Abby Schaffer
English 1106
18 February 2009

Persepolis Movie Review

Before watching Persepolis, I expected it to be different then what it turned out to be. The movie could easily be considered a very condensed version of the graphic novel. Including the important scenes from the book, the movie actually went further into the life of Marjane Satrapi. When the movie ventured into Marjane’s life after her parents sent her away, it surprised me because I thought it was only going to be on the first part. If you are like me and felt that you were just left hanging when the book ended, then the movie would be very beneficial to you.
This film allowed myself to actually hear what the characters sounded like. Instead of imagining what Marjane, her parents, her grandmother, friends, neighbors, etc. sounded like, we heard them for ourselves and were able to compare what we heard to what we previously thought. For instance during the film we actually saw how bratty Marjane was, which was perfectly portrayed in scenes such as when she tried to attack the young boy with screws. Another aspect we were able to see was how Marjane felt she knew everything about the war. It was funny to listen to her explanations about the war because she did not really know all the facts, so she just restated everything she heard, even if it wasn’t right.
By visualizing the characters and hearing them instead of looking at them on a piece of paper it allowed you to picture everything better. The cool thing was that this entire movie took place in French, resulting in sub-titles, which isn’t as bad as you think it would be. I did not mind that I had to read subtitles because if I didn’t hear the characters in Marjane’s natural language I think it would have taken away from her real experience. Along with the sub-titles, if you paid attention to the music in the background, you would hear how perfectly it went along with the scenes. For example whenever something terrible happened, there was either complete silence that set the mood or gloomy depressing music.
The special effects for this movie worked perfectly. By choosing a black and white, animated theme the directors chose a path that related to the graphic novel. If they were to choose real actors, I think that the point of the movie would have been ruined. According to the A.O. Scott, “In this age of Pixar and “Shrek,” it is good to be reminded that animation is rooted not in any particular technique, but in the impulse to bring static images to life” (The New York Times). Scott’s point is saying that instead of bringing in characters that were not going to be able to portray Marjane’s image, they decided to be as simple as possible. By using animated characters, it shows everyone that you do not need all the big time actors and actresses in the movie to get your point across. Also the fact that the entire movie was in black and white besides the few scenes in the airport proves a point that they are trying to make it more and more like a comic book.
One problem that I had was the transitions that occurred. During the entire movie I felt like it was choppy and not smooth. The poor transitions occurred more often in the beginning, but when it happened it was blatantly obvious. Once a scene was over it seemed like they would just pause for a split second then move on. It could just be my perception, but I felt like these poor transitions happened for a good majority of the movie. Eisner would argue that, “ …when there is need to compress time, a greater number of panels are used. The action then becomes more segmented, unlike the action that occurs in the larger, more conventional panels” (30). He basically is saying that even though it may have appeared choppy, the director could have done it purposely. There is not a lot of time given to movies, so the idea of jumping from point to point in the beginning could easily have been on purpose. Who knows, maybe the director was trying to make it as much like a comic book as possible.
If asked if the movie portrayed the book well, I would agree. McCloud himself writes, “…however you might say that before it’s projected, film is just a very, very, very ,very slow comic!” (8). His point is that even though we don’t think about movies in this way, it is actually a comic, just sped up. In the sense of Persepolis, which is actually a comic, the connection between the two was accomplished very well. It wasn’t like a lot of movies that were made based on books that didn’t follow the books storyline very well, but of course it did leave some things out. A movie is maximum of about two and a half hours long: a short time span to fit a lot of information in. For the most part I thought that the directors picked the correct scenes to portray, and filmed them almost exactly like how the book illustrated them. Unlike some of the other movies that were made from comic books, Persepolis stayed true to the original graphic novel. Everything from the characters to specific instances that occurred in the book was visually correct in the movie. I thought it was cool how during the movie I saw almost exact pictures from the book, which again emphasized how well the movie worked off of the book.
Overall I feel that the movie version of Persepolis eventually worked up to the standards that I was expecting. If I needed to recommend it to someone I would say that it is unlike any other movie you saw that was based off of a comic book. If you are trying to get away from the action heroes and super powers that are considered the “interesting” comics, then Persepolis would be a great choice for you. Demonstrating all of the characteristics of a comic book, this movie correctly analyzes Marjane’s life during a war and will give you a viewpoint of the war that you never saw before.



Works Cited Page
Scott, A.O. (2007, December 25). Movies. Retrieved February 18, 2009, from The New York Times Web site: http://movies.nytimes.com/2007/12/25/movies/25pers.html

Abby Schaffer
English 1106
18 February 2009

Persepolis Movie Review

Before watching Persepolis, I expected it to be different then what it turned out to be. It was a really good idea to read the graphic novel version before watching the film because if you didn’t, I do not think you would have received the full effect. The movie could easily be considered a very condensed version of the graphic novel. Including the important scenes from the book, the movie actually went further into the life of Marjane Satrapi. I thought that we were going to see the same ideas and plots that the book contained, but when they moved on to what Marjane’s life was after her parents sent her away, I felt like it was a really good addition. If you are like me and felt that you were just left hanging when the book ended, then the movie would be very beneficial to you.
When reading the graphic novel I felt that Marjane did an excellent job portraying the characters, but it was not until I saw the movie where I felt I actually knew the characters personally. Instead of imagining what Marjane, her parents, her grandmother, friends, neighbors, etc. sounded like, we heard them for ourselves and were able to compare what we heard to what we previously thought. For instance during the film we actually saw how bratty Marjane was, which was perfectly portrayed in scenes such as when she tried to attack the young boy with screws. Another aspect we were able to see was how Marjane felt she knew everything about the war. It was funny to listen to her explanations about the war because she did not really know all the facts, so she just restated everything she heard, even if it wasn’t right.
By visualizing the characters and hearing them instead of looking at them on a piece of paper it allowed you to picture everything better. The cool thing was that this entire movie took place in French, resulting in sub-titles, which isn’t as bad as you think it would be. I did not mind that I had to read subtitles because if I didn’t hear the characters in Marjane’s natural language I think it would have taken away from her real experience.
The special effects for this movie worked perfectly. By choosing a black and white, animated theme the directors chose a path that related to the graphic novel. If they were to choose real actors, I think that the point of the movie would have been ruined. Other critics would say that too many special effects would ruin the film, but the special effects are not the typical ones that you would expect. Instead of hydraulics and fireworks, the special effects in this movie were more on the animated side. The fact that the entire movie was in black and white besides the few scenes in the airport proves a point that they are trying to make it more and more like a comic book. One problem that I had was the transitions that occurred. During the entire movie I felt like it was choppy and not smooth. The poor transitions occurred more often in the beginning, but when it happened it was blatantly obvious. Once a scene was over it seemed like they would just pause for a split second then move on. It could just be my perception, but I felt like these poor transitions happened for a good majority of the movie.
If asked if the movie portrayed the book well, I would agree. It wasn’t like a lot of movies that were made based on books that didn’t follow the books storyline very well, but of course it did leave some things out. A movie is maximum of about two and a half hours long: a short time span to fit a lot of information in. For the most part I thought that the directors picked the correct scenes to portray, and filmed them almost exactly like how the book illustrated them. Unlike some of the other movies that were made from comic books, Persepolis stayed true to the original graphic novel. Everything from the characters to specific instances that occurred in the book was visually correct in the movie. I thought it was cool how during the movie I saw almost exact pictures from the books, which again emphasized how well the movie worked off of the book.
Overall I feel that the movie version of Persepolis eventually worked up to the standards that I was expecting. If I needed to recommend it to someone I would say that it is unlike any other movie you saw that was based off of a comic book. If you are trying to get away from the action heroes and super powers that are considered the “interesting” comics, then Persepolis would be a great choice for you. Demonstrating all of the characteristics of a comic book, this movie correctly analyzes Marjane’s life during a war and will give you a viewpoint of the war that you never saw before.

Suggestions for Writing ex. 2

Both critics seemed to have extremely different ideas about the movie "Spider Man 2".  Todd Gilchrist thought that the sequel did not deserve any of the praise that it received, while Robert Ebert thought that the movie was absolutely amazing.  They mainly disagreed on many things, but there was a couple times where they agreed.  For the majority of both of these reviews, both critics gave an overall summary, talked about the characters, and then gave their own view on what the movie should do in comparison to the actual comic book.  Todd Gilchrist thought that although the movie was not terrible as a whole, it needed areas of improvement.  He went about explaining this by tearing apart the film piece by piece.  In a way I guess you could expect this from a critic who did not really like the movie.  Of course someone who loved the movie wouldn't want to intentionally find flaws that made it not as perfect as they thought it was.

In the summary, Gilchrist seems to think that the main character, Peter (Tobey Maguire), finds his life becoming not as exciting in the sequel, while Ebert thinks Peter thrives due to additions in the script.  Probably what stood out the most to me when reading the second critique was how Roger thought that "Spider Man 2" was unlike the other comic book related movies, which veered away from the original comic books.  He thought that these movies should not only focus on superpowers and the main points people think of when they think of super-heroes, but instead focus on what the original books thought was important.  He felt that the effects were not over the top and actually contributed to the movie, making you feel that the objects were real and not just "robot" like.

Overall you could say that the two critics differed in their opinions on how a sequel should evolve.  Gilchrist thought that they should be exciting and keep you on your toes by adding new emotions and deepening the plot, while Ebert thought that the sequels should be less high tech and more like the original books.  If i was to pick someone to agree with, I would say that I would want to take both sides and make them into one.  Agreeing with Gilchrist that these kinds of movies should not be dragged on, but also agreeing with Ebert that they should not be over packed with special effects and over the top characters.  When reading the two reviews we see how the critics use similar methods to review the movie, which leads us to seeing their different viewpoints.  Not everyone is going to agree that a movie is perfect, but the only thing that can be taken out of these response is the fact that there is always room to change, even when someone thinks it is the best piece of work.

Persepolis Movie vs. Book

On Wednesday when we were about to start the film I thought that it was going to be a full out movie with like real actors and actresses.  To my surprise it was in basically the same format that the book was in, except all the voices were in French and you had to read subtitles.  I was not upset that there were subtitles because I am used to reading them due to having to watch lots of movies in my French class in high school.  In a way I thought it added to the movie because you got to see a different side of Marjane, her cultural French side, then we saw in the book.   At first I thought the comic scenes were stupid because it was basically the same thing we just did, but as the movie continued I found myself liking it more and more.  Although they left out some scenes, for the most part the major scenes were included.

Unlike the book, during the film you did not really have time to reflect on what happens.  When reading the book you got to read the words, look at the pictures, then reflect, but in the movie it was like a ton of information just bombarded you all at once.  Also in the movie I feel that it is choppy and just random scenes from the book placed into motion picture format.  The transitions are probably the part that would need the most work on because when they decide to move on from one scene it is like a small pause instead of a smooth transition.

Although the movie has some flaws, I think that overall it gives us a better picture of what is going on in Iran.  Now, instead of reading and imaging what is going on, we actually get to grasp more then what we got from just looking at the pictures.  For instance, we see actually how bratty Marjane is and how cruel the environment is during the war period.  Instead of imagining what Marjane sounded like, now I have better description that helps connect my book thoughts of her to what I see in the movie.  I don't think I would have liked the movie as much as I do, if I hadn't read the book before.  I think reading the book before we watched a movie was a great idea because we got to understand what was going on and get out own vision of everything.  The movie then was just to further our knowledge and give us a motion vision instead of just pictures.  I am now really interested in the film and am excited for us to finish it tomorrow.  In a way I am hoping it paints a better picture in my mind of the ending because after reading the ending in the book I was disappointed.  Who knows, maybe the movie will leave me on a better note then the book.

Reflection of Persepolis

Persepolis was not what I was expecting at all.  After just finishing the book I look back and realize that before I started reading, I had a completely different view of what went on in Iran during this time.  Before, I saw the problems in Iran only in the way the media portrayed them, but now after reading Persepolis, I can see a completely different view point of what actually happened.  From Marjane Satrapi's stand point, we saw a child's perspective of the war.  In a way I think this perspective can be a lot easier to understand.  For instance if we were to read a regular novel about the revolution in Iran, we would most likely be ten times more lost and would not understand it as well.  The graphic novel approach was appropriate because we saw the war in picture form, which put visions in our head of what actually happened.  For instance when they would show the people getting beat up and stabbed during a demonstration, it showed us how violent everything got in Iran.

This young girl in the story goes against all of the stereotypes that have been shared about Iran.  Although we read the story from the child's perspective, we still got the majority of the amount of information we would have gotten if it was written in any other format.  The comics are relevant because they allow you to read the words, see the image, grasp the concept, then move on to the next box.  These boxes can be in any format to get their point across, for example the boxes that take up the entire page.  If you think about it though, these boxes are perfect because it shows you that it is important and gives you the appropriate amount of time to think about why they made the box so big.  Also there are boxes with just pictures in them to allow you to imagine what they would say.  These boxes can vary so much that it adds to the excitement of reading a graphic novel.  I think if this book was not in a comic format that it would be a terrible read, but instead because of the comics I was able to grasp the information they wanted me to get from the book and actually learn something. 

Off Topic Blog: Michael Phelps

So about Michael Phelps...

I found it shocking that these pictures emerged because when you think of him you think, role model.  When I was on CNN.com I read an article where he apologized.  I think that he spoke really well and although he did do a bad thing that was against the rules, he at least took the blame and apologized to everyone.  People are saying that he is going to be kicked out of the olympics forever, which I think is stupid.  Think about all the athletes that do steroids, which in my opinion are worse.  Michael Phelps is a role model to everyone, and although he messed up I think that he learned a lesson and will never do it again.  Being a fan of Michael, I don't think he should be kicked out of the olympics forever, but instead punished in a different way.  By apologizing and taking full responsibility he knows what he did was wrong and I doubt it will ever happen again.

Chapter 1- Exercise 1/ Experimenting with templates

a. In their recent work scientists have recently suggested that there are dangerous levels of Chemical X in the Ohio groundwater.

b. It has become obvious that this novel has certain flaws.

c. A number of people believe that football is so boring.

d. It has become common that male students often dominate class discussions.

e. It is become obvious that the film is really about the problems of romantic relationships.

f. A number of people may agree that templates like the ones in this book will stifle my creativity.

experimenting with templates:

Teenagers today, if asked how they feel about comics, would most likely say that they are childish and common sense.  They say that comics are not meant to deal with real life problems and serious issues in the real world, but in reality they can have hidden meanings within them.  Although comics have a lot of short sentences and pictures, if you read beyond the "lines" then you can learn a lot more.  McCloud says that comics revolve around sequential art and is a juxtaposed pictorial.  While similarly, Eisner says that comics take on the characteristic of language along with sequential art.  He differs from McCloud by saying that it communicates in a language that relies on a visual experience common to both the creator and audience.  I used to believe that comics were stupid, but now I cannot help but think that they are much more involved then I ever thought they were.  I would say that if given the chance they deserve, people will see that there is much more to them then meets the eye.

Eisner and McCloud responses

I actually got the opportunity to read a graphic novel in high school.  Throughout my senior year we read Maus.  My teacher made us read the graphic novel then analyze it by answering questions about specific parts of the story.  That was my first experience with graphic novels, and to my surprise I did not really mind it.  In the Eisner piece we had to to read I saw a different part of graphic novels that wasn't taught to me in high school.  For instance the author stated how the graphic novel is a different, more creative way to express your writing instead of being a boring person just like the rest of the world.  With the different ways to organize thoughts and to express your thoughts, brings reading to a different level.  There are so many things you must pay attention to: the word bubbles, pictures, characters, shapes of boxes, ect.  Everything comes into play when you are reading a graphic novel.  I found it interesting in the Eisner piece how they said the boxes can be different sizes to express different thoughts.  If you really think about it there are tons of things that come into play when reading a graphic novel, and you must be prepared to try and capture everything.

In the McCloud reading I found it really interesting that the entire thing was in comic book style.  It was cool how he was describing comic books, by writing a comic book.  Reading a comic book is ten times more enjoyable then reading just a plain book.  I would choose reading a graphic novel over a normal novel any day.  When reading a graphic novel I feel like I am not being forced to read it, instead I am reading it because it actually seems interesting.  The fact that the ideas are split up into smaller sections along with pictures makes the read so much easier and fun.  I found it interesting how McCloud used illustrations within his comic book to describe what he was talking about.  Also the idea of being so simple just to get the point across is so cool because if you really think about it, you really can see the true meaning when everything is stripped down and not extremely complicated.  At the end when he said that we become the cartoon, I found it interesting because I did not experience that when I was reading Maus, but hopefully I will experience it when reading Persepolis.

After I read over the articles about comics I feel like I already know so much more about comics then I did before.  They seem extremely interesting and I am really excited about starting the chapter on comics.  The idea of a comic is so complex and interesting, that learning about them won't be boring.  Also I am excited to because reading comics aren't nearly as bad as reading normal texts, so hopefully this unit will be more fun then everyone anticipates it to be.