[Note: refresh your webpage occasionally to see an updated post and to see your peers’ comments.]
Prewriting (15 minutes):
1) Evaluate your courses: https://apps.qc.cuny.edu/courseevaluation/logon.aspx
2) Vote on our film (poll closes by end of class): http://poll.fm/40dp0
3) Leave a one-sentence comment saying what you hope to discover while watching this film.
Part 1 (25 minutes): (to come at 4:45)
Look at the list of Leitch’s questions from last time, particularly #6, #7, #12, and #14.
Look (quickly) at one or two of the videos from last time.
Using the videos as examples, leave a comment of 2-3 sentences that offers a tentative answer to one of Leitch’s questions. If you finish early, respond to some of your peers.
Part 2 (20 minutes): (to come at 5:10)
Consider the problem of “laymen” that J.D. Connor raises in “The Persistence of Fidelity,” particularly in the last paragraph and in the section on authority. To help you, here’s a link to a (rough draft) Harvard Outline (but with full sentences) of Connor’s essay: http://filmadaptation.qwriting.qc.cuny.edu/2012/12/06/harvard-outline-of-connor
In your own words, leave a comment summarizing Connor’s stance on the divide between laymen and critics.
Part 3 (20 minutes): (to come at 5:30)
Now, take a look at a movie review aggregator site like Metacritic (or Rotten Tomatoes), which averages together a wide range of reviews from across the web to create one ranking score: http://www.metacritic.com/movie
Here’s how Metacritic describes itself: http://www.metacritic.com/about-metacritic
Here’s how they describe their method: http://www.metacritic.com/about-metascores
What do you think Connor would say about these kinds of aggregating websites? Do you think they help the layman continue to “raise fidelity questions,” or instead do they help the critics “silence that conversation of judgment”? Answer this question by replying to one of the comments your peers made in Part 2. (i.e., reply to their “comment summarizing Connor’s stance on the divide between laymen and critics,” and extend it by discussing the concept of movie aggregation websites).
Part 4 (25 minutes): (to come at 5:50)
Now let’s turn to Linda Hutcheon. Our fifth Learning Outcome is for students to be able to answer the following questions:
~ How did early film theorists define cinema as an art distinct from other arts?
~ How do theories of “how fiction works” relate to the cinema, and where do they fall short?
~ Why did the early film industry see literature as the “obvious” source for films?
~ What features are pointed to when calling adaptations “successful” or “unsuccessful”?
~ Why and how has the contemporary American film industry encouraged transgenre adaptation, tie-ins, remakes, reboots, sequels, appropriations, etc?
Pick one of these questions, and answer it in a longish paragraph, using your understanding of Linda Hutcheon’s argument to support your claim.
Part 5 (5 minutes): (to come at 6:15)
Whew, that’s it! One last thing: leave a sentence comment telling me in general what you think of this online format for class.
Our film for next time is: The Dark Knight (dir. Christopher Nolan, 2008, 152m). Let me know ASAP if you think you will have trouble locating a copy.
I’ll see you next Thursday.