Reference no: EM133264482
Assignment - This week we are looking at a deep dive into the actor Tom Cruise and his Impossible Mission action movie franchise. The essay we will be reading is written as a dialogue between two critics that is specifically timed for the release of the fifth movie in the franchise, but ends up being less of a review and much more of an evaluation of the series and Cruise as an actor overall.
In the essay, the two critics discuss why they think the series is great even if no one else does, how the movie series treats out-of-date media (like tape players), and what the movies are actually saying vs. what the filmmakers might think they are saying (i.e., how a war movie can actually glorify war even if the filmmakers mean to show the horrors of warfare).
First, read the essay here. It is longer than most reviews, so give yourself time to read and sit with it. Then think about how the essay works as an evaluation essay.
In your first post (due Wednesday), choose ONE of the following threads.
Thread 1: The two authors (Hu and Schnepf) are in a dialogue with each other. How does this affect their argument and the way that the reader receives that argument?
Thread 2: An evaluative essay is designed to make an argument about the value of a particular thing. Does this essay accomplish that goal in terms of Tom Cruise and/or the Mission Impossible series? How do they accomplish that goal in terms of arguments styles and techniques?
Thread 3: In essays 2 and 3 you will be writing about an ethical issue in regards to whatever subject you choose. What ethical issues have Hu and Schnepf brought up in their essay? What conclusions do they draw? How do they support their argument?