Friday, January 20, 2006

Media coursework for Y10

Hello, everyone! You have successfully located Lighting Fools, Mr.Davies' blog created especially as a forum to support you chaps in getting the lovely shiny A*s for English Language and English Literature which you all so richly deserve.

You have, of course, handed in the first draft of your media assignment, and had it marked. Somewhere in the work I have underlined a passage and put an asterisk (*) beside it in the margin. This is the best idea or most beautifully-turned phrase in your assignment: your 'Golden Lines'. What I'd like you to do now is click on the 'Comments' tab below this post and type in your 'Golden Lines'. The rest of the class can then view it, and you can view theirs. It's a great way to share our best thoughts and turns of phrase. Please remember, though, there's sharing and there's copying: I don't expect your final drafts to be some kind of Frankenstein's monster of stitched together extracts from other people's work!


Blogger lobster said...


7:12 AM  
Blogger Amy said...


7:36 AM  
Blogger Hannah said...


9:31 AM  
Anonymous your name said...


3:05 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

David Baker

Dusty old traditionalists believe that Baz Luhrmann's 1996 version is a 'bastardisation of Shakespeare's original' or a 'dumbed down portrayal of a timeless classic and would argue that it is not as true to the original play as Zefferelli's version.

1:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Zoë Fox

Cinema employees everywhere despise this film. "No sir, this isn't the wrong screen." "Yes madam, you are in the right place." And on it goes.

9:12 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

James Armstrong

Zeffirelli might use more original sppech but Luhrman is a way better adaption that catches the spirit but doesn't chuck the veg.

2:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


A modernised interpretation of a classic love story that's sexier than any before it,set in a Miami-style location, with the girls to match. This film could suit anyone:People out to find a chick flick, you can't get much better than this;and anyone who enjoys an action filled movie, will not be left unsatisfied.

8:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tom Childs

Luhrmann took the risk of setting the film in modern-day America so that it would appeal to a younger, media literate generation - and it's a risk that paid off.

11:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Declan Gilbody 10MP

Comparing Lurhman’s version to Franco Zeffirelli’s Romeo and Juliet would be cruel and unfair, but I’ll do it anyway

8:47 AM  
Anonymous Robbie said...

Luhrmann makes a clever contrast at the entrance of the Capulets by playing music similiar to that of a Clint Eastwood or John Wayne epic, changing the ambience drastically. Tybalt steps out of the satin black car wearing spurs, simultaneously stubbing out his cigarette. This immediately foretells that some form of violence is on its way. In Zefferelli's version, the threat is much quieter and more polite and there is very little male bravado or machismo. It almost seems as if he has purposely refrained from letting things go and in a way, 'censored' it.

8:15 AM  
Blogger Hannah said...

Hannah Rosa

Contraversial since it's first release, Luhrman's 1996 version of Romeo and Juliet is one of the most talked about films of its decade. It is therefore the Independent's Film of the Week. Aimed at a modern MTV audience, the realistic gang violence ensures its post-watershed scheduling on Channel 4 at 10pm this Saturday, and is definitely worth staying awake for.

10:31 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Emma Gedney

There is a sense of precarious peace achieved by the speech-the way the threats are issued almost signifies that Captain Prince knows there won't be peace for long-it leaves you wondering just who is going to reignite the feud and to what consequence.

10:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jessica Watts

On the other hand; Zeffirelli's classic presentation has a slow opening with a tracking shot of the city in Italy;it makes it more romantic but you will feel like you are watching a theatre production, not a movie.

2:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Laura Walker

Luhrmann's version is not only a superior cinematic experience, but a miracle. Teens and youngsters will now willingly sit and watch Shakespeare because they want to. He relies on media literate audiences so that he can get Shakespeare across the easy way.

6:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Heather Ivatt

Basically, if you want your soul elevated, watch Baz Luhrmann's 1996 adaptation of Romeo and Juliet, 'the love story of all time, for our time'; switch on to channel 4 at 9:30pm on Thursday 26th January. Trust me, if you want to be educated and still have a kick-ass time then tune in before you miss the time of your life...

7:05 AM  
Anonymous Dani(elle) said...

The biscuit-sucking old traditionalists argue that it is a disappointing bastardization and an insult to the master-piece which Shakespeare originally produced.

9:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hayley Hamilton

‘The similarities between the script and the rough- edged city culture are obviously lost in the 1968 version, being set in a much older setting, and to be quite honest it, to begin with, as if the light hearted teasing to follow will be insufficient in setting off any kind of clash whatsoever, and the incipient violence present in the modernised version is clearly not so here.’

2:48 AM  
Anonymous Becca said...

Luhrmann's film also boasts an impressive cast: Leonardo DiCaprio and Claire Danes act wonderfully throughout, and John Leguizamo's smooth line deliveries continue to burn on like glowing embers through the scenes in which he appears as Tybalt.

8:09 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


The spirit of the original play is caught in such a spectaular way, that I am completely confused how anyone can think negatively of this masterpiece. The original writing's expression of feelings and emotion are captured even better by this newer film. Luhrmann manages to keep Shakespeare alive by bringing back elements from his text that I for one thought were long gone when I saw the 1968 bore. The violent, savage, bawdy, fast paced, sexy, direct action of this film make the achievement of telling a story known worldwide even greater.

1:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The film was obviously aimed at an MTV generation, media-literate teens & twenty somethings

10:43 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


His creative use of rapid camera cuts and close-ups may seem daunting in the opening scenes, but ultimately give the film its ability to reach a wide audience through its references to the action genre in the crucial first minutes and make Shakespeare more than just a chore to be endured at school.

8:21 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sam Young

i think the newer version is better because it is more up to date and they have done very well to keep to the original script.
the older version is not the kind of thing you would think of seeing anymore as in little markets you do not have little scraps with people throwing vegetables.

12:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the 1996 version of romeo and juliet is is amimed at a different generation then Zeffirelli's because he was aiming his version at the generation of that decade. even though Luhrmann's version is set in modern day america withe modern day clothes weapons ans scenery the movie is much truer to shakespear's original beacuse it uses more of the original text.

2:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

teenagers carrying guns, swearing and shouting abuse at each other. this is every parents nightmare seening their child as a thug.


8:34 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Holly Youngs

Parents of the world your worst nightmare is here.What is the youth of today turning into. Obsesive violence, underage sex and swearing. But what you haven't realised is that it's also a description of Baz Lurman, Romeo and Juliet.

8:46 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sophie Bywater
What is this film? A 9mm bullet gun thundering across the screen. No; it cant be a shakespearean film, with a montage of violence, underage sex and swearing on the streets.

Parents this is your worst nightmare, but kids just sit back and relax!

9:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Kerry Bettles

What do you think when someone says Romeo and Juliet?
What do you think when someone says modern Romeo and Juliet?

12:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

isaac bucingham 10 kdm On the other hand, the sound track used in High School Musical 2 is more upbeat than Skins. It has a very poppy soundtrack and it usually has the characters singing.
The music played in Skins is non-diagetic in the first scene and then on the radio in the background, it is diagetic in other scenes.
The music played in High School Musical 2 is non-diagetic – the music is played over the scene, but the characters “step out” of the scene to sing and dance to it.

Any teens that watch Skins and High School Musical 2 need to remember that these shows are all about making money. They are totally unrealistic and teens should not be influenced by the choices the characters make in either of the shows.

3:26 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home