John Adams

The first part mainly centers on one theme that whether Captain Preston stands behind the soldiers and gives the command to shoot at the crowd. In this part, it is full of conflicts and the situation is rather tense. Mr Forrest wanted John Adams to defend for the British soldiers. However, Goddard stated firmly that Captain Preston gave the soldiers the command to shoot at the crowd in the court. Actually, John Adams received great public pressure since his defense for the soldiers, and he carried out hot debate with his wife, Sam, Captain Preston, Goddard and so on, which fully displayed the characters of John Adams

John Adams’s wife reminded him that “ your perspective client is the most despised man in Boston, you will be condemned and said to be the man of the crown if you plead the case”, and John Adams simply replied that “ I care not for malicious tongues on either side”. John Adams knew that his decision to defend for British soldiers would cause public condemnation, but as a lawyer, it was his responsibility to prove that the soldiers were not guilty, John Adams had his principal, he would not submit to external pressure. John Adams went to see the murderers. Captain Preston said to him that “You wish to engage my services in your defense? They’ve all refused us, sir, every man jack of them”, “You may expect from me no art of address, no sophistry or prevarication in such a cause. Nothing more than fact, evidence and the law will justify” John Adams answered. This dialogue showed that what John Adams believed was evidence, everything should be judged according to the law not public resentment. As a lawyer, he should give the public the truth. Just as Captain Preston said, John Adams was a man of integrity. When Sam came across John Adams, Sam warned him that “You have not much of a case, John. No Boston jury will ever vote for acquittal, this is a time for choosing sides”, John Adams did not yield to Sam’s warning because he knew that his responsibility was to prove the truth, public resentment to the crown should not be put into consideration during this case. “I am for the law, cousin, is there another side? I intend to prove that this colony is governed by law”, John Adams replied firmly. At last, John Adams successfully proved that Captain Preston did not give the command to fire and the soldiers were sentenced no guilty.

The Shawshank Redemption

The Shawshank Redemption, which is one of the most worth-watching movies throughout the human history. The film can simply described as a prison-break story, which takes us only several hours, but the leading role, Andy, almost 20 years. At the beginning, Andy is ordered to serve two life sentences for two victims, his wife and her lover, who are supposed to be murdered by him. But it turns out to be a miscarriage of justice. In the following 19 years living in prison, Andy has gone through a lot of hardships and fortunately made a real friend, Red, another leading role in this film. Andy is amazing guy who has even won the respect from the jailors because of the comprehensive knowledge of accounting. He is also a guy of incredible perseverance that he has spent 19 years to tunnel through the prison wall and successfully escaped the prison at the end. When seeing he is extending his arms in front of himself in the heavy rain to enjoy the freedom, I was so touched. I think it is hard to say whether it is a happy story or a sad one, because the plot, you know, really makes your heart ache and the ending may make the cruelest man in the world smile. "Two old friends""on the beautiful beach of Mexico""hugging each other""after tens of years suffering in the prison" I think it is so wonderful that it can't be expressed in words. Well, I like the film so much because it always reminds me that we should appreciate the beauty of life and fight for the dignity of human beings. And the most important is to keep hope forever, just as the sentence on the film poster — “fear can hold you prisoner; hope can set you free”.

Hotel Rwanda ---- a story of an African Schinderler

Hotel Rwanda is a film about a man. It was based on a real story of a man who saved 1268 people’s lives in a madness genocidal, which happened in Rwanda, 1994. The film was directed by Terry George, 2004. The main actor Don Cheadle is not handsome but just an ordinary man. You probably will even not recognize him when you happen to meet him on the street. He acted a hero based on a true story, a man who was as simple as he is, Paul Rusesabagina. Paul is a hero, a real man, while a hero and a real man doesn’t always need to be handsome or attractive in the appearance. There are two nations in Rwanda, hutu and tutsi. Paul is a hutu manager working for a 4 stars hotel on town. The hutu army planed a genocidal to clear out all the tutsi people in ruwanda. The tutsi people were suffering a madness blood bath. Over 800,000 people had been killed within 100 days. Paul has a tutsi wife, in order to protect his wife, children and other tutsis; he took them to hide in the hotel Rwanda. There are many white people from all over the world lived in this hotel so the hotel is the safest place in Rwanda to hide. There are 80 UN soldiers in Rwanda but only 4 guarded in the hotel and all of them are not allowed to shot. If we say that Paul just wanted to save his wife at the beginning, after recognized that there is no one would come to help the tutsis, Paul throw himself into the breach. He bribed the hutu general by wine and gold, used out every coin of his to purchase the refugees’ lives, ten, a hundred, 2 hundreds, 3 hundreds… more and more tutsi refugees flee to the hotel wishing to survive. To them, Paul is an angel who keeps a hope for those hopeless people in the calamity. His goodness his mercy is the key to be alive. 
The hotel Rwanda is a dramatically and war film, ingeniously, there was almost no lens for slaughtering; however, the threatener of death was full filling with the whole movie. One of the tutsi asked Paul, 
“Why they are so truculence?” 
“ Hatred? Insanity? … I don’t know.” 
The event is a humanitarianism disaster and Paul needs no reason to save the lives. When the world closed its eyes, he opened his arms. Facing a madness calamity and crazy crowds, the individual’s power is far from enough. However, Paul saved more than 1000 people’s lives. Paul Rusesabagina is a hero, a real man, an African Schinderler. 

Topic Development post

1. Issue:·      Recently more and more people are addicted to the Internet, this group of people is like a gang of people without the soul, according to an article from US News and World Report, there are some potential risks of Internet addiction.

2.Controversial question Does the addiction of internet harm people's health?

3.Yes-- indulgence in the internet does harm people/ No--It's just a coincidence.

4. Audience: Internet potatoes and their parents, normal people, public heath care authority.

5. Claim:    Even though some people do not understand the potential risk of Internet addiction, it’s no doubt that the indulgence in the internet does harm on ideology, psychology, and physiology of human being.

Persepolis-----The difference between Movie and Comic

First and foremost, I want to talk about this movie first.

Iranians overthrew a dictatorship, why did they meet another tyranny, why they chose the very brutal Islamic fundamentalist revolution? Also, we need to know, the Iranians, they are Persians, they do not speak Arabic. So Iran and the Arab world there was not the same.

Democracy, street sports, war, communism, Islamic revolution, the monarchy, women's rights, homosexuality, these were all involved in this movie . The comparison is interesting,  before and  after the Islamic revolution, a full range of contrast. If you know nothing about Iran, the film will open your door to a mysterious place. Iran is a different country ,then, saw the film, I even think about China, if one day a revolution happened , will we also fall into the trap of some kind of fundamentalist doctrine .The blind worship of the masses is scary.

Next I want of talk about the difference between Movie and Comic.


In my opinion, all comic book movies are not 100% perfect.


For Persepolis ,due to time issues, the film cut lot of small yet interesting details . For example, in comic,when Marjane back to austria, ,she rent a house with six man and all those men were gay, but in movie,this story was only a dictation. I do not know if  the director wanted to avoid political issues, the Communism also weakened.In Marjane childhood dream, there's a conversation like that :if God has abandoned me,  I have Marx.

The film for my greatest disappointment is the too hasty conclusion. On the Comic, Marjane back to Austria , married a french and live a happy life.In the film, dirctor may be want the audience think deeply, he cut this section.

Of course, the above questions are all about the director of the arts . Since I have seen the comic and movie,I'm in a more critical angle. From a technical perspective, the film has maintained the same flavor of the comic style.

....

zqy, ailin,gzj????    脚踏几只船好累... zqy有戏吗?.... 也许是我不懂的事太多

First post, about rhetoric.

 Hi, I'm Chao, you can just call me Charlie. I'm a student in university of Iowa and I'm taking rhetoric class this semester.

 I think it is an interesting class because it offers me a lot of knowledge which fascinated me . Our teacher , Andrew Behrmann, told us some concepts of rhetoric, such as context, culture, audience,rhetor, etc.

It is universally acknowledged that those concepts exists everywhere in our everyday life. For example, last Saturday, I watched the movie Inception. The objective observation, rational reasoning, and rigorous logic make this movie no doubt the best of 2010.


One scene of Inception was the leading actor Leo taught a little girl how to build a dream. In my opinion, the context is the restaurant , the rhetor is Leo (my favorite actor);the culture is the world of Inception that human being could have 4 stages of dreams and people can create and control the dream.( awesome!!) , the audience is the little girl and the people in the movie theatre.


It's very delight to analysis this movie with rhetoric concepts.