Monday, 2 February 2015

    Film Review: Follow-up questions


    Follow-up questions for my Magazine Review:


    1. How effectively do you think the review uses traditional Sight and Sound layout conventions? Where do you think they have been used most effectively? So they’ve been used well, is there any way you feel they could be developed? Example, or how doesn’t it?


    1. What could be done, in your view that would make it challenge industry conventions? And how might you develop them?


    1. How do you think font has been used effectively? Where do you think it could be developed? Where do you think it is similar to Sight and Sound, and where do you think it challenges it?


    1. What about text size, do you think it’s been used effectively? Where do you think it’s been used best? How do you think it either challenges or develops from Sight and Sound?


    1. Do you think language has been used well? Where do you think the criticism is most effective? Where/how do you think it could be developed to engage and inform, as well as critique better?


    1. Do you think the register suits the magazine context for the review? Where do you think it is especially appropriate? How do you think its developed Sight and Sound conventions, or how do you think it could?


    1. Do you think there was an appropriate use of ICT? Why? How do you think it could be developed or challenged to be more innovative and effective?


    1. How do you think image could be integrated with text in an effective way? How do you think it could be done in a way that challenges Sight and Sound conventions?


    1. How do you think the image could be framed well? Why? How do you think it could challenge, or conform to industry conventions? What makes you think this?


    1. Do you think this works well from a mise-en-scene perspective? Where do you think mise-en-scene is used well?

    No comments:

    Post a Comment