I need 5-8 pages for a critical analysis on the movie Inglourious Bastards with these specifications
THE ASSIGNMENT
The culminating assignment for this class is to craft a 5-8 page (1500-2400 total words, excluding titles and bibliography) critical analysis of a media-related object (primary source) of your choice.
For example, you might choose to write about a movie, TV show, song, video game, photograph, magazine, fandom, media company, technology, celebrity, genre, advertisement, or just about anything else that connects to media and popular culture. The only form of media that your professor prohibits are literary novels – save those for English class. Graphic novels and comics are acceptable.
The key is that your primary source is focused and manageable. Remember, you cannot possibly analyze “the media” in 5-8 pages. And even though Sharp says that topics should be general, that’s different than saying broad.
WHAT IS A CRITICAL ANALYSIS?
In Section 2.1, Sharp offers some guidelines for writing critical analyses; however, your professor would like to offer some additional context. It often helps to understand what a critical analysis is not in order to better understand what a critical analysis is.
A critical analysis is not a review. Reviews assume that readers possess no special knowledge about the object of the review. This form of writing often relies heavily on plot summary and the result is usually a judgment about the quality of the object under review (e.g., thumbs up/down, a star rating, or some rotten tomatoes). This is not say say that reviews are unimportant, but it is to say that they are typically not scholarly enough for a class like this.
A critical analysis is not a full-fledged theoretical essay. Theoretical essays are the province of professional academics (i.e. professors and graduate students). A theoretical essay requires a very deep dive into theoretical concepts and analytic methods. These essays suppose that the writers knows a great deal about the object of study, the histories surrounding those objects, and the academic theories and methods used to analyze media texts/objects/artifacts. The audience for theoretical essays are typically other academics.
A critical analysis falls somewhere between a review and a theoretical essay. Writers should assume that your readers are other media criticism students. In other words, assume that your audience possess some, but not deep, knowledge of analytic process and approaches to analysis. In our case, we have been practicing analyses involving shared experiences (i.e. we’ve all been analyzing the same things), but in this paper that assumption probably will not hold true so you’ll need to offer enough information to help your reader become familiar with your object but not so much summary that it displaces the analysis. In short, you’ll need to set up your analysis so your readers understand the important themes, concepts, historical contexts, cultural issues, and theoretical/methodological approaches on which you’ll rely. Your goal is to reveal subtleties, complexities, nuances, and/or interpretations of the object. In short, you want to deepen your readers’ understandings of the object. Adopting a clear theoretical/methodological foundation will help you frame that analysis, because theories provide lenses. Whereas a theoretical essay may attempt to extend or expand the readers understandings of theories/methods, a critical analysis merely uses existing theory/method as a tool.
USING THEORIES/METHODS
To analyze your primary source you should rely on RELEVANT concepts or theories explored in this class (i.e. from Takacs). You should also conduct additional research to expand your understanding of those concepts, theories, or your primary source. Remember, some of the key theoretical/methodological approaches that we have been introduced to are:
- Historical
- Author
- Textual
- Semiotic
- Genre
- Ideology/Discourse
- Representation/Identity (Race, Gender, Sexuality, Class etc.)
- Affect & Fan Studies
- Medium
- Globalization
Your professor recommends choosing one of these approaches or some combination of them for your paper. It’s wise to revisit Section 2.1 of the Sharp textbook for a step-by-step breakdown of what a critical analysis entails. Pay particular attention to Step #4:
Demonstrate how the primary sources take specific positions on an issue. This type of analysis, which is sometimes called ideological analysis, looks at how a source is in dialogue with the ideology of the society in which it was produced. Sometimes a source reinforces prevailing ideas about a particular issue and sometimes a source rejects dominant ways of thinking. Sometimes a source does a little bit of both. However, all sources take a position on the issues they evoke. Your analysis should make clear what position a particular primary source is taking and what conclusions it is leading the reader to accept. (Sharp, p. 11)
Take note of the way that Takacs developed our understanding of ideological analysis throughout the chapters of her book. This form of analysis often marries well with, or is incorporated into the various approaches mentioned above.
OPINION v. ANALYSIS
All critical analyses involve some opinion. Critical-cultural approaches tend to be more subjective than their more objective scientific counterparts. This does not mean that presenting unsupported opinions is a good idea. Just because your opinion may creep into your work does not mean that your opinion should be the focus of that work. Instead, a critic wants to demonstrate why the claims s/he makes a viable and justifiable.
Opinions are almost always written in first-person (i.e. using pronouns like I, me, and my). Analyses may use first-person at times but writers need to be careful about when and how that voice is used. Some methods, like autoethnography, centralize the writer and in these cases a heavier usage of first-person is anticipated and appropriate. Of this topic Timothy Corrigan (2010) writes, “When you write about the [media], personal feelings, expectations, and reactions may be the beginning of an intelligent critique, but they must be balanced with rigorous reflection on where those feelings and expectations and reactions come from and how they relate to more objective factors concerning the [object] in question: its place in film history, its cultural background, and its formal strategies” (p. 17).
FORMATTING GUIDELINES
Your document should be double-spaced, use a standard typeface (e.g., Times), and have 1″ margins.
You will submit your document by uploading it as a .doc, .docx, or .pdf file.
PLEASE DO NOT PUT YOUR NAME ANYWHERE ON YOUR DOCUMENT. YOU MAY INCLUDE YOUR NAME IN THE FILE NAME.
NOTE: Your professor is less interested in your ability to write the assigned number of words than in your ability to produce a focused and insightful analysis; however, any analysis that is too long or too brief will be penalized. Put simply, your professor will only count words in egregious situations.
PARTS OF A CRITICAL ANALYSIS
All critical analyses should possess the following parts:
- An introduction that introduces the topic and your primary source, outlines important historical/cultural contexts, demonstrates the significance of your work, and offers a focused and manageable thesis statement that leads to a thoughtful and developed analysis. (The intro usually spans 1-3 paragraphs)
- A body containing several PEAR structures paragraphs with points, evidence, analysis, and reminders that flesh out the thesis and topic. (The body usually contains 3-7 paragraphs)
- A conclusion that sums up your position, reiterates important evidence, and re-articulates your thesis statement. (The conclusion usually has 1-3 paragraphs)
- A MLA formatted bibliography that includes ALL sources, including the object of your study (i.e. the media text, artifact, or object). ANNOTATIONS ARE NOT REQUIRED WITH THE FINAL PAPER’S BIBLIOGRAPHY.
THE PROCESS
To help launch the process revisit the work we’ve completed throughout the semester. Either choose something from the class that you’ve already worked to expand or choose something else as your primary source and analyze that.
Next, revisit the discussion board(s) that were most relevant to your approach. Read over all responses, but pay particular attention to your own responses and the feedback you received. Use that information to help you shape your analysis. You’ll also need to execute a full analysis (see Sharp’s sections) and weave everything together with transitions. As you do this consider how your introduction and body are leading toward a conclusion. Keep in mind that your introduction should be the last thing you revise.
Make sure that you internally cite any evidence you use and include the source in a bibliography. You may reference MLA style here (Links to an external site.).
You ARE required to undertake additional research. This research should involve a critical interrogation of your primary source, but it should also apply and develop your selected concepts, theories, and/or approaches. In other words, you should use a range of evidence (see BEAM (Links to an external site.)).
IN SUM
Your professor would like to keep the assignment somewhat flexible so you can tailor your analysis of the primary source you select to the theories, approaches, topics, and issues that most interest you. The only requirement is that you analyze a media-related primary source and do so by using what you learned in this class.
Rubric
Critical Analysis Rubric (121720)
Critical Analysis Rubric (121720)
| Criteria |
Ratings |
Pts |
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeINTRODUCTION: Topic Statement
|
| 15 pts
Polished
The topic statement establishes clear, focused, and appropriate historical and/or cultural contexts. The statement also coherently outlines important and relevant issues for the writer to explore and identifies the primary source in MLA style while also clarifying its connection to the broader topic. Finally, the statement sufficiently sets up the thesis statement and ensuing analysis, but avoids engaging in that analysis.
|
13 pts
Notable
The topic statement makes a strong attempt to establish relevant historical and/or cultural contexts. It also endeavors to outline important and relevant issues for the writer to explore and identifies the primary source. Finally, the statement efforts to set up a thesis statement and an analysis.
|
11 pts
Competent
The topic statement nods toward historical and/or cultural contexts, but those contexts could be more fully considered. It strives to outline relevant issues for the writer to explore and identifies the primary source, but the statement could more fully clarify the relevance of the analysis. Finally, the statement begins to point to the thesis statement and analysis, but either engages in that analysis or falls a bit short of setting up a compelling thesis.
|
9 pts
Developing
A topic statement is presented, but it falls short of providing accurate or compelling historical and/or cultural contexts. It either fails to outline relevant issues for the writer to explore or does not identify the primary source. Overall, the statement does not effectively set up the thesis statement and/or the analysis. INCOMPLETE OR WOEFULLY UNPOLISHED RESPONSES WILL NOT EARN HIGHER THAN DEVELOPING IN ANY CATEGORY.
|
7 pts
Problematic
The topic statement is seriously problematic but present. It falls well short of providing accurate or compelling historical and/or cultural contexts. It fails to outline any relevant issues for the writer to explore or does not identify the primary source. Overall, the statement fails set up the thesis statement and/or the analysis.
|
0 pts
Absent or Woeful
The topic statement is absent or woefully problematic.
|
|
15 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeINTRODUCTION: Thesis Statement
|
| 15 pts
Polished
The thesis statement offers a full and engaging overview of the analysis that will follow and fully establishes the main points that the writer plans to make. This statement clearly identifies the meaning and importance of the primary source and why an analysis of that source is needed. Put simply, the writer effectively sets up an argument by fully addressing the “so what” question while effectively mapping the parameters and direction of the analysis.
|
13 pts
Notable
The thesis statement offers a good overview of the analysis that will follow and introduces some main points that the writer plans to make. This statement largely establishes the meaning and importance of the primary source and why the analysis of that source is needed. Put simply, the writer makes a strong effort to set up an argument, to address the “so what” question, and to map the parameters and direction of the analysis.
|
11 pts
Competent
The thesis statement begins to offer an overview of the analysis that will follow and to introduce some main points that the writer plans to make. This statement falls a bit short of establishing the meaning and importance of the primary source or does not sufficiently explain why the analysis of that source is needed. Put simply, the writer makes an effort to set up an argument, to address the “so what” question, and to map the parameters and direction of the analysis, but that effort needs some notable improvement in one of the key areas outlined above.
|
9 pts
Developing
An identifiable thesis statement is present but that statement does not offer an effective overview of the analysis that will follow and/or fails to suggest the points that the writer seeks to make. This statement falls notably short of establishing the meaning and importance of the primary source and/or does not sufficiently explain why the analysis of that source is needed. Put simply, the writer does not set up a compelling argument or fails to sufficiently address the “so what” question and/or map the parameters and direction of the analysis. The thesis needs substantial work if the writer hopes to produce a compelling analysis. INCOMPLETE OR WOEFULLY UNPOLISHED RESPONSES WILL NOT EARN HIGHER THAN DEVELOPING IN ANY CATEGORY.
|
7 pts
Problematic
The thesis statement is difficult to identify and does not set up a coherent analysis. This statement falls well short of establishing the meaning and importance of the primary source and does not sufficiently explain why the analysis of that source is needed. Put simply, the writer does not set up a compelling argument and fails to sufficiently address the “so what” question and/or map the parameters and direction of the analysis. The thesis needs a total rewrite if the writer hopes to produce a compelling analysis.
|
0 pts
Absent or Woeful
The thesis statement is absent or woefully problematic.
|
|
15 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBODY: Point(s)
|
| 15 pts
Polished
Points are consistently compelling, focused, clear, engaging, and insightful. You effectively and fully set-up meaningful and important analyses of your primary source.
|
13 pts
Notable
Points are largely compelling, focused, clear, engaging, and insightful. You make strong attempts to set-up meaningful and important analyses of your primary source. Only minor revisions are needed.
|
11 pts
Competent
Points are compelling but need to be more focused, clear, engaging, and/or insightful. You make decent attempts to set-up a meaningful and important analyses of your primary source, but those attempts could also be stronger.
|
9 pts
Developing
Points need to be more focused, clear, engaging, and/or insightful. The reader is likely to struggle to determine why this analysis of the primary source is meaningful and/or important. INCOMPLETE OR WOEFULLY UNPOLISHED RESPONSES WILL NOT EARN HIGHER THAN DEVELOPING IN ANY CATEGORY.
|
7 pts
Problematic
Points need to be considerably more focused, clear, engaging, and/or insightful. The reader is unlikely to determine why this analysis of the primary source is meaningful and/or important.
|
0 pts
Absent or Woeful
The points are absent or woefully problematic.
|
|
15 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBODY: Evidence
|
| 15 pts
Polished
You use specific, concise, and detailed evidence that is drawn from reliable and relevant sources. The evidence selected is clearly connected to the point and sets the foundation for an enlightening analysis. Your evidence is also clearly signaled and appropriately cited.
|
13 pts
Notable
You use specific evidence that is drawn from reliable and relevant sources. The evidence selected is largely connected to the point and will likely set the foundation for an enlightening analysis. Your evidence is also clearly signaled and appropriately cited.
|
11 pts
Competent
You use some evidence but it could have been better selected, drawn from more reliable or relevant sources, or needed to be considerably more specific. Or, the evidence used seems problematically connected to the point and as a result may not set the foundation for an enlightening analysis. Your evidence is sometimes not signaled and/or appropriately cited.
|
9 pts
Developing
You rely on weak, unreliable, or overly general evidence and struggle to connect the evidence to the point. The evidence used is unlikely to set the foundation for an enlightening analysis. Your evidence is often not signaled and/or appropriately cited. INCOMPLETE OR WOEFULLY UNPOLISHED RESPONSES WILL NOT EARN HIGHER THAN DEVELOPING IN ANY CATEGORY.
|
7 pts
Problematic
You rely on very weak, unreliable, or overly general evidence and do not connect the evidence to the point. The evidence used does not set the foundation for an enlightening analysis. Your evidence is not signaled and/or appropriately cited.
|
0 pts
Absent or Woeful
The points are absent or woefully problematic.
|
|
15 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBODY: Analysis
|
| 15 pts
Polished
You seamlessly break down the evidence so readers can clearly understand its significance to the point. You offer a meticulous and detailed analysis that helps readers see the primary source, your point, and/or the evidence provided in novel ways.
|
13 pts
Notable
The writer makes a strong effort to break down the evidence so readers can understand its significance and its connection to the point. The writer offers a detailed analysis that attempts to help readers see the primary source and/or evidence provided in novel ways.
|
11 pts
Competent
You make a strong effort to break down the evidence so readers can understand its significance to the point. You offer a detailed analysis that attempts to help readers see the primary source, point, and/or evidence provided in novel ways.
|
9 pts
Developing
The analysis of the evidence is largely obvious and/or does not connect clearly enough to the point. Put simply, the analysis struggles to reinforce the significance of the primary source, point, and/or evidence. INCOMPLETE OR WOEFULLY UNPOLISHED RESPONSES WILL NOT EARN HIGHER THAN DEVELOPING IN ANY CATEGORY.
|
7 pts
Problematic
The analysis of the evidence is so general or obvious that it lacks any notable significance. Put simply, the analysis does not reinforce the significance of the primary source, point, and/or evidence.
|
0 pts
Absent or Woeful
The analysis is absent or woefully problematic.
|
|
15 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBODY: Reminder
|
| 10 pts
Polished
You consistently, effectively, fully, and clearly remind readers of the significance of your points. You also employ seamless transitions between paragraphs and ideas.
|
8 pts
Notable
You almost always remind readers of your points and largely establish their significance. You also usually employ seamless transitions between paragraphs and ideas.
|
7 pts
Competent
You make an effort to remind readers of your point, but could establish its significance a bit more strongly. Your transitions could use some polish because they are sometimes abrupt or choppy.
|
6 pts
Developing
You make an effort to remind readers of your points, but those attempts need notable improvement. You struggle to establish the significance of your analysis and/or you largely fail to incorporate transitions to help the reader move through your thoughts fluidly. INCOMPLETE OR WOEFULLY UNPOLISHED RESPONSES WILL NOT EARN HIGHER THAN DEVELOPING IN ANY CATEGORY.
|
5 pts
Problematic
Your reminders are disconnected from the points. You do not remind readers of or reinforce the significance of the analysis. Or, you almost totally fail to incorporate transitions between paragraphs and ideas.
|
0 pts
Absent or Woeful
The reminders are absent or woefully problematic.
|
|
10 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONCLUSION: Conclusion
|
| 10 pts
Polished
The writer sums up the argument fully and effectively. Readers are reminded of the most important points and/or pieces of evidence. The conclusion clearly states final conclusions about the primary source(s) and strongly re-articulates the thesis statement.
|
8 pts
Notable
The writer largely sums up the argument and reminds readers of some important points and/or pieces of evidence. The conclusion states final conclusions about the primary source(s) and re-articulates the thesis statement.
|
7 pts
Competent
The writer attempts sums up the argument but does not remind readers of the important points and/or pieces of evidence. The conclusion states final conclusions about the primary source(s) but those conclusions are tenuously connected to the thesis statement.
|
6 pts
Developing
The writer tries to sum up the argument but does not remind readers of the important points and/or pieces of evidence. The conclusion offers limited or almost no conclusions about the primary source(s) or those conclusions are disconnected from the thesis statement. INCOMPLETE OR WOEFULLY UNPOLISHED RESPONSES WILL NOT EARN HIGHER THAN DEVELOPING IN ANY CATEGORY.
|
5 pts
Problematic
The writer offers a conclusion but it fails to sum up the argument and does not remind readers of any important points and/or pieces of evidence. The conclusion offers no substantive conclusions about the primary source(s) and those conclusions are disconnected from the thesis statement.
|
0 pts
Absent or Woeful
The conclusion is absent or woefully problematic.
|
|
10 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOVERALL: Mechanics, Grammar & Style
|
| 5 pts
Polished
The writer avoids all common mistakes. The effort is also mechanically, grammatically, and stylistically sound. It needs no or almost no revision.
|
4 pts
Notable
The writer avoids almost all common mistakes. The effort needs minor mechanical, grammatical, and stylistic improvements. It needs only minor revision.
|
3 pts
Competent
The writer tends to avoid common mistakes. The effort needs some notable mechanical, grammatical, and stylistic improvements. It needs a bit more than minor revision.
|
2 pts
Developing
The writer makes a few common mistakes. The effort needs notable mechanical, grammatical, and stylistic improvements. It needs substantial revision. INCOMPLETE OR WOEFULLY UNPOLISHED RESPONSES WILL NOT EARN HIGHER THAN DEVELOPING IN ANY CATEGORY.
|
1 pts
Problematic
The writer makes common mistakes regularly and/or repeatedly. The effort needs substantial mechanical, grammatical, and stylistic improvements. It needs major revision.
|
0 pts
Absent or Woeful
The writing and style are woefully problematic.
|
|
5 pts
|
|
Total Points: 100
|
