Sign In
Not register? Register Now!
Essay Available:
Pages:
6 pages/≈1650 words
Sources:
4 Sources
Style:
APA
Subject:
Visual & Performing Arts
Type:
Movie Review
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 21.6
Topic:

Comparison of Thor (2011) and its Sequel, Thor: Ragnarok (2017)

Movie Review Instructions:

Final essay is due. Draft submissions prior to the deadline can be emailed to the professor. Please review the grading criteria prior to submission. Please do not forget the bibliography. Folder locks at 11:45pm. Grades will be released within 48 hours.
PART 3: CAP Final Submission (Due Dec. 14): Finally, you will submit your final comparative analysis paper. The final paper (final CAP) will require that you write a 5+ page paper (minimum) discussing all the cinematic elements that we've discussed throughout the past 8 weeks.
The final essay requires that you compare and contrast an original versus a sequel; or an original versus a remake. The essay must provide an analysis of these two version, covering
1. Cinematography (camerawork, lighting, mise-en-scene, color tones) in both versions
2. Editing (continuity editing, etc.) in both versions
3. Sound (diegetic and non-diegetic) in both versions
4. Screenwriting (dialogue) in both versions
5. Special Effects in both versions (independent research is likely necessary)
6. Directing (point of view of the story; characters; message of the film, etc.) in both versions
7. Overall analysis of both version - focusing on director's delivery of all of the above
8. Each technique reference includes a description of a scene and the impact on the audience.
9. 80% must focus on the core elements of cinematography, editing, sound, screenwriting, special effects, and directing.
10. Bibliography APA or MLA
Though this essay should analyze the films overall, the essay can also focus on 5 different scenes in each version.
Please review the grading criteria prior to final submission. Please limit trivia or historical information on the film to no more than one paragraph (e.g. actor bios, box office numbers, reviews from other film critics).
Though it may tempting to focus primarily on trivia information about the film or the differences in the cast (actors) and their performances, 80% of the essay must focus on the core components of cinematography, editing, sound, directing, screenwriting, and special effects. By the time we reach week 8, the course content and discussions should have sufficiently prepared you to analyze these components successfully.
----
Helpful links for terminology for your essays:
• Cinematography: Camera angles Examples: Master Shot, Point of View Shot, Extreme Close Up
• Cinematography: Camera movement Examples: Pan, Tilt, Dolly, Zoom, Rack Focus
• Cinematography: Lighting Examples: Lighting: Natural lighting, low-key lighting
• Editing: Editing terminology Examples: continuity editing, cross-cutting, montage, dissolve, jump cuts
• Sound: diegetic and non-diegetic examples and additional examples in film

GRADING CRITERIA
Formatting requirements:
• The essay must be 5+ pages in length. Remember that the paper must be minimally 5 full pages; not 4.5.
• No greater than 12 point font.
• Double spaced, with no additional spacing between paragraphs.
• No subheadings
• Normal (default) margins.
• A bibliography is necessary (APA or MLA).
• 80% of your paper must focus on an analysis of the cinematic elements (not trivia, background info, box office numbers, plot summaries, biographies, production stories, etc.) 2
Thesis statement and first paragraph 2
History (limited to 1-2 paragraphs max) 1
Cinematography for both films: camera angles and movement 5
Cinematography continued: Lighting, Mise-en-scene, color tones for both films 5
Editing for both films: Montage, cross-cutting, continuity editing 10
Sound/Music for both films: diegetic, non-diegetic sounds, use of silence, score/music 10
Screenplay: dialog for both films 5
Directing for both films: story perspective, characterization, visual storytelling, synthesis 10
Special Effect for both films if applicable 5
Each assertion contains a) cinematic technique; b) scene example; c) impact on the audience 10
Conclusion: restating thesis and summary 5
5 scenes for each version or essay contains analysis of entire film throughout. 5
Terminology 5
Overall analyses discussing similarities and differences between the two films 5
80% paper focused on core cinematic elements from both films 10
Bibliography 5

Movie Review Sample Content Preview:

CAP III: Comparison of Thor (2011) and its Sequel Thor: Ragnarok (2017)
Student's Name
Institution
Course
Professor's Name
Date
Introduction
The two films are superhero films that star the same character, Chris Hemsworth as Thor, and produced Marvel Studios. Kenneth Branagh directed Thor (2011). Thor, the protagonist, has an adopted brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston), and they belong to the kingdom of Asgard headed by Odin (Anthony Hopkins). Loki betrays Asgard by secretly working with the Giant frosts from Jotunheim, leading to Thor's ex-communication by his father and the king Odin. Thor: Ragnarok (2017) was directed by Taika Waititi. It continues the Asgard's kingdom story where Thor gathers forces with Hulk (Mark Buffalo), Scrapper 142 (Tessa Thomspon), and Heimdall (Idris Elba) to defeat his sister Hela (Cate Blanchet) and other enemies to secure the people of Asgard. Both Thor and Thor Ragnarok are similar in scene development, cinematography, editing, sound use, and lighting, with some characters also possessing a similar development from the beginning to the end, although a slight difference exists in the lighting setting and dialogue. The films also maintain the Hawksian theme by characterizing women as being equal to men.
Cinematography
Most scenes in Thor (2011) are shot in natural, low-key light aided by artificial lights in traditional lightings handheld by the characters. These scenes shot in low-key lights present the other realms apart from the earth. Other realms like Asgard are golden to show the difference between the earth and the other realms. The technique also underplays the significance of superhero sense in the film and shows the audience that it is a fantasy and not real, as reinforced by the low-key lighting (Hamzah, 2017). Branagh shot stories set on earth in bright natural light to show that earth exists, unlike the other realms where the audience sees strange ways of life.
Thor (2011) also uses heavy close-up and medium close-up shots with selective use of long and extreme long shots. The purpose is to allow the audience to read the characters' facial expressions, helping in the plot and theme development of the film. Branagh also uses a mixture of high and low-angle shots in the film. The high camera angle is used on scenes set on earth to show the superiority of earth over the other eight realms. On the other hand, the low-key angles of scenes shot on Asgard and Jotunheim aim at undermining their perceived superiority (Havard et al., 2019). The director extensively uses pan and zoom techniques to create establishing shots and focus on various scenes and characters, thus reinforcing the film's themes of sibling rivalry, betrayal, humility, war, pride, and love. Generally, the film balances scenes shot on earth and in the other realms like Asgard and Jotunheim to help the audience compare and reflect on the ways of life on earth and in the other realms.
The director Waititi in Thor: Ragnarok (2017), like Branagh in Thor (2011), employs extensive use of medium and closes up shots throughout the film. These cinematic techniques help the audience read body language and connect it with the verbal and sign language that aid in theme and plot development. The director combines these me...
Updated on
Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:
Order

👀 Other Visitors are Viewing These APA Movie Review Samples:

HIRE A WRITER FROM $11.95 / PAGE
ORDER WITH 15% DISCOUNT!
Order Now