Persepolis Review

Many say that it is impossible to recreate any piece of writing into a film successfully. The written word has too much detail and too many twists and turns to fit eloquently into a movie that runs at most, a little over two hours. Does this include graphic novels?
A step up from the classic comic book, graphic novels are longer and can contain topics that surpass the humorous Calvin and Hobbes or sci-fi superheroes. Far more advanced than I ever imagined, some of these lengthy comics have been known to entertain their readers with historical events.
My first experience with graphic novels came in the form of Persepolis. The author, Marjane Satrapi, describes growing up in Iran during its deadly revolution. At first glance, I didn’t think the topic would be thoroughly explained. Textbooks have trouble describing this intricately confusing event, so how could a comic book, of all things, get the point across? Satrapi definitely answered that question with detailed explanations through the eyes of a young girl. We traveled through little Marji’s life and follow along as she carries on a normal childhood until this national event makes her a prisoner of her own country and faith.
The theatrical adaptation was as true to the original piece as possible and I enjoyed it as much as I could while ignoring the fact that I don’t speak French. On the other hand, I feel like being forced to read the subtitles encouraged me to keep my focus and fully grasped what was going on. There is something to be said about “seeing” what is said.
The film was spot on with the novel’s graphics and dialogue, but there was one portion that was slightly different, and in my opinion, better. The playful way they portrayed the history of how the Iranian Shah came to power was an easy scene to laugh at. Instead of the original fluid motions of the novel, they depict the political players as puppets on strings that make their actions seem less intense than their realities.
Although Marji’s quick wit and spunky personality was apparent in the novel, we get a chance to see her in action – literally. It was nice to witness her bustling about while stating her opinion on the current crisis to whoever would listen. Being able to see a scene fully played out also helps the audience either confirm their perception of the situation, or arouse new insight about it. There were a couple moments from the movie that I played out differently in my mind while I read the novel. I liked having another view to compare mine with.
I would throw out som negative critiques, but I really don’t have much to say. Of course I would have loved to see more of the smaller subplots played out in the film, but like I said before, it isn’t possible. No one can sit through hours upon hours of the Iranian Revolution.
All in all, the move from graphic novel to film was done extremely well in my book. I wanted to immediately go out and grab the sequel!

Suggestion for writing #2

After reading both Gilchrist's and Ebert's movie reviews, I can't help but wonder if they were even watching the same movie. While Gilchrist pin pointed every possible flaw he could muster up, Ebert praised Spidey's sequel as if he had witnessed a miracle. Being professional movie critics, they both hit on similar subjects ranging from special effects to plot development, but had severely contrasting opinions on everything. Who do I believe, when one liked the first movie but not the sequel, and the other wasn't keen on the original but absolutely drooled over the second?
They can't agree on anything. While Gilchrist rolled his eyes at all the emotionally slower moments, Ebert applauded the in depth character analysis of our hero and his supporting characters. The former believed the writer's held the audience's hand a little too much. If they were familiar with the the first Spiderman, or could formulate thoughts, they could follow along just fine without a play by play. On the other hand, Ebert thoroughly enjoyed the extra attention to Spidey's past. The constant reminder of where Peter Parker came from reminds everyone that he's only human and should deal with his problems like a normal person. Just because he gets to strut his stuff in a really cool costume doesn't mean he doesn't have feelings.
Moving on to Spidey's super special effects. What do you get when you mix quickly moving action scenes with well balanced weight distribution? Yes, another discrepancy. Gilchrist couldn't get over the nauseating speed and movement of the action sequences. They took him back to the director's previous work on the Evil Dead movies and the cameras reckless abandon. Of course, Ebert was thrilled with the improved human-like movements of Spiederman, opposed to the cartoonish flying in the first movie. I think it's safe to say that Ebert has a stronger stomach.
All in all, I think it comes down to personal preference. Gilchrist had high expectations after the success of the first Spiderman film but was dismally disappointed with the sequel. At the same time, Ebert wasn't a fan of Spiderman but is a sucker for the genre and found what he believes to be the "essence" of superhero movies in Spiderman 2.

Persepolis: Comic and Movie

After finishing my first graphic novel, I'm shocked at how much I enjoyed it. I was skeptical at first but now I realize that no matter the medium that a story is in, it can still get its points across.
As for Persepolis, the story really gave an inside look at the Iranian Revolution. If I hadn't read it, I doubt I would really understand what happened. The author made the characters lovable and endearing - something most would not expect these days.
I enjoyed the film in class, but the graphic novel has so much more detail that I think I'm leaning in favor of it. And it's not just the easy-to-understand story line, but being able to see scenes back to back made me want to read more. It also had great emotional effect. I remember specifically one page with two large frames. On the top, there were young soldiers dying, and below that, Marjane's first party. Seeing suffering next to celebration hit me at how intense the situation was.
Now, I'm seriously considering reading the sequel. How could she leave us hanging like that?!

Graff ch.1 ex.1

1. A number of scientists have suggested that there are dangerous levels of chemical X in the Ohio groundwater.
2. After a long debate, the critics have decided that this novel has certain flaws.
3. In its recent showing, football has been deemed boring because its lack of viewers.
4. It has become common today to believe that male students dominate class discussions.
5. Surprisingly, a large number of viewers believe that the film is really about the problems of romantic relationships.
6. Many students be live that writing templates will stifle their creativity.

Eisner and McCloud

After reading up on Eisner and McCloud's descriptions of comics, I'm utterly floored. I had n0 idea that comics were so complicated. Everything from Eisner's writing about how comics are a legitimate source of reading and all the time and energy that comic writers have to put into them to make sure they are easy to follow was very interesting. Some would say that comics are harder to create than novels. With McCloud's writing, he really went in depth about what a comic actually is. He starts with sequential visual art and ends up with a long, drawn out definition of what a comic really is. I can now say that I'm impressed with comic writers. I definitely stereotyped them as Sunday paper comics and weird super natural handbooks. Now I can see that not all comics are for sci-fi convention participants, and that they are just another form of literature.