The Movie Proof

Overall, I enjoyed the film, but the ending had me feeling uneasy and agitated. I believe that the psychiatrist did a great job at counseling each member of the Bennett family, but it was his treatment and recommendation of their situation that had me uneasy. The psychiatrist believed that family counseling would be an effective treatment, instead of the father going to jail or having charges brought against him. The psychiatrist believed that Gail and Steven could work out their problems together, and that Amelia and her father could have a relationship again. The ending felt a little contrived as Amelia has a flashback of her father singing “Hush Little Baby Don’t Say a Word.” “Something About Amelia” was produced in the 1980’s, but I believe if it was shot preset day, Steven would have been ostracized and gone to prison instead of

For example, the movie only mentions that Christina had found her mother’s letters, but it never really went into detail as to what they said, something which is very important to understanding the rest of the story. Something else is the fact that the movie ended off with Christina’s mother telling the police officer of her boyfriend hitting Christina. Even though I didn’t really care for this ending, I think it was a very interesting and creative idea of the group members to end the movie off on a cliff hanger like that. Finally, one other problem with the movie was the aesthetics of it. In some scenes, you could hear the cameraman saying “action” or something similar, and the camera was also quite shaky at times. Overall, I think that the movie came out fairly well. It gave viewer an idea of what the story was about and also intrigued them by cutting to completely separate scenes sometimes and ending off on a cliff hanger, and even though some small details were left out, I think it ended up being an entertaining and compelling

Overall I found the movie to be quite interesting and exciting at times but a bit slow in others. The story itself was very clear to me and didn’t cause any confusion. It had a good flow also, just as you were on the verge of falling into boredom with a scene they switched it up on you to keep you

The characters in this movie were great actors. They acted so realistic that it looked as if it was occurring live from the scene of the action. All of the characters were excellent , especially the women when they got their hair cut off in the concentration camp.

As cliche and predictable the movie was, I really did enjoy it because it accurately portrayed the era. The actors showed how hopeful everyone was to make a new life and return back to their old lives. Watching Peggy and Fred struggle over their attraction for each other was quite entertaining because Fred had nothing to give, but Peggy accepted that unlike Marie. In addition, Homer’s prosthetics made him feel vulnerable, but his fiancee proved to him that love is more than what can be seen. I really enjoyed the movie because everyone had their own personal battles, but with everyone's’ support and advice, everyone moved forward. Homer eventually married Wilma and Fred and Peggy ended up together. It was quite a happy film and I loved

The play Proof by David Auburn and directed by Peter Cocuzza was presented by Southern Illinois Universities Theater and dance department. This play is based on the life of a girl named Catherine whose father ends up dying due to an ongoing mental illness. The play included two phenomenal actresses and two phenomenal actors. The two actresses were Catherine and Claire, and the two actors were Robert and Han.

Again the visual effects made it very hard to focus on what is going on the movie and hard to place your eyes on what's happening in the movie. The whole point of visual effects are to make the movie shine and pop; dragging and pulling the viewers focus on the movie, but Luhrmann somehow manage to disappointed a majority of the people who watched the movie. Also Luhrmann seems like he could not find his footing on the current timeline fashion. Even though the majority of the characters in the film were very wealthy, the clothes back in the 1920´s were not as flashy as it was represented in the movie. Leaving the audience with a very bad taste on what the 1920's culture was all

Acting was awesome I really saw the actors get into their parts. The actors had moments of emotion portraying the characters personality in the story. The whole musical was very entertaining I watched both acts, found it to have different points of view on how the time in Berlin was for Cliff and Sally. How the Germans and Jew might have been like before World War II. It also showed how it was like to be an individual away from home and not knowing what would happen next. Cliff reminded me of how I would like to travel and meet people for inspiration even if there were differences about how they saw their lives. One of the character that got my attention was Sally she was very funny, serious and had Cliff worried for some reason she had a natural flow of just being herself. The other two characters I really liked was Herr and Fraulein Story it shows how these two were very good friends and slowly started dating and then got married. One was a Jew and the other a German to me it expressed that people did not see it as a bad thing to be with someone who is not from the same background or culture. Even through times that they could not be together they managed to be

I think that the movie was interesting, especially for when it was made. Though it didn’t do well at the box office, I’m not quite sure why it didn’t, as the trailer especially seemed to reel one in. There were a lot of good suspenseful moments throughout the film, especially when the genetics tests were demanded over and over again. While there were few characters, I could easily read the tropes for each one, making them easily identifiable. I might have liked a bit more development concerning the character Irene, as the

One positive aspect was that the lighting was more bland and not overly saturated. I believe this gave the movie a more natural, yet depressing tone. The movie starts out before the sun rises and as Maria rides the bus to work in the first scene the overcast sky creates a bleak atmosphere. This coincides with the plot line and how Maria feels about working in the flower factory. On the other hand, the shaky camera proved to be distracting for much of the film, especially the ending scene. The shot of Maria walking through the airport was supposed to represent a newfound strength and power, but the movement of the camera distracted slightly from such an empowering scene. Overall, the director did a wonderful job on the film. It is truly a film about redemption and finding oneself. While much of the film portrays one difficulty after another, the audience feels as though they are on the journey with Maria. We feel as though we are traveling from Colombia, trying to figure out what to do next in New York, and finally finding the strength to stay as Maria

Permit me to begin by sharing the two main reasons I was initially enthusiastic about this film. First of all, the concept of time travel has always fascinated me. In fact, time travel stories were the earliest kinds of science fiction tales I appreciated. Add in a bit of Yuletide magic, and I'm sold.

When I saw the movie last Saturday, I was so impressed because it is a 3D version and even though it’s a 3D movie, it looks like a real person or actor in the movie. I noticed the special effects, and it was stunning. I definitely love the moral of the story, the musical scoring, the visual effects and the animation. The historical accuracy was good, the costume and the traditions, they even had the right accents. The movie was kinda funny at times, it had good actions, good twists in the story and pretty good acting. The movie was able to rely the message it was meant to rely to the audience, the importance of bravery and heroism, and to sacrifice yourself.

To fully understand the film I had to look back and research the time period of which the story took place. The film is set in 1964, the year after the Kennedy Assassination. It was a time of change, both in society in general and in the church. Sister Aloysius and Father Flynn represent conflicting views on how the church should function. She belongs to a more corporate conservative school of thought, believing the church as separate from society at large and not needed anything to change. He, on the other hand, had a different belief with the changes being after Kennedy death. It’s seems like the problem of the past can resurface in the future. The difference of one opinion can make you hate or dislike

The people in the movie were well presented and well characterized. However, Charles Van Doren seemed very fake even at the beginning of the movie. I am unsure whether the actor is to blame or if they did it on purpose to show the strain that Charles Van Doren was feeling by being a Van Doren. Herb was well presented as well as the lawyer, Dick. By adding the involvement of Dick's and Herb's wives as well as their personal lives added personality

When Hal has one nightstand with Catherine, she gives a notebook to him with the development of a unique mathematics theory that Catherine claims that she developed. Hal and Claire do not believe on her, until the truth is disclosed. The winner of the 2001 Tony Award for best play and the Pulitzer Prize in drama, Proof is a significant text that explores character development, individual identity, and the importance of achieving one’s potential. John Madden's "Proof" is an extraordinary thriller about matters of scholarship and the heart, about the true authorship of a mathematical proof. “Without mathematic there’s nothing you can do because everything around you is mathematic, everything around you is