I really liked your comparison of Darth Vader to the Phantom of the Opera. It's a really interesting approach to the character and the similarities between the two are striking. Each character does posses both good and evil like all of us. Also both of the two characters lives are eerily similar. I wonder if George Lucas took some inspiration from Leroux?
I thought it was great that you brought in the concept of mise-en-scene to your analysis and used it as a point of comparison. Given that Leroux's novel takes place in a theater, it makes me wonder if he'd originally incorporated the strong imagery and avid descriptions into his story so that the plot, setting, and characters could be easily replicated by playwrites or directors to produce the same eerie and mysterious effects that the words of the book seem to do.
One of the things that really struck me throughout your entire presentation was the author behind the playwrights and novels. His background and biography really interested me (father died young, spent his inheritance lavishly until he had nothing left, he'd go out of his way to prove the shadow side of some). How did his background shine through in his writing, and affect the content and style of his novels? What did he do specifically to "go out of his way" to prove others' shadow sides, and do his novels and plays directly reflect his personal experiences with this?
I'm interested in the author as well, particularly why he became obsessed with the "grimmer shades" of life and death. While his life was far from easy, I must wonder what lead to his special obsession with death and personal darkness. Further, I'm curious as to why he chose mystery novels as his modus operandi. He certainly incorporates his surroundings into his work quite often, but his preoccupation with darker subjects does engender a great deal of curiosity about his life. What would lead him to this sort of perspective on humanity? With his preoccupation with personal darkness, it does seem quite ironic that he would be best remembered for writing a musical version of the "Beauty and the Beast" story. I can't imagine that he would approve of having the darkness in his works diluted through Broadway performance, even though it was handled by Andrew Lloyd Weber. The dominance of the play has quite clearly outstripped the book, but it is always interesting to see how much a cultural phenomenon has changed over its lifetime, and this is no exception. The novel, to the extent of my knowledge, is considered worse than the play by most, and this demonstrates just how much the work has changed over time, as the book, despite its more complex approach to the phantom, is still less favored.
I thought the comparison of the mis-en-scene really made your presentation stand out, i think the question that Angie poses is a good thought, did Leroux write with thinking about the mis-en scene in his stores? I have seen and read the phantom of the opera and have never thought about the whole aspect of mis-en scene until now. I also enjoyed how even though Leroux uses "dark themes" in his stories, you incorporated the mis-en scene discussion to not only strengthen why he wrote with a dark writing style but also to lighten the presentation as a whole.
I completely agree with Stephanie on her comment about your analysis of mis-en-scene. I t was really clever to have analyzed this because then it makes since why Langston Hughes is such an astounding writer even if the critiques for the book weren’t that great. I liked how in you made a comparison chart in your PowerPoint so we could directly see the positives and negatives of the book and movie. I also think that the use of mis-en-scene gave an aspect that the book didn’t. In the movie, we are actually able to see what is going on in the elaborately done scene instead of just reading just reading the novel. This seemed to have created the dark tone that is perceived from watching the movie because we get a sense that the dark side will inevitably take over. I would also like to point out something about your thesis. Your thesis basically says that Hughes writing had two sides, a shadow or a clever side. Then in one of your literary criticism, it states that Hughes had a “fixation on the grimmer side of life” (NY Times). Does this mean that Hughes believed that our shadow side is prevalent over our clever side at all times?
I really enjoyed the comparison and contrast you made with the movie to the book and how each were different and relied on different elements of mis-en-scene and literary devices to create something memorable. I really liked the way your portrayed that Darth Vader is like the Phantom, I also really enjoyed your author's belief that everyone has a dark side. Though I think only some actually thrive in that dark side. Do you think that the Phantom actually enjoyed living with this side of himself? Because it was easier than trying to escape it, and everyone else already plagued him as the "bad guy". Also, your cookies were very good ^-^ I think that the Phantom was a very powerful character regardless if you focus on the film or the novel. He has the darkness to him that is sinister and yet at the same time very mysterious. It's a very overpowering combination and I think it was very well shown in the movie with the aspect of the songs that the Phantom sings.
I really liked your comparison of Darth Vader to the Phantom of the Opera. It's a really interesting approach to the character and the similarities between the two are striking. Each character does possess both good and evil, like all of us. Also, both of the two characters lives are eerily similar. I wonder if George Lucas took some inspiration from Leroux? George Lucas was known for drawing on works of literature in the writing of the Star Wars movies.
Darth Vader has always been known as the ultimate bad guy, similarly the Phantom of the Opera also is portrayed this way. Along with the stereotypical bad guy also comes the ability for redemption. Each character embodies this ability for redemption. However, while Vader is completely redeemed, the Phantom is only partially redeemed for his transgressions. Maybe George Lucas improved upon this.
I also like the comparison of the Phantom of the Opera to Darth Vader, and I agree with Jacob's point that both characters posses good and evil like all of us. However I think that one important distinction to make is that the Phantom is pushed by people's hatred of him into becoming evil. All he ever wanted was love and the fact that he gets fear instead of the love he desires turns him into the dark, evil character that he is in the novel. Darth Vader though, was tempted by the power that the dark side offered and thus choose his fate. It was the intrigue and promise of power that brought him to the "dark side" and the fear of losing his power made him stay. I think the fact that the Phantom isn't completly redeemed shows that Leroux believes that once someone gives into the darker side of their nature they can never truly return to goodness; George Lucas's views on redemption are obviusly different.
I agree with Angie and Stephanie that the addition of comparing the mis-en-scene with "The Phantom of the Opera" made your presentation stand out as no one else looked into their novels from that view. It added more depth to your presentation and allowed for a greater connection between the writing and the film adaptation. Also I agree with Gelila and Talia about the addition of the movie and book comparison charts, it was nice to see what was and wasn’t the same between the book and the film. As a side note I would also like to say that I very much enjoyed your energy and enthusiasm you had while presenting it really made me want to pay more attention, I also enjoyed how you incorporated movie clips into your PowerPoint as well.
Not to one up Jacob in the nerd department, but I always held the belief that Emperor Palpatine is more villainous than Vader. After all, Palpatine is evil from start to finish. Vader’s life was more of an evil Oreo (evil cream sandwiched between two good guy cookies). Vader is a better character for that very reason. The Phantom is just as dynamic a character as Vader. You’re comparison is spot-on and goes even deeper. Vader is considered so evil that he takes on an almost mythical persona in the minds of other characters, just like the Phantom. Your presentation did a great job of characterizing Tom (I’m calling the Phantom Tom now). You did an even better job making a presentation about books that were completely eclipsed by later adaptations.
I really liked your comparison of Darth Vader to the Phantom of the Opera. It's a really interesting approach to the character and the similarities between the two are striking. Each character does posses both good and evil like all of us. Also both of the two characters lives are eerily similar. I wonder if George Lucas took some inspiration from Leroux?
ReplyDeleteI thought it was great that you brought in the concept of mise-en-scene to your analysis and used it as a point of comparison. Given that Leroux's novel takes place in a theater, it makes me wonder if he'd originally incorporated the strong imagery and avid descriptions into his story so that the plot, setting, and characters could be easily replicated by playwrites or directors to produce the same eerie and mysterious effects that the words of the book seem to do.
ReplyDeleteOne of the things that really struck me throughout your entire presentation was the author behind the playwrights and novels. His background and biography really interested me (father died young, spent his inheritance lavishly until he had nothing left, he'd go out of his way to prove the shadow side of some). How did his background shine through in his writing, and affect the content and style of his novels? What did he do specifically to "go out of his way" to prove others' shadow sides, and do his novels and plays directly reflect his personal experiences with this?
ReplyDeleteI'm interested in the author as well, particularly why he became obsessed with the "grimmer shades" of life and death. While his life was far from easy, I must wonder what lead to his special obsession with death and personal darkness. Further, I'm curious as to why he chose mystery novels as his modus operandi. He certainly incorporates his surroundings into his work quite often, but his preoccupation with darker subjects does engender a great deal of curiosity about his life. What would lead him to this sort of perspective on humanity?
ReplyDeleteWith his preoccupation with personal darkness, it does seem quite ironic that he would be best remembered for writing a musical version of the "Beauty and the Beast" story. I can't imagine that he would approve of having the darkness in his works diluted through Broadway performance, even though it was handled by Andrew Lloyd Weber. The dominance of the play has quite clearly outstripped the book, but it is always interesting to see how much a cultural phenomenon has changed over its lifetime, and this is no exception. The novel, to the extent of my knowledge, is considered worse than the play by most, and this demonstrates just how much the work has changed over time, as the book, despite its more complex approach to the phantom, is still less favored.
I thought the comparison of the mis-en-scene really made your presentation stand out, i think the question that Angie poses is a good thought, did Leroux write with thinking about the mis-en scene in his stores? I have seen and read the phantom of the opera and have never thought about the whole aspect of mis-en scene until now.
ReplyDeleteI also enjoyed how even though Leroux uses "dark themes" in his stories, you incorporated the mis-en scene discussion to not only strengthen why he wrote with a dark writing style but also to lighten the presentation as a whole.
I completely agree with Stephanie on her comment about your analysis of mis-en-scene. I t was really clever to have analyzed this because then it makes since why Langston Hughes is such an astounding writer even if the critiques for the book weren’t that great. I liked how in you made a comparison chart in your PowerPoint so we could directly see the positives and negatives of the book and movie. I also think that the use of mis-en-scene gave an aspect that the book didn’t. In the movie, we are actually able to see what is going on in the elaborately done scene instead of just reading just reading the novel. This seemed to have created the dark tone that is perceived from watching the movie because we get a sense that the dark side will inevitably take over. I would also like to point out something about your thesis. Your thesis basically says that Hughes writing had two sides, a shadow or a clever side. Then in one of your literary criticism, it states that Hughes had a “fixation on the grimmer side of life” (NY Times). Does this mean that Hughes believed that our shadow side is prevalent over our clever side at all times?
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed the comparison and contrast you made with the movie to the book and how each were different and relied on different elements of mis-en-scene and literary devices to create something memorable. I really liked the way your portrayed that Darth Vader is like the Phantom, I also really enjoyed your author's belief that everyone has a dark side. Though I think only some actually thrive in that dark side. Do you think that the Phantom actually enjoyed living with this side of himself? Because it was easier than trying to escape it, and everyone else already plagued him as the "bad guy".
ReplyDeleteAlso, your cookies were very good ^-^
I think that the Phantom was a very powerful character regardless if you focus on the film or the novel. He has the darkness to him that is sinister and yet at the same time very mysterious. It's a very overpowering combination and I think it was very well shown in the movie with the aspect of the songs that the Phantom sings.
I really liked your comparison of Darth Vader to the Phantom of the Opera. It's a really interesting approach to the character and the similarities between the two are striking. Each character does possess both good and evil, like all of us. Also, both of the two characters lives are eerily similar. I wonder if George Lucas took some inspiration from Leroux? George Lucas was known for drawing on works of literature in the writing of the Star Wars movies.
ReplyDeleteDarth Vader has always been known as the ultimate bad guy, similarly the Phantom of the Opera also is portrayed this way. Along with the stereotypical bad guy also comes the ability for redemption. Each character embodies this ability for redemption. However, while Vader is completely redeemed, the Phantom is only partially redeemed for his transgressions. Maybe George Lucas improved upon this.
I also like the comparison of the Phantom of the Opera to Darth Vader, and I agree with Jacob's point that both characters posses good and evil like all of us. However I think that one important distinction to make is that the Phantom is pushed by people's hatred of him into becoming evil. All he ever wanted was love and the fact that he gets fear instead of the love he desires turns him into the dark, evil character that he is in the novel. Darth Vader though, was tempted by the power that the dark side offered and thus choose his fate. It was the intrigue and promise of power that brought him to the "dark side" and the fear of losing his power made him stay. I think the fact that the Phantom isn't completly redeemed shows that Leroux believes that once someone gives into the darker side of their nature they can never truly return to goodness; George Lucas's views on redemption are obviusly different.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Angie and Stephanie that the addition of comparing the mis-en-scene with "The Phantom of the Opera" made your presentation stand out as no one else looked into their novels from that view. It added more depth to your presentation and allowed for a greater connection between the writing and the film adaptation. Also I agree with Gelila and Talia about the addition of the movie and book comparison charts, it was nice to see what was and wasn’t the same between the book and the film. As a side note I would also like to say that I very much enjoyed your energy and enthusiasm you had while presenting it really made me want to pay more attention, I also enjoyed how you incorporated movie clips into your PowerPoint as well.
ReplyDeleteNot to one up Jacob in the nerd department, but I always held the belief that Emperor Palpatine is more villainous than Vader. After all, Palpatine is evil from start to finish. Vader’s life was more of an evil Oreo (evil cream sandwiched between two good guy cookies). Vader is a better character for that very reason. The Phantom is just as dynamic a character as Vader. You’re comparison is spot-on and goes even deeper. Vader is considered so evil that he takes on an almost mythical persona in the minds of other characters, just like the Phantom. Your presentation did a great job of characterizing Tom (I’m calling the Phantom Tom now). You did an even better job making a presentation about books that were completely eclipsed by later adaptations.
ReplyDelete