Analyzing Message in "Natalie Portman, excellent special effect?"

In this post, I will be using A Student's Guide and its information about a text's message and purpose to answer the following questions. My article is titled "Natalie Portman, excellent special effect?"

Aquino, Christopher." black swan psycothriller" 10/3/15 via flickr. Fair Use.

• Out of all the bullet points listed for "Message and Purpose" on page 181, which two or three seem most relevant to the goals of your text's author/s? Why?

#1: Express and Idea or Opinion

The article is centered around the authors opinion that physical transformation does not equate to acting prowess in all situtations. He feels that the Academy should not applaud people who are merely "props" in his mind.

#2:Respond to a Particular Occasion or Text

Shone's piece is a reaction to the upcoming Oscars/ nomination list. He felt the need to comment on this occasion because he saw an "inequity" in the Academy's choices.

#3: Persuade an Audience of Something

The author wants the readers to feel that CGI stunts are not enough to create a good actor. He uses language to suggest that technological "stunts" and "feats" are a cheap trick to get audiences to think that the acting was good.

• Which bullet points do NOT seem relevant to the goals of your text's author/s? Why not?

The bullet "Inform the Reader about a Topic that is Usually Misunderstood" does not really apply to the piece because it is not a commonly discussed topic. Most movie goers do not care that much about CGI versus "Real Acting." Even theatre professionals do not generally think much about physical transformation because it is just another facet of performance.

• Are there nuances and layers to the message the author(s)/speaker(s) is/are trying to get across? If so, what are they? If not, why not?

I don't think that Shone's message is particularly nuanced because it is not a hot button issue. The topic is more subjective and involves a discipline that is much more liberal and open than others, so criticism is welcome. I think he clearly communicates his opinion without needing to gloss it up so that it is palatable to readers.