Difference between revisions of "329--Week 7 Questions/Comments"
From McClurken Wiki
Wholcomb86 (Talk | contribs) (→3 Movie as primary source about makers/time/setting/genre) |
Wholcomb86 (Talk | contribs) (→5 Other movies/questions of style/framing/storyline) |
||
| Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
Characterization is something that bothers me with this movie. The movie really focuses on just a few characters ignoring pretty much everyone else. The confederates who were the enemies were never really characterized as anything more than fodder. While I suppose this is better than characterizing characters in a stereotypical or false way it really limits the scope of history this movie presents. The movie is show entirely through a few member of the 54th division and ends up giving a really limited scope causing the movie to miss out on presenting a broader picture of what was going on during the time. - Jonathan Bell | Characterization is something that bothers me with this movie. The movie really focuses on just a few characters ignoring pretty much everyone else. The confederates who were the enemies were never really characterized as anything more than fodder. While I suppose this is better than characterizing characters in a stereotypical or false way it really limits the scope of history this movie presents. The movie is show entirely through a few member of the 54th division and ends up giving a really limited scope causing the movie to miss out on presenting a broader picture of what was going on during the time. - Jonathan Bell | ||
| + | |||
| + | One thing about the stereotype that amuses me is that once the 54th is in SC, a slave is talking to the Northern, educated, "Snowflake" Thomas, and he needs the wise old Freeman to interpret the dialect for him! But maybe I just like that because I like linguistics. -Whitney H. | ||
== 6 Overall == | == 6 Overall == | ||
