Internal assessment resource reference number English/3/1 – C3
PAGE FOR TEACHER USE
2005
Internal Assessment Resource
Subject Reference: English 3.1
Internal assessment resource reference number: English/3/1 – C3
“Screen Time”
Supports internal assessment for:
Achievement Standard 90720 version 2
Title: Produce an extended piece of writing in a selected style
Credits: 4
Date version published: November 2005
Ministry of Education For use in internal assessment
from 2006
quality assurance status
1
© Crown 2005
Internal assessment resource reference number English/3/1 – C3
PAGE FOR TEACHER USE
Teacher Guidelines:
The following guidelines are supplied to enable teachers to carry out valid and consistent assessment using this internal assessment resource.
Context/setting:
In this activity students write a film review suitable for a readership of senior students and adults. The review may be based on a film studied in class, or viewed independently.
It is intended at this level that students should have the opportunity to explore and develop a writing genre of their choice. Refer to explanatory note 3 in the Achievement Standard.
This writing assessment task may be used as part of a film study for 3.4 Respond Critically to Oral or Visual Text (studied).
Conditions:
This activity may require both classroom and homework time. If films for review are selected individually by students, preparation completed at home might include viewing and note taking. All drafting should be worked on in class under teacher supervision to ensure authenticity of the final published pieces. Notes and drafts should be sighted regularly. Teachers should be aware of the significant amount of film review material available.
Teachers may guide students through the initial tasks, demonstrating how the techniques used in the activity can be applied to the students’ own writing.
As students develop their final drafts, teachers can offer appropriate guidance that writing may need further work on ideas, language, structure or accuracy in spelling, punctuation or paragraphing. Teachers may not correct errors, rewrite sentences or suggest specific ideas. Students should have access to dictionaries and thesauruses to check their writing. Word processing is acceptable.
Resource requirements:
Selected feature films
Access to additional background material on the films
Dictionary
Thesaurus
1
© Crown 2005
Internal assessment resource reference number English/3/1 – C3
PAGE FOR STUDENT USE
2006
Internal Assessment Resource
Subject Reference: English 3.1
Internal assessment resource reference number: Eng/3/1 – C3
“Screen Time”
Supports internal assessment for:
Achievement Standard 90720 version 2
Produce an extended piece of writing in a selected style
Credits: 4
Student Instructions Sheet
In this activity you will write a film review. Before you begin writing you will explore the content, style and structure of the review text type, to prepare you to write your review.
You will be assessed on your ability to:
· Develop and sustain/support your ideas and opinions about the film
· Craft controlled writing which creates effects appropriate to the film review text type and an audience of senior students and adults, and which communicates an informed opinion in an interesting style
· structure material in a way that is appropriate to the audience, the purpose and the text type
· use writing conventions accurately (spelling, punctuation, grammar, syntax, paragraphing)
Your writing will be at least 600 words long. It should be appropriate for a readership of your peers and your English teacher.
Task 1: Close Reading
Read the review (Resource A) written by Helene Wong in The Listener [Oct 18, 1998] about the film Saving Private Ryan, directed by Steven Spielberg. Also read the annotations about the content and structure and the language and style of the review.
RESOURCE A (CONT)
RESOURCE A (CONT)
Task 2: Your Close Reading Exercise
a) Read the review by Helene Wong (Resource B) of the two films Shrek and Tigerland and answer these questions. They will help you develop a deeper understanding of review writing.
1 Read the introductory paragraph:
· What information are you given?
· What is the reviewer’s opinion of the work? How do you know?
2 Identify and list the main content of each paragraph.
3 Annotate the review, identifying its language and style features. Use the information on the annotated review of Saving Private Ryan to guide you.
4 What evidence can you find of the reviewer’s research or background knowledge?
5 What specific criticisms are developed at greater length? Summarise them in your own words.
6 Is the review balanced? List the strengths and weaknesses of the films in the review.
7 What overall assessment is made of the films? With what final impression are you left?
RESOURCE B
(LISTENER June 30 2001)
After Roald
BY HELENE WONG
------
SHREK
Directed by Andrew Adamson & Vicky Jenson; PG
TIGERLAND
Directed by Joel Schumacher; R16 Contains violence, offensive language and sex scenes
Since The Simpsons and South Park, animated characters have been getting downer and dirtier. Even Rugrats in Paris pushed the scatological envelope for the teeny tots. Thus far, though, Disney has remained impervious, maintaining its wholesome conservatism despite, for example, the irreverent tone of The Emperor’s New Groove. After Shrek, however, the mouse’s gloves must come off. DreamWorks producer Jeffrey Katzenberg has aimed a fart in the direction of his erstwhile employer (with whom he had a troubled relationship), and that’s entirely in keeping with the spirit of his new animated hero.
Shrek (voiced by Mike Meyers) is a grubby, chubby, not-so-jolly green giant (actually an ogre, for the giant spotters out there), whose private swamp is invaded by a host of creatures banished from their home by the evil, vertically challenged Lord Farquaad (John Lithgow). The creatures look remarkably like characters from fairytales – blind mice, dwarves, a little wooden boy and a big bad wolf – and their home, even more remarkably, looks like Disneyland. Shrek does a deal with Farquaard to get his swamp back by rescuing the beautiful Princess Fiona (Cameron Diaz) for Farquaad to marry.
Based on a children’s story by William Steig, this is a breezily good-humoured swipe at the classic fairytale conventions that are Disney’s stoke-in-trade. Princesses, dragons, knights and giants are not what they seem; the stereotypes of good and evil, ugly and beautiful are subverted in order to scatter messages of self-acceptance and “It’s what’s inside that counts”. Hardly new, and all very ironic – and unconvincing – coming from appearance-obsessed Hollywood, but hey … their heart’s in the right place.
If the story isn’t groundbreaking, the animation was advanced enough to get the film into the competition at Cannes. Nuances of facial expression and simulation of natural phenomena just keep improving with the digital wizadry, and much of Shrek’s success as a character is due to the sympathy his emotions evoke in us as they play across his face. Add Meyers’s comedic improvisation and a hint of Scottish burr and we have no trouble seeing beyond Shrek’s physical unattractiveness. In fact, it’s the homelier characters who most engage us, which I suppose is the point.
Voice honours go to Eddie Murphy as Shrek’s garrulous, tenacious donkey sidekick. Eeyore he ain’t. With an eclectic soundtrack (Antonio Carlos Jobim, Neil Diamond, Leonard Cohen) and quickfire allusions to Gladiator, The Matrix and the WWF, this is a highly enjoyable post-modern foray into an alternative Storyland. And co-director Andrew Adamson, who earned his stripes on visual effects in the Batman franchise, is a New Zealander.
Meanwhile, Adamson’s Batman director, Joel Schumacher, gets down and dirty himself, producing a low-budget, grainy 16mm feature filled with unknowns, and getting away with it. Tigerland follows a platoon of young grunts through boot camp in 1971 – Tigerland is the “stateside province of Vee-et-nam”, actually a Louisiana swamp (are swamps the location du jour?) – and it’s an intense piece of work that hooks you into what at first glance seems unpromising macho material.
It’s not surprising that Irish actor Colin Farrell, who heads a brilliant cast, has become hot property since. As Roland Bozz, a charmer who’s also a cocky anti-authoritarian (we meet him as he is released from another stint in the stockade), he reminds you of Jack Nicholson in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. Though his attitude makes him a threat to platoon discipline, he has a pacifist’s compassion and an understanding of the bigger picture that makes him a true leader.
Schumacher’s gritty, pared-down style in long hand-held takes transmits an acute sense of improvisation and intimacy. The dialogue feels like a continuous litany of threats involving private parts, and the pacing is episodic, but the truth of the characters is so beautifully captured and (under)played by the cast that you will want to stay through the end credits just to see who these new faces are.
b) Read a range of other reviews to familiarise yourself with the review writing genre and various styles used by other published film reviewers. When you write your review, you may not include material from existing film reviews. You should avoid reading reviews of the film you will write about for this reason.
Task 3: Developing Content
a) View the film selected for review several times.
b) Create a Viewing Sheet to record details modelled on Resource C.
RESOURCE C
Viewing Sheet
Director / Actors*
*
*
* / Roles / Actors
*
*
*
* / Roles
BRIEF PLOT SYNOPSIS / KEY THEMES AND EVIDENCE
INTERPRETATION OF KEY CHARACTERS
Character 1 Character 2 / Other characters
*
*
*
*
* / *
*
*
*
*
Evidence and examples / Evidence and examples / Evidence and examples
KEY/MEMORABLE SCENES
· Opening
*
§ Other scenes
· Final scene / REFERENCES TO TECHNIQUES
* Use of setting/location
* Camera work (including editing)
* Sound track/music
* Costumes
* Symbolism
* Colour and lighting
* Use of setting/location
* Camera work (including editing)
* Sound track/music
* Costumes
* Symbolism
· Colour and lighting
* Use of setting/location
* Camera work (including editing)
* Sound track/music
* Costumes
* Symbolism
* Colour and lighting
Reference to film genre / Your personal evaluation of strengths and weaknesses, highlights etc. Overall impressions
Task 4: Research
a) An informed opinion comes from researching beyond the film, for example, by:
· reading about the background and the social, cultural and political setting of the film
· reading about the director, other key production personnel, and the lead actor[s].
· viewing other films by the same director or films featuring the same lead actor[s]
· viewing other films in the same genre.
These steps can help establish a film’s critical reputation and place it in its filmic, historical or socio-cultural context. It will also enable you to develop a depth of knowledge to support your opinions and to make comments that can enrich your review.
b) Use the Background Research Sheet (Resource D) to record research details linked to the film you have chosen.
RESOURCE SHEET D BACKGROUND RESEARCH SHEET
Film Title:______Director:______
Genre:______Lead Actor:______
(You may not be able to or need to complete all sections of this research sheet)
Important aspects of this genre I know from viewing other films and reading reviews·
·
·
· / How this film conforms to the genre
/ How this film deviates from the genre
Other films I have seen in the genre
*
*
* / Comparisons I can make with this film
Important historical / social / political / cultural background events
*
*
*
*
* / How these background events are important to this film
Other setting /location comments I can make
Other films I have seen by the same Director
*
*
*
* / Comparisons I can make with this film
Other films I have seen featuring the same lead actor
*
*
*
* / Comparisons I can make with the actor in this film
Task 5: Developing a Draft
a) In addition to the published reviews already studied, you could also read the annotated student review exemplars which follow, discussing their strengths and areas where they could be improved.
b) Using your Viewing Sheet and Background Research Sheet and your understanding of the structure and style of film reviews, write the first draft of your film review. Remember to include:
· an apt title
· correct standing details
· an introduction that commands attention. It should signal the opinion or point of view on the film that you will develop
· evaluation of several features (for instance, content/plot, pace, atmosphere/setting/location, characterisation, acting, credibility, structure, film techniques used), supported by selected details and your background research
· clear links between the ideas
· language choices that are appropriate for your audience and the review text type
· a conclusion that ends the review strongly and pulls together the major aspects of the review.
Task 6: Developing a Final Version
Develop a final version of your review. It should:
· develop, sustain and support your opinions about the film
· craft controlled writing which creates effects appropriate to the film review text type and an audience of senior students and adults, and which communicates an informed opinion in an interesting style
· structure material in a way that is appropriate to the audience, the purpose and the text type
§ use writing conventions accurately (spelling, punctuation, grammar, syntax, paragraphing)
Your review will be at least 600 words long. It should be appropriate for a readership of your peers and your English teacher. You may not include material from the exemplars, from the activity, or from existing film reviews sourced from elsewhere.
Exemplar A: Excellence
SAVE THIS ONE
Schlndler’s List [1993] M
Director: Steven Spielberg
Duration: 187 minutes
Schindler’s List is a powerful film. The story follows the creation of a Jewish ghetto in Krakow, Poland, during World War II and the subsequent arrival of entrepreneur Oskar Schindler (played by Liam Neeson - Rob Roy, Michael Collins). Initially Schindler regards the Jews merely as a source of cheap labour as he exploits the war in order to make his own fortune, but his focus shifts to saving ‘his’ Jews from both random death and concentration camps.