself (idesthai âto behold). In ancient Greece the philosophical âideasâ were likewise premised upon theories of sight: what we would label the âbrainâ was frequently linked to a sort of inner visual organ, viz.âthe mindâs eyeâ of the soul. Antiquityâs celebration of the eye is also greatly reflected in the art of that time. Sculptors took their philosophy to stone and they created perfection through symmetry and natural form in each of their works. The most common subject of the ancient art form was the nude, usually presented in an athletic form. The idealized human images were the embodiment of balance and harmony. The access to this perfection was therefore visual-cognitive. It was not about looking at beautiful realistic sculptures but at the idea of things in stone. The idealization of the human body and pursuing the visual perfection was vital. It was not about the fact that these bodies look so perfect, but that they represent a perfect idea that is beheld when the sculpture is looked at. Therefore the idea was the object of knowledge, the sphere of eternal truths, which the sense of smell for instance could not grasp. That means that human vision distinguishes us from the animals, who can see but not âsee asâ, âseeing for oneselfâ, idesthai/aisthanomai. The notion that seeing is knowing continues in the development of medieval philosophy. Roger Bacon praised sight so strongly he said (1996, p. 65): âa blind man may find out by experience nothing that is worthy in this worldâ. Bacon considered vision as a practical and authentic tool that is>
seeingâ and âknowingâ, sharing as they do a common etymological stem. For Greek âseeingâ, the state of knowing (oida, â I knowâ) is both linguistically and conceptually inseparable from the experience of seeing for oneself (idesthai âto behold). In ancient Greece the philosophical âideasâ were likewise premised upon theories of sight: what we would label the âbrainâ was frequently linked to a sort of inner visual organ, viz.âthe mindâs eyeâ of the soul. Antiquityâs celebration of the eye is also greatly reflected in the art of that time. Sculptors took their philosophy to stone and they created perfection through symmetry and natural form in each of their works. The most common subject of the ancient art form was the nude, usually presented in an athletic form. The idealized human images were the embodiment of balance and harmony. The access to this perfection was therefore visual-cognitive. It was not about looking at beautiful realistic sculptures but at the idea of things in stone. The idealization of the human body and pursuing the visual perfection was vital. It was not about the fact that these bodies look so perfect, but that they represent a perfect idea that is beheld when the sculpture is looked at. Therefore the idea was the object of knowledge, the sphere of eternal truths, which the sense of smell for instance could not grasp. That means that human vision distinguishes us from the animals, who can see but not âsee asâ, âseeing for oneselfâ, idesthai/aisthanomai. The notion that seeing is knowing continues in the development of medieval philosophy. Roger Bacon praised sight so strongly he said (1996, p. 65): âa blind man may find out by experience nothing that is worthy in this worldâ. Bacon considered vision as a practical and authentic tool that is>
