Revised Introduction

In this post, I will share my original introduction as well as my re-written and re-imagined introduction. My new introduction will accomplish the "Tips and Strategies" included in the Student's Guide pgs. 52-53.

Lirshtah8. "Floral sunset." 10/17/15 via deviantart. Attribution 2.0.

Original

Who can get away with telling other professionals in their field what they truly think of their work, no sugar coating needed? Film critics, that’s who! In polite society where no one is really telling the whole truth all of the time, critics get the chance to share their whole opinons in a wholly honest way. These brazen men and women have a rhetorical toolbox all their own to convince the public of their arguments about a performance, and Tom Shone’s article “Natalie Portman, Good Actor” is no exception. Initial reading of "Natalie Portman, Great Actor" may paint Shone as a film purist against all technological progress in the industry. Shone's apropos humor, detailed examples and acknowledgement of the counterargument, however, helps the audience come into line with his belief that physical transformation alone is not an indicator of acting talent.

New and Improved

When Star Wars first burst onto screens in 1977 with its humming light-sabers and stunning explosions, audiences were unsurprisingly in awe. Special effects of this caliber had never been seen before, and this was a major reason that people fell in love with the film. NYC film critic and professor of film Tom Shone argues in "Natalie Portman, Good Actor" that these computer generated "stunts" have evolved into a cover up of mediocre acting, not into embellishments that amplify an already solid film. Though his humor may seem off-putting at first, Shone effectively uses jokes and specific examples to logically get his audience to agree. This paper will model the effective deconstruction of an argument in the entertainment field, which is an important skill for theater students to learn. With this information, they can be less gullible when reading opinion pieces and evaluate them on a deeper level as well as construct their own arguments more effectively.

----

My new intro is stronger than the first primarily because it takes the rhetorical situation of the project into account, which I did not do before. It's not formulaic and forecasts the scope and direction of the essay well. Also, I think the attention grabber is much stronger on my new intro than the old one!