Well done, Kas - on getting your review up so promptly and available to feedback: it's clear too that you've listened in terms of seeking to 'make an argument' and draw conclusions between the look of the film and the implied critique. So - some pointers:
1) You don't need to divide up your review into those subheadings (introduction, main body etc). I gave you those sub-headings as guidelines for your structures, but they shouldn't appear as headings in your reviews.
2) When you refer to another visual reference in your academic writing with which you're seeking to make a point, you must include that visual reference in the writing for the reader - for example, you refer to Hello Kitty as an example of kitsch, but do not include an image (which you need to think of as 'evidence').
3) You need to put your book titles etc in italics and also include their publication date afterwards, and it's common to include the authors' names too when you first mention them. (It's the same for any films you mention).
4) You need to look again at Harvard Referencing and how to do citations - the bit after the quotes you're using - so it should be written like this (Gleiberman, 1990)
5) It's an 'illustration list' not an illustration bibliography...
More broadly, this is your most focused, most persuasive review so far - well done.
Well done, Kas - on getting your review up so promptly and available to feedback: it's clear too that you've listened in terms of seeking to 'make an argument' and draw conclusions between the look of the film and the implied critique. So - some pointers:
ReplyDelete1) You don't need to divide up your review into those subheadings (introduction, main body etc). I gave you those sub-headings as guidelines for your structures, but they shouldn't appear as headings in your reviews.
2) When you refer to another visual reference in your academic writing with which you're seeking to make a point, you must include that visual reference in the writing for the reader - for example, you refer to Hello Kitty as an example of kitsch, but do not include an image (which you need to think of as 'evidence').
3) You need to put your book titles etc in italics and also include their publication date afterwards, and it's common to include the authors' names too when you first mention them. (It's the same for any films you mention).
4) You need to look again at Harvard Referencing and how to do citations - the bit after the quotes you're using - so it should be written like this (Gleiberman, 1990)
5) It's an 'illustration list' not an illustration bibliography...
More broadly, this is your most focused, most persuasive review so far - well done.