Saving Private Ryan Examine Steven Spielberg's use of images and Presentation of war. Refer closely to the first twenty-five minutes of "Saving Private Ryan."?
Saving Private Ryan Examine Steven Spielberg's use of images and Presentation of war. Refer closely to the first twenty-five minutes of "Saving Private Ryan."? "Saving Private Ryan" is a war/action/drama film directed by Steven Spielberg. This film was released in 1998. "Saving Private Ryan," tells the story of several men led by Captain John H. Miller (the commanding officer) who are sent on a mission to retrieve a Private James Francis Ryan from war and send him back to his mother. He is being sent back simply because all his brothers have died in the war and the army deems it necessary to send him back home before he dies so that his mother doesn't lose all her children in the war. The film makes us care about the men in Captain John H. Miller's troop so that when they die we feel sad, and when they are sharing jokes we laugh with them.This almost makes us feel like we're in the film. It lets you know what these brave men went through and gives you a great sense of appreciation for what they did for the people of their countries and others. Throughout the film the colour of the picture seems desaturated. This gives it a dull effect and was probably done by Spielberg to show the dullness of war. In the starting battlescene Spielberg shows a realisitic battle scene as he shows the death with all the graphicness there would be in real life. He also shows how the allies
Why is the Battle of the Somme regarded as such great military tragedy? For this question, I will be exploring why the Battle of the Somme is regarded as such great
History GCSE Coursework Question 1 Why is the Battle of the Somme regarded as such great military tragedy? For this question, I will be exploring why the Battle of the Somme is regarded as such great military tragedy. I will be discussing issues such as leadership, casualties, tactics, and war of attrition as well as weapons and life in the trenches. Firstly, there is evidence to suggest that Haig felt the battle could only be won by sacrificing soldiers' lives. Although many believe General Haig was a great strategist, his cold hearted attitude to casualties lead to him being often referred to as the "Butcher of the Somme". Hence it can be said that many hold General Haig responsible for the Battle of the Somme becoming a military tragedy. The Battle of the Somme is also regarded as a great military tragedy because of Haig's lack of tactics. It is known Haig had little understanding for modern warfare, yet he managed to make the same misjudgement by overestimating the ability of artillery to destroy German defences. Haig's misunderstanding of modern warfare lead to chaos on the battle field and what's more, no orders were prepared for the situations that soldiers found themselves in. Therefore poor leadership had a key role in making the battle of the Somme a great military tragedy. Furthermore, General Haig and Deputy General Rawlinson worked out the tactics.
Dunkirk and the battle of Britain.
Dunkirk and the battle of Britain All three of the sources A, B and are useful in their own unique way, but they all have limitations, so they can only describe a small snippet out of the big picture, on how it was like at the battle f Dunkirk on the beaches. Source A seemed useful to me, because it gave me a real idea about the atmosphere and morale, when the British undertook the rescue. The person giving the statement is commander Thomas Kerr, who was one of the naval officers sent to organize the evacuation. Seeing that he is of this rank, he seems that he is trustworthy because as commander he seems trustworthy. I also noted that the statement was a very personal one because the way he spoke about the British side, it would have been censored. The statement is a very personal view, so it must be from a diary or personal log. Seeing as this could be true, it does make it seem that it is more believable. Also the commander isn't giving us any "stiff upper-lip", he's not living in the world of half told stories, stretched truths and blatant lies, he isn't being biased, he is critical of his own side. The only problem I might have with the Kerr's statement is that he could be boasting about the navy, I sensed this by reading this part in the statement; " the sight of naval uniforms restored some order to the rabble", this does seem he is boasting against the army. On the
The battle of Hastings.
William "Duke of Normandy" was the son of Duke Robert and also a Tanners daughter. For this he was taunted, they would call him "William the Bastard". Those who did this would get flayed alive. Harold was defined as an affable and holy man. He was the enemy of evil doers and he was the son of Earl Godwin. Edward and Harold himself had created an oath in 1064 to make William the king and they made this oath over the bones of a dead saint (allegedly.) Harold was made king in January 1066. William arrived at Pevensey on the 28th of September and made himself a small fort. But there were no Saxons to be found. *Meanwhile* There was a battle going on at Stanford Bridge! The Vikings had landed on the bay of Yorkshire. They had landed with Harald and with Tostig (Harold's own brother.) Harold had left London on the 20th of September and arrived on the 25th of September. Harold had arrived unannounced and surprise attacked them. There was one man who was on a bridge that would not let anyone past. They called him a giant. He would hack them down by just using a standard figure eight shape. To get past this man they decided to put a man in a barrel with a spear then this man would thrust the spear up through the bridge and leave him brogged. Harald's men had all left their armour at their ships. Harald and Tostig were both killed. It took 300 ships to take the Vikings to England
Battle Royal.
Battle Royal. In "Battle Royal" by Ralph Ellison, the brawl initially acts as a suspense builder. Before the climactic speech, the reader must explore the fight between the protagonist and a few black boys. White men incite this fight for their own viewing pleasure. At first glance, the Battle Royal scene appears trivial but it allows the reader to dwell into the mind of the protagonist. Ellison makes a social commentary throughout this story on the newly emancipated black man's quest for success. In Battle Royal by Ralph Ellison, the white men invite the narrator to fight under the pretense of a speech opportunity, the actual fight scene symbolizes white America's efforts to instill black disunity, and the narrator briefly realizes that the prestigious white men whom he adores, were not contributing to his advancement but surreptitiously hindering it. A reader must always note that the narrator involuntarily participated in the battle royal. "I was told that since I was to be there anyway, I might as well take part in the battle royal" (2). This statement illustrates an idea that the whites coerced the narrator into the smoker. He could have turned down this invitation but "he was afraid to act any other way because they didn't like that at all" (2). The naïve narrator lives for the moment and fails to contemplate the existence of anterior motives. In addition, without
Comparing and contrasting "The charge of the Light Brigade" and "The Defence of Lucknow" by Lord Alfred Tennyson.
Comparing and contrasting "The charge of the Light Brigade" and "The Defence of Lucknow" by Lord Alfred Tennyson "The Charge of The Light Brigade" and "The Defence of Lucknow" are two notable poems written by Lord Alfred Tennyson one of Britain's finest poet laureates who lived during the 19th century. These two poems are based on two different battles which the Britons faced and fought with bravery and loyalty. Within this essay I am going to signify the differences and similarities between the two poems. "The Charge of The Light Brigade" is based on the battle where the British and the French became allies with each other and emerged as a unit against the Russians. Both nations feared the dominance of the Russians thus they decided to unite since the Russians in that time were known as the Super power. The poem was written in the 19th century and Tennyson wrote this emphatically as a response to a newspaper article in "The Times" by W.H. Russell. Tennyson felt that W.H. Russell was being too pessimistic about the performance of the British soldiers. This is why he decided to write a poem in the favour of Britain, glorifying the efforts of the British soldiers to show how brave and loyal the soldiers were. In this poem Tennyson emphasises on the British because he is a pro British poet laureate therefore he only wrote about the experience of the British soldiers and in
Was Alexander really great?
Was Alexander really great? The death of Alexander in 323BC, greatly affected many people throughout Greece and Macedonia. He had gained a lot of respect during his reign, which had earned him the title 'Alexander the Great', however it is important to consider to what extent was this due to the use of propaganda. All of the sources, which are available to us, portray Alexander as a heroic and victorious leader; nevertheless we must remember that the writers of these sources are probably extremely biased towards him. Alexander was only 31years old when he died and had achieved much more than many other leaders in his short lifetime. When he was just 20 years old Alexander invaded Persia and his first battle was at River Granicus in 334BC. Arrian reports on this battle "His infantry was massed in two groups, both wings protected by cavalry, while all transport had orders to follow in the rear", this suggests that Alexander was very well prepared and had organised his troops so that they performed as efficiently as possible. Also in his description of the battle Arrian indicates Alexander's popularity:- "They could see Alexander himself, an unmistakeable figure, attended by his suite with an almost ecstatic reverence." Alex was very young at this point in his rein but already had established himself as a great leader among the Greeks and greatly feared by the
Consider the way in which Shakespeare presents Martius in the early part of the play.
Consider the way in which Shakespeare presents Martius in the early part of the play. The first, and perhaps most popular view of Martius is that of the plebeians in the opening scene, who have an unequivocally negative opinion of the man soon to become a popular and 'noble' consul, albeit transiently. While it is argued by Martius that the citizens can never be content ('what would you have, you curs, that like nor peace nor war?'), it is still significant that the earliest reference to him in the play states that he is 'chief enemy to the people'. Further quotations help explain why this conclusion is drawn. Shortly after this point, one citizen suggests that they 'kill him (Martius), and...have corn at our own price'. Since 'Coriolanus' is set in the period immediately succeeding a great famine in Rome, it is of paramount importance to the plebeians that they do not encounter the same situation again, therefore they are aggrieved that patricians like Caius Martius have the power to raise the price of corn at their discretion. Although it is widely understood that, during this period of civil unrest in Rome, few patricians are held in high esteem by the lower classes ('They ne'er cared for us yet', complains one citizen), it would be fair to state that Martius is among the least popular. In fact, he is further described as, 'a very dog to the commonalty'. Here
Ralph Ellison’s “Battle Royal”
Paul Dangcil English 102 Dr. Perkins Everyone fought hysterically. It was complete anarchy. Everybody fought everybody else. No group fought together for long. Two, three, four, fought one, then turned to fight each other, were themselves attacked. Blows landed below the belt and in the kidney, with the gloves open as well as closed, and with my eye partly opened now there was not so much terror. I moved carefully, avoiding blows, although not too many to attract attention, fighting from group to group. The boys groped about like blind, cautious crabs crouching to protect their mid-sections, their heads pulled in short against their shoulders, their arms stretched nervously before them, with their fists testing the smoke-filled air like the knobbed feelers of hypersensitive snails. In one corner I glimpsed a boy violently punching the air and heard him scream in pain as he smashed his hand against a ring post. For a second I saw him bent over holding his hand, then going down as a blow caught his unprotected head. I played one group against the other, slipping in and throwing a punch then stepping out of range while pushing the others into the melee to take the blows blindly aimed at me. The smoke was agonizing and there were no rounds, no bells at three minute intervals to relieve our exhaustion. The room spun round me, a swirl of lights,
Dunkirk - Source A is a contemporary painting, which means it, was not painted at the time. Which makes it a secondary piece of evidence, and it is an artist's impression of what happened.
Dunkirk Course Work Source A Source A is a contemporary painting, which means it, was not painted at the time. Which makes it a secondary piece of evidence, and it is an artist's impression of what happened. In addition, it is much exaggerated it shows a lot of thick black smoke so it appears a very large ship is on fire. Nevertheless, that is not what happened only a few smaller ships were bombed and sunk. Source B Source B is a photograph of Dunkirk beaches at the time it was happening which makes it a primary piece of evidence plus it helps to show how many troops were actually were on the beaches. The photograph clearly shows that the battle of Dunkirk was a complete mess. There were hundreds of thousands of troops stranded on the beaches and you can only just make out the calm seas in the photo thankfully. If it was rough then we might have struggled getting all the men off the beach, but as the sea was calm, we managed to rescue 340,000 men of the beaches of Dunkirk. They had to leave all their equipment behind. Source C Source C is a photograph taken at the time of the battle of Dunkirk. This makes the photograph a primary piece of evidence. It shows three soldiers trying to shot down German aircraft on the beaches of Dunkirk. I can also make out a person laying down this person is probaly dead. The British troops didn't shot any German aircraft down
