Lighting, Camera Angles, Focal Length, Framing, Camera Movements, Proxemics, Mise en scène, Sound
Design, and Editing.
Cite specific examples in each of the categories below to support the filmmakerâs higher-level form and
content strategies, include timecode and/or provide a detailed description of moments in the film.
- CINEMATOGRAPHY What are the lighting techniques, camera angles, focal length, framing, movement,
and proxemics used by the filmmaker to serve her/his story. Cite specific examples to support each
category and reference timecode and/or provide a detailed description of moments in the film. This section
requires a more detailed analysis of the category yet also supports FORM. - PRODUCTION DESIGN What are the specific design elements
(location, costume, hair, make- up, props, special effects) used by the filmmaker to support her/his
narrative. Cite specific examples to support each category and reference timecode and/or provide a
detailed description of moments in the film. This section requires a more detailed analysis of the category
yet also supports FORM. - ACTING How did the performances of the actors
support the filmâs narrative? Evaluate key performersâ appropriateness and transparency, inherent
thoughtfulness or emotionality, expressive coherence, wholeness and unity. These details should include
their appearance, behavior, physicality, and speech patterns. In other words, the details and layers of a
consistent, unified and believable performance. This section requires a more detailed analysis of the
category yet also supports FORM. - EDITING How did the editing effectively
communicate the content of the story? Identify specific sequences in the film where editing techniques
enhanced the narrative. This section requires a more detailed analysis of the category yet also supports
FORM. - SOUND DESIGN/MUSIC How did the filmmaker use sound design
and a musical score to reinforce her/his narrative? Did it transport you further into the world of the story?
Link specific sound cues to key moments in the film. This section requires a more detailed analysis of the
category yet also supports FORM.
Sample Solution
Over the previous century the field of criminology has changed radically, with thoughts like intersectionality rapidly turning out to be increasingly predominant when endeavoring to clarify wrongdoing and the main thrusts behind it. Sex has gotten progressively significant in the journey to comprehend criminal measurements and the incongruities between the genders. Gendered practices impact even road level wrongdoings in a bigger number of ways than the early criminologists would have ever accepted. One significant inquiry is how does the re-development of sexual orientation happen and impact guilty parties and by what method can looking at wrongdoing through an intersectional structure assist us with getting it? I immovably imagine that the gendered practices, or the activity of “doing sex” by guilty parties, assumes a significant job in wrongdoing and that the intersectional system can give genuine chances to additionally see how sexual orientation, race, and class interlaces with wrongdoing. It is essential to initially see how people re-build sexual orientation in the city. Normally, men are the “internal hover” of the posse, and this quickly prompts sex generalizations being strengthened. The men strengthen generalizations they have retained from the more extensive society, similar to family or media. They at that point implement these generalizations on the remainder of the group, particularly the ladies. In an investigation distributed in the International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, titled Homegirls, Hoodrats and Hos: Co-building Gang Status through Discourse and Performance, Dr. Abigail Kolb and Dr. Ted Palys (2016) examine this wonder in road packs. Ladies who join a pack by laying down with at least one individuals are not regarded and are viewed as “hoodrats”. They are not trusted with significant issues and rush to nark whenever got. Ladies who “do manliness”, or dress and act progressively manly, are viewed as substantially more reliable than hoodrats. Shockingly, to keep their status they need to excuse and regularly showcase the predisposition of the men in the gathering by putting down different ladies assigned as ho>
Over the previous century the field of criminology has changed radically, with thoughts like intersectionality rapidly turning out to be increasingly predominant when endeavoring to clarify wrongdoing and the main thrusts behind it. Sex has gotten progressively significant in the journey to comprehend criminal measurements and the incongruities between the genders. Gendered practices impact even road level wrongdoings in a bigger number of ways than the early criminologists would have ever accepted. One significant inquiry is how does the re-development of sexual orientation happen and impact guilty parties and by what method can looking at wrongdoing through an intersectional structure assist us with getting it? I immovably imagine that the gendered practices, or the activity of “doing sex” by guilty parties, assumes a significant job in wrongdoing and that the intersectional system can give genuine chances to additionally see how sexual orientation, race, and class interlaces with wrongdoing. It is essential to initially see how people re-build sexual orientation in the city. Normally, men are the “internal hover” of the posse, and this quickly prompts sex generalizations being strengthened. The men strengthen generalizations they have retained from the more extensive society, similar to family or media. They at that point implement these generalizations on the remainder of the group, particularly the ladies. In an investigation distributed in the International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, titled Homegirls, Hoodrats and Hos: Co-building Gang Status through Discourse and Performance, Dr. Abigail Kolb and Dr. Ted Palys (2016) examine this wonder in road packs. Ladies who join a pack by laying down with at least one individuals are not regarded and are viewed as “hoodrats”. They are not trusted with significant issues and rush to nark whenever got. Ladies who “do manliness”, or dress and act progressively manly, are viewed as substantially more reliable than hoodrats. Shockingly, to keep their status they need to excuse and regularly showcase the predisposition of the men in the gathering by putting down different ladies assigned as ho>
