Great Expectation Essay Example for Free

Great Expectation Essay Compare the filming techniques used in Pips first meeting with Miss Havisham with two adaptations of Charles Dickenss Great Expectations  The two film clips that this essay will be based on, and comparing, is a version by Julian Jarrold which appeared on TV screens in 1999 and a much older cinema appearance by David Lean from 1946. The first noticeable difference is that the earlier film is played in black and white and therefore has certain lighting limitations and, as a result of technological disadvantages, has limited camera shot availability. However, there are a number of useful factors available for analysis. Both films attempt to build up a sense of mystery and increasing tension all the way through the scenes and the task in hand is to focus in on all the different types of filming techniques used to do so. On the whole, the 1999 version is darker than the 1946 edition and this increases the tension factor. Each scene takes us from Pip entering Miss Havishams room to when he leaves and incorporates all of the insults and belittling from Miss Havisham and Estella, although even this is played differently in the two films; David Lean makes very obvious insults as though Estella is actually telling him he is lower than her yet in Jarrolds version Estella either insults Pip to Miss Havisham or to herself in an undertone. There are six main techniques used by each director which this essay will analyse, they are: shot types and framing-how each camera shot affects the mood of the scene, camera angles and lens movement-how the camera is positioned and what bearing that has on the scene, editing, music and sound effects-the backing sounds and its effect on the viewer, costumes-what each actor is wearing and what it does for the characters personality/appearance, lighting and visual effects-how the light and dark areas of the screen portray different ideas. Firstly, there are a few similarities between both scenes Shot types and framing/Camera angles and lens movements/Editing. The first is that both incorporate a long shot as Pip enters to show the huge room in front of him and show that this room really is intimidating as Pip looks tiny compared to the huge open space ahead. Secondly, both films show Pips reaction as a close up shot after the insults from Estella, this gives the viewer a real sense of pity for Pip and shows us what exactly is going through his mind at the time. The final similarity is as the game of cards unfolds, both films fade into the game to show a passing of time and both use an extreme close up to show us what is happening and, Miss Havisham is sat high on a chair in the middle, with Pip and Estella on the floor either side, with a medium shot, making Miss Havisham look very dominant and the children look almost patronised. The 1999 version has a lengthy amount of time when Pip is wondering around the room looking at certain objects, building up mystery and tension, which Jarrold misses out and skips from Pip entering straight to his conversation with Miss Havisham. This added section has a mixture of medium close ups, close ups and extreme close ups, but all the way through the shots are positioned a bit higher than Pip so it gives the audience the idea that somebody has a watchful eye on him, and this, to a certain extent, is almost creepy, certainly builds up mystery and also borderlines on scary. For example, when Pip is walking past the dummies the camera is high up so it is as though the viewers are looking through Miss Havishams eyes. The other main camera uses are when Pip sees Miss Havisham in the mirror, she looks virtually ghost like and it is almost scary, but just before she appears, its looks again as though he is being watched, and as Miss Havisham waves her arm to tell Pip to play, there is a close up of her arm to show her dominance and shortly after a close up of Pips face to show the confused reaction. This section of the scene is very clever camera work by Jarrold, and really does freak the audience out. Both films use shot types, framing, camera angles, lens movement and editing differently, but there a number of specific differences between the two. When the two films join back up, there are many different camera uses and consequences of such. In the 1946 version, there is a long shot as Pip walks up to Miss Havisham and a medium close up as they talk to one-another and as Pip advances further, the camera moves in an arc to keep him and Miss Havisham on the picture at the same time. When they are closer, it allows an even closer shot than before of their faces and therefore portrays both expressions and the reactions to each others expressions individually. An addition to this version of Great Expectations is how the camera zooms in on a cobweb covered bible to show the lost faith of Miss Havisham, and explain to the audience that something terrible has happened earlier in her life to make her do so. A two shot of Miss Havisham and Pip is on screen, and, as Estella joins the camera slides horizontally to follow her in. As Estella whispers in Miss Havishams ear there is a two shot to portray Miss Havishams expression. When Miss Havisham asks Pip his opinion of Estella he is made to whisper it in her ear but as he does so there is a medium close up showing all three expressions at the same time, i.e. Pips horror as Miss Havisham tells Estella what he has just said and Estellas delight of hearing such approving words. As Pip approaches the gate to go home, there is another fade in to show more time has passed by. This can be compared with the 1999 version which has a much briefer conversation between Pip and Miss Havisham as much time is spent when Pip walks around, but, when Pip is whispering about Estella, the camera zooms in on Estellas face to show her reaction after being praised by Pip. Finally, when Pip and Miss Havisham are talking, there is a two shot of them to show each reaction as each person says something.

Silencing the Left in Modern America Essay -- Essays Papers

Silencing the Left in Modern America â€Å"Just so you know, we’re ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas.† -- Natalie Maines on tour in England The crowd erupted in cheers. Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks band had just excited two thousand fans in a small London club with her anti-Bush statement, only one week before American forces entered Iraq. The Dixie Chicks finished their concert riding the high of their audience’s support. Little did they know the trouble these fifteen words would cause. When Maines and the other Dixie Chicks, Martie Maguire and Emily Robison, returned to their hotel in London later that week, their manager received a call informing them that the Associated Press found out what they had said. Their manager consoled them, â€Å"†¦don’t worry. It’s going to blow over in three days.† But it didn’t. Unwittingly, the Dixie Chicks found themselves in a maelstrom of angry political and social debate. Their country music fan base, predominantly conservative Americans, felt alienated by their statement. Opposition came in many forms: on the Internet, on the radio waves, on television, from individuals, and from corporations. The size and nature of the hostility to the Dixie Chicks and other celebrities is unprecedented. The boycotts, censorship, and threats all point to an alarming new trend arising from the latest war in Iraq. During the 1950s, Americans held a deep-seated fear that all that they had fought for in World War II – namely, the freedom of the world from fascists – was being lost to the worldwide communist revolution. As a result, the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) was reestablished to monitor the behavior of radicals dangerous to the nation. Mostly us... ...john_lennon.html>. 15 November 2004. Kot, Greg. â€Å"Musicians’ protests of Iraq War create conflicts within industry.† Columbia Daily Tribune 30 March 2003 . Krugman, Paul. â€Å"Dixie Chicks and Clear Channel Communications†. New York Times. 26 March 2003. Lee, Zach. â€Å"Sticks and stones vs. opinions.† The Daily Cougar. Volume 68, Issue 124. 2 April 2003. Maguire, Martie, Natalie Maines, and Emily Robison. Interview with Diane Sawyer. Primetime Thursday. ABC. New York. 24 April 2003. â€Å"The Dixie Chicks Come Clean.† Entertainment. May 2003. â€Å"What Music Stars Are Saying About The War In Iraq.† Radio One Global . 26 November 2004. Wiener, John. Gimme Some Truth: The John Lennon F.B.I. Files. The University of California Press, Berkeley: 1999.

Lawless

SYNOPSIS Creates diversionary program for juveniles who are criminally charged for â€Å"sexting† or posting sexual images. CURRENT VERSION OF TEXT As introduced. An Act creating a diversionary program for certain juveniles, and amending P. L. 1982, c. 81 and supplementing Title 2A of the New Jersey Statutes. Be It Enacted by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey: 1. Section 2 of P. L. 1982, c. 81 (C. 2A:4A-71) is amended to read as follows: 2. Review and processing of complaints. a. The jurisdiction of the court in any complaint filed pursuant to section 11 of P. L. 1982, c. 77 (C. A:4A-30) shall extend to the juvenile who is the subject of the complaint and his parents or guardian. b. Every complaint shall be reviewed by court intake services for recommendation as to whether the complaint should be dismissed, diverted, or referred for court action. Where the complaint alleges a crime which, if committed by an adult, would be a crime of the first, second, third or fourth degree, or alleges a repetitive disorderly persons offense or any disorderly persons offense defined in chapter 35 or chapter 36 of Title 2C, the complaint shall be referred for court action, unless the prosecutor otherwise consents to diversion.Court intake services shall consider the following factors in determining whether to recommend diversion: (1) The seriousness of the alleged offense or conduct and the circumstances in which it occurred; (2) The age and maturity of the juvenile; (3) The risk that the juvenile presents as a substantial danger to others; (4) The family circumstances, including any history of drugs, alcohol abuse or child abuse on the part of the juvenile, his parents or guardian; (5) The nature and number of contacts with court intake services and the court that the juvenile or his family have had; 6) The outcome of those contacts, including the services to which the juvenile or family have been referred and the results of those referrals; (7) The availability of appropriate services outside referral to the court; (8) Any recommendations expressed by the victim or complainant, or arresting officer, as to how the case should be resolved; [and] (9) Any recommendation expressed by the county prosecutor; and (10) The offense alleged is an eligible offense pursuant to section 3 of P. L. , c. (C. (pending before the Legislature as this bill) and the juvenile is eligible to participate in the educational reform program set forth section 3 of P. L. ,c. (C. )(pending before the Legislature as this bill). (cf: P. L. 1988, c. 44, s. 17) 2. (New section) Where a complaint against a juvenile pursuant to section 11 of P. L. 1982, c. 77 (C. 2A:4A-30) alleges that the juvenile has committed an eligible offense satisfying the criteria set forth in subsection c. of section 3 of P. L. , c. (C. ) (pending before he Legislature as this bill) and the court has approved diversion of the complaint pursuant to section 4 of P. L. 1982, c. 81 (C. 2A:4A-73) the resolution of the complaint shall include participation in an educational program set forth in 3 of P. L. , c. (C. ) (pending before the Legislature as this bill). 3. (New section). a. As used in P. L. , c. (C. )(pending before the Legislature as this bill), â€Å"eligible offense† means an offense in which: (1) the facts of the case involve the creation, exhibition or distribution of a photograph depicting nudity as defined in N.J. S. 2C:24-4 through the use of an electronic communication device, an interactive wireless communications device or a computer; and (2) the creator and subject of the photograph are juveniles or were juveniles at the time of its making. b. The Attorney General, in consultation with the Administrative Director of the Administrative Office of the Courts, shall develop an educational program for juveniles who have committed an eligible offense as defined under the provisions of subsection a. of this section.A juvenile who successfully co mpletes the program shall have the opportunity to avoid prosecution for the eligible offense. c. Admission to the program shall be limited to cases where: (1) the juvenile has not previously been adjudicated delinquent for or convicted of a crime or offense which, if committed by an adult, would constitute aggravated sexual assault; sexual assault; aggravated assault; aggravated criminal sexual contact; endangering the welfare of a child pursuant to N. J. S. 2C:24-4; luring or enticing a child pursuant to section 1 of P. L. 1993, c. 291 (C. C:13-6); luring or enticing an adult pursuant to section 1 of P. L. 2005, c. 1 (C. 2C:13-7) or an attempt to commit any of the enumerated offenses; (2) the juvenile was not aware that his actions could constitute and did not have the intent to commit a criminal offense; (3) there is a likelihood that the juvenile’s offense is related to a condition or situation that would be conducive to change through his participation in the educational program; and (4) the benefits to society in admitting the juvenile into this educational program outweigh the harm done to society by abandoning criminal prosecution. . The educational program shall provide information concerning: (1) the legal consequences of and penalties for sharing sexually suggestive or explicit materials, including applicable federal and State statutes; (2) the non-legal consequences of sharing sexually suggestive or explicit materials including, but not limited to, the effect on relationships, loss of educational and employment opportunities, and being barred or removed from school programs and extracurricular activities; 3) how the unique characteristics of cyberspace and the Internet, including searchibility, replicability, and an infinite audience, can produce long-term and unforeseen consequences for sharing sexually suggestive or explicit materials; and (4) the possible connection between bullying and cyber-bullying and juveniles sharing sexually suggest ive or explicit materials. e. The Attorney General may promulgate guidelines to effectuate the provisions of this act. 4. This act shall take effect on the first day of the seventh month after enactment. STATEMENTThis bill establishes an educational program as an alternative to prosecution for certain juveniles who are charged with a criminal offense for posting sexually suggestive or sexually explicit photographs, or who engage in the behavior commonly known as â€Å"sexting,† in which these pictures are transmitted via cell phones. The bill provides that where a complaint against a juvenile alleges that the juvenile has committed an â€Å"eligible offense† and the court approves diversion of the complaint, the resolution of the complaint would include participation in the educational program created by the bill.The bill defines an â€Å"eligible offense† as an offense in which: (1) the facts of the case involve the creation, exhibition or distribution of a pho tograph depicting nudity as defined in N. J. S. A. 2C:24-4 through the use of an electronic communication device, an interactive wireless communications device or a computer; and (2) the creator and subject of the photograph are juveniles or were juveniles at the time of its making. Under the bill, the Attorney General, in consultation with the Administrative Office of the Courts, would develop an educational program for these juveniles.A juvenile who successfully completes the program would have the opportunity to avoid prosecution for the offense. Admission to the program would be limited to cases where: (1) the juvenile has not previously been adjudicated delinquent for or convicted of a crime or offense which, if committed by an adult, would constitute aggravated sexual assault; sexual assault; aggravated assault; aggravated criminal sexual contact; endangering the welfare of a child; luring or enticing a child; luring or enticing an adult or an attempt to commit any of the enum erated offenses; 2) the juvenile was not aware that his actions could constitute, and did not have the intent to commit, a criminal offense; (3) there is a likelihood that the juvenile’s offense is related to a condition or situation that would be conducive to change through his participation in the educational program; and (4) the benefits to society in admitting the juvenile into this educational program outweigh the harm done to society by abandoning criminal prosecution.The educational program would provide information concerning: (1) the legal consequences of and penalties for sharing sexually suggestive or explicit materials, including applicable federal and State statutes; (2) the non-legal consequences of sharing sexually suggestive or explicit materials including, but not limited to, the effect on relationships, loss of educational and employment opportunities, and being barred or removed from school programs and extracurricular activities; 3) how the unique characte ristics of cyberspace and the Internet, including searchibility, replicability, and an infinite audience, can produce long-term and unforeseen consequences for sharing sexually suggestive or explicit materials; and (4) the possible connection between bullying and cyber-bullying and juveniles sharing sexually suggestive or explicit materials. In addition, the bill amends N. J. S. A. 2A:4A-71 to specifically provide for the diversion of juveniles into the newly created educational program created under the bill as one of the enumerated recommendations which can be made by the court.SYNOPSIS Creates diversionary program for juveniles who are criminally charged for â€Å"sexting† or posting sexual images. CURRENT VERSION OF TEXT As introduced. An Act creating a diversionary program for certain juveniles, and amending P. L. 1982, c. 81 and supplementing Title 2A of the New Jersey Statutes. Be It Enacted by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey: 1. Section 2 of P. L. 1982, c. 81 (C. 2A:4A-71) is amended to read as follows: 2. Review and processing of complaints. a. The jurisdiction of the court in any complaint filed pursuant to section 11 of P. L. 1982, c. 77 (C. A:4A-30) shall extend to the juvenile who is the subject of the complaint and his parents or guardian. b. Every complaint shall be reviewed by court intake services for recommendation as to whether the complaint should be dismissed, diverted, or referred for court action. Where the complaint alleges a crime which, if committed by an adult, would be a crime of the first, second, third or fourth degree, or alleges a repetitive disorderly persons offense or any disorderly persons offense defined in chapter 35 or chapter 36 of Title 2C, the complaint shall be referred for court action, unless the prosecutor otherwise consents to diversion.Court intake services shall consider the following factors in determining whether to recommend diversion: (1) The seriousness of the alleged offen se or conduct and the circumstances in which it occurred; (2) The age and maturity of the juvenile; (3) The risk that the juvenile presents as a substantial danger to others; (4) The family circumstances, including any history of drugs, alcohol abuse or child abuse on the part of the juvenile, his parents or guardian; (5) The nature and number of contacts with court intake services and the court that the juvenile or his family have had; 6) The outcome of those contacts, including the services to which the juvenile or family have been referred and the results of those referrals; (7) The availability of appropriate services outside referral to the court; (8) Any recommendations expressed by the victim or complainant, or arresting officer, as to how the case should be resolved; [and] (9) Any recommendation expressed by the county prosecutor; and (10) The offense alleged is an eligible offense pursuant to section 3 of P. L. , c. (C. (pending before the Legislature as this bill) and the juvenile is eligible to participate in the educational reform program set forth section 3 of P. L. ,c. (C. )(pending before the Legislature as this bill). (cf: P. L. 1988, c. 44, s. 17) 2. (New section) Where a complaint against a juvenile pursuant to section 11 of P. L. 1982, c. 77 (C. 2A:4A-30) alleges that the juvenile has committed an eligible offense satisfying the criteria set forth in subsection c. of section 3 of P. L. , c. (C. ) (pending before the Legislature as this bill) and the court has approved diversion of the complaint pursuant to section 4 of P.L. 1982, c. 81 (C. 2A:4A-73) the resolution of the complaint shall include participation in an educational program set forth in 3 of P. L. , c. (C. ) (pending before the Legislature as this bill). 3. (New section). a. As used in P. L. , c. (C. )(pending before the Legislature as this bill), â€Å"eligible offense† means an offense in which: (1) the facts of the case involve the creation, exhibition or distribution of a photograph depicting nudity as defined in N. J. S. 2C:24-4 through the use of an electronic communication device, an interactive wireless communications device or a computer; and 2) the creator and subject of the photograph are juveniles or were juveniles at the time of its making. b. The Attorney General, in consultation with the Administrative Director of the Administrative Office of the Courts, shall develop an educational program for juveniles who have committed an eligible offense as defined under the provisions of subsection a. of this section. A juvenile who successfully completes the program shall have the opportunity to avoid prosecution for the eligible offense. c.Admission to the program shall be limited to cases where: (1) the juvenile has not previously been adjudicated delinquent for or convicted of a crime or offense which, if committed by an adult, would constitute aggravated sexual assault; sexual assault; aggravated assault; aggravated criminal sexual contact; en dangering the welfare of a child pursuant to N. J. S. 2C:24-4; luring or enticing a child pursuant to section 1 of P. L. 1993, c. 291 (C. 2C:13-6); luring or enticing an adult pursuant to section 1 of P. L. 2005, c. 1 (C. C:13-7) or an attempt to commit any of the enumerated offenses; (2) the juvenile was not aware that his actions could constitute and did not have the intent to commit a criminal offense; (3) there is a likelihood that the juvenile’s offense is related to a condition or situation that would be conducive to change through his participation in the educational program; and (4) the benefits to society in admitting the juvenile into this educational program outweigh the harm done to society by abandoning criminal prosecution. . The educational program shall provide information concerning: (1) the legal consequences of and penalties for sharing sexually suggestive or explicit materials, including applicable federal and State statutes; (2) the non-legal consequences of sharing sexually suggestive or explicit materials including, but not limited to, the effect on relationships, loss of educational and employment opportunities, and being barred or removed from school programs and extracurricular activities; 3) how the unique characteristics of cyberspace and the Internet, including searchibility, replicability, and an infinite audience, can produce long-term and unforeseen consequences for sharing sexually suggestive or explicit materials; and (4) the possible connection between bullying and cyber-bullying and juveniles sharing sexually suggestive or explicit materials. e. The Attorney General may promulgate guidelines to effectuate the provisions of this act. 4. This act shall take effect on the first day of the seventh month after enactment. STATEMENTThis bill establishes an educational program as an alternative to prosecution for certain juveniles who are charged with a criminal offense for posting sexually suggestive or sexually explicit pho tographs, or who engage in the behavior commonly known as â€Å"sexting,† in which these pictures are transmitted via cell phones. The bill provides that where a complaint against a juvenile alleges that the juvenile has committed an â€Å"eligible offense† and the court approves diversion of the complaint, the resolution of the complaint would include participation in the educational program created by the bill.The bill defines an â€Å"eligible offense† as an offense in which: (1) the facts of the case involve the creation, exhibition or distribution of a photograph depicting nudity as defined in N. J. S. A. 2C:24-4 through the use of an electronic communication device, an interactive wireless communications device or a computer; and (2) the creator and subject of the photograph are juveniles or were juveniles at the time of its making. Under the bill, the Attorney General, in consultation with the Administrative Office of the Courts, would develop an educatio nal program for these juveniles.A juvenile who successfully completes the program would have the opportunity to avoid prosecution for the offense. Admission to the program would be limited to cases where: (1) the juvenile has not previously been adjudicated delinquent for or convicted of a crime or offense which, if committed by an adult, would constitute aggravated sexual assault; sexual assault; aggravated assault; aggravated criminal sexual contact; endangering the welfare of a child; luring or enticing a child; luring or enticing an adult or an attempt to commit any of the enumerated offenses; 2) the juvenile was not aware that his actions could constitute, and did not have the intent to commit, a criminal offense; (3) there is a likelihood that the juvenile’s offense is related to a condition or situation that would be conducive to change through his participation in the educational program; and (4) the benefits to society in admitting the juvenile into this educational program outweigh the harm done to society by abandoning criminal prosecution.The educational program would provide information concerning: (1) the legal consequences of and penalties for sharing sexually suggestive or explicit materials, including applicable federal and State statutes; (2) the non-legal consequences of sharing sexually suggestive or explicit materials including, but not limited to, the effect on relationships, loss of educational and employment opportunities, and being barred or removed from school programs and extracurricular activities; 3) how the unique characteristics of cyberspace and the Internet, including searchibility, replicability, and an infinite audience, can produce long-term and unforeseen consequences for sharing sexually suggestive or explicit materials; and (4) the possible connection between bullying and cyber-bullying and juveniles sharing sexually suggestive or explicit materials. In addition, the bill amends N. J. S. A. 2A:4A-71 to specifically provide for the diversion of juveniles into the newly created educational program created under the bill as one of the enumerated recommendations which can be made by the court.

Unit 4P4 to Describe Two Theories of Ageing...

P4: to describe two theories of ageing –disengagement and activity P5 – Describe physical and psychological changes due to the ageing process M3: Use examples to describe the 2 theories of ageing D2: Evaluate the influence of 2 major theories on health and social care provisions. The activity theory The Activity Theory was originally an idea that was proposed by Lemon Bengtson amp;Peterson this proposal was seen to have a much more hopeful and positive view on ageing in comparison to the disengagement theory by Cumming and Henry. The activity theory suggests that as people get older their ageing process will be more successful if they maintain their roles and responsibilities as they did when they were younger this is if they†¦show more content†¦work, hobbies and relationships. At this stage old people are disengaging from the responsibility and livelihood that they were previously experiencing and decide to become inactive, less social and have minimum friendly interactions with others. When people get older they start to live their life in the opposite way to how they lived it when they were younger. When in the disengagement process those people who were usually active and social as they get older they would begin to withdraw from all these po sitive things in their lives and give up on what was seen as traditional and normal behaviour, this could be anything from going to work or visiting the social club. In the disengagement process any normal and routine thing such as work or visiting friends would reverse and change into something that was completely negative like retiring from work and being anti-social. Cumming said that the amount of social contact that the old people would experience will slowly reduce as they get older and they would chose to become more independent and individual in terms of shutting other out of their lives and resorting to doing nothing active or meaningful in their lives with this they have a less concern with what others expect from them. He also said that disengagement was a natural process that comes with aging which is appropriate and healthy for older people to withdraw from the people around