Metal Reviews

Anyways, on the topic of the first essay, it didn't seem THAT bad...it's hard to tell when there's no description as to what they were supposed to be writing about. "Creative writing" tells absolutely nothing...

I can understand the criticisms being levied at the film review, but in all fairness why does it matter? You might be taking it far more seriously than was ever intended by the writer. He/she could have written that simply to see what kind of reaction they'd get from the professor, even if doing so meant getting a poor grade. Who knows.

None of that really has anything to do with the professor's "grading" of the assignment. A 0 percent for "inappropriate content" is ridiculous, assuming of course, that he/she didn't make it clear beforehand what would and would not be considered appropriate. And given markings that seem to indicate extreme shock, and no markings that say anything like "please refer to line XX in the syllabus... content that is considered inappropriate..." I'll assume that it wasn't even considered.

That's really the issue. There's no markings there that suggest anything remotely related to what many of you are coming up with as justification for a "0". So throw it out the window because it's irrelevant. It is "0" for "this is inappropriate for my...err... anyone". How that flies under your radar as being appropriate conduct from the professor is beyond me. If you think the student put out barely any more effort than was necessary to type with a keyboard, I'd suggest that the professor put out even less, both in the "grading" displayed here and (likely) a lack of preparation (which in this case is being held against the student) - and got paid for it too.

-Tyrion

Most film professors (at least in my experience) don't come out and say that pornography is inappropriate for class because they assume that their students aren't complete idiots, and the ones that do this sort of thing do it on purpose.

Of course, this begs the question that it's a real paper. The whole thing could very well be Photoshopped.

Um, Kayla, the professor couldn't spell 'appropriate'. Surely the fact that a so-called teacher can't spell basic words renders whether or not someone doing a porno - which is an important type of film, which I'd expect to be covered in a decent course on film - irrelevant.

Tyrion's right, the paper deserved much more than 0%. Teaching a film course should be done with enough open-mindedness, ffs, unless you're covering the artistic value of Disney films.

It's a 40-second clip of two girls eating shit and puking on each other. Un Chien Andalou this ain't. The paper itself does, in fact, suck. As I said before, there's no filmic deconstruction, there's no discussion about what all this means in a larger context, it's just a description of the action with a lot of bullshit words you learn in college. It has as much academic worth as the "film" has artistic. And I still say the paper and comments could be fake, in any case.

Yadda, yadda, yadda, it deserves more than 0. It seems pretty clear that the teacher gave a 0 because of the subject matter, rather than the lack of in-depth writing on it. And the teacher still can't spell.

And obviously I'm assuming that it's real.

Even if it was partially because of the subject matter (as I maintain that the essay itself is also crap except as an amusing send-up of film papers), what's wrong with that? What if someone had chosen to analyze, say, Thomas the Tank Engine? Would you really consider something like that to be appropriate for a college film course? There are some things that don't merit serious filmic academic study, and scat porn is one of them.

Without knowing more of the guidelines, as Tyrion said, it's hard to know, but since cartoons are a valid form of visual media as well... I mean, what, in your film classes people can only deconstruct Herzog?

Scat porn is about the farthest thing I'd want in a film class, but hell, it shows initiative and imagination. And the teacher STILL CAN'T SPELL.

I think a 0 is justified because the person obviously was just doing it as a joke... Maybe if the paper was good or thought out and the professor gave it a 0 just based on content I'd agree with Tyrion that they were unfair. But it's not. So it's obvious they were just doing it on something offensive for giggles.

And Zad I don't think spelling really matters much, the teacher had to mark a ridiculous number of papers and made a typo... yippee.

we're putting wayyy too much thought into this

Agreed on all counts.

You're missing the point - if the teacher gave it 0 because it was a joke, it would've said something like 'this isn't funny'. Instead, not only was 'appropriate' mis-spelt twice (sloppy teacher - good ones never make errors over here) but they couldn't handle the subject matter. Ie, they shouldn't be teaching a course about film, some forms of which aim to shock.

Agreed with the last point, though.

"The opening image, that of the stenciled "MFX 1290" suggests a confusing misunderstanding - the 1209 seems as some sort of date, yet the aesthetic of the number lends itself to a futuristic association. This blurring of past and future, mixed with the confusion to the presumed-to-be-acronym primes the audience for the confusion to come."

Are you honestly telling me that this can be taken as anything but a joke? Granted, it's an excellent spoof of film papers (which drove me nuts as an English major) but it's still obviously not serious. The content is null, it's worthless except as an exercise in humor, and if it was turned in as a serious paper, it deserves a zero.

It can be taken seriously, especially when you consider other examples of what people believe to be decent writing (have a trawl through some fanfic sites, especially the "erotic" ones). Interesting, again, that your definition of what film criticism is is so... defined.

And just because I'd be selling myself out if I didn't mention it, the teacher can't spell 'appropriate'.

So Snape/Harry slashfic is appropriate for an academic setting? Or worse, vore and macro? (If you don't know what those are, consider yourself lucky.) This was being done for a class. And yes, my definition of a film paper is defined. It should be.

That's an example of good filmic writing. For further information, consult such essayists as Susan Sontag.

I'm not saying that the piece in question was amazing writing. I'm saying it deserved better than 0. Also, I bet your teacher could spell.

Anyway, film criticism's extremely relative. Take me, I use everything from Ebert to Ruthless to IMDB to research films. I've even read and understood a few of the reviews at ANUS.com (to diverge slightly) - does that make them 'good' writing'? Not at all. But, just like the piece in q. it can be a good review. It told me everything I wanted to know about 2girls1cup, and added some interpretation in addition. Is that interpretation correct? Who cares? The joy of cinema is in its depth.

And yes, you can clearly (assuming that was really a piece of yours, which I know you well enough to take for granted ) write about films well, but I'm sure if you were presented with Shit-eating Whores vol 2.1 to write about for an academic exercise, you'd have fun with it.

Silly subject to argue about. Um, what was your point? Yeah. Sort of.

My point, boiled down to its most basic form, is that I'm right and you're wrong.

Also, the essay isn't a review or a piece of criticism. It's an academic essay, which has different rules and different standards of judgment. It said nothing, it explored nothing, it was just funny. I'm guessing that that was not within the parameters of the assignment. It didn't have a thesis, which is not always necessary in film essays (much to my aggravation) but it also didn't interpret or elucidate anything. It said nothing, and therefore deserved a grade of nothing.

Heh, as usual. You have to admit, though, before I give up and do something less like banging my head against a wall, that:

1. Academic essays are partly about describing a piece of art, much like a review.
2. The teacher can't spell basic words.

Admit those points and I'll quite happily agree to whatever else you say. Nearly anything.

1. No, essays do not describe. They strive to prove or explicate something.

2. The teacher does seem to need a spell check.

That is all.

1. They can; it depends.
2. Someone kill me; I can now die happy.