TOW #13- ‘Star Wars: The Force Awakens’ Shatters Box Office Records by BROOKS BARNES

         

            Everyone was anticipating the new Star Wars movie this weekend and it seems as though people were  really really really anticipating it. As Brooke Barnes, a journalist for the New York Times who writes about Hollywood news, puts it, the movie took the people by storm and broke some records along the way. After Disney’s opening weekend for “Star Wars; The Force Awakens,” there was a rough estimate of $517 million in ticket sales worldwide. Its first three days earned $238 million in sales which, in respect to how much the movie “Avatar,” the highest grossing movie of all time, made in the first couple days ($85 million), this seems like a gigantic figure. Star Wars fans have been anticipating this film for a while and that truly showed this weekend.

            Besides talking about the movie this weekend, Barnes had another purpose of showing his audience the direction that he believes most movies are going it. Barnes believes that the real money in movies is coming from restarting or continuing franchises. This weekend was the example of the continuation of Star Wars, but later there will be more of the Avengers, Indiana Jones, and X-Men.

            One of the greatest components of this article that made it great was the wit and informality that can be seen. When describing the role movies are moving to, Barnes writes, “plan to battle back: Death Star-size movies that can capture the public’s imagination in ways reminiscent of the earliest years of blockbusterdom, before the hyperfragmentation of pop culture” (Barnes 1). This quote exemplifies his wit and humor, along with his informal jargon. These characteristics make the article seem more like a conversation making it all the more enjoyable to read. So when the audience, who is suppose to be the general public, reads this, it will appeal to all of them.

Tow #12- IRB post: A Deadly Wandering by Matt Richtel

           I am now about half way into this book A Deadly Wandering and I am really enjoying the read. I don’t normally like books that my mom recommends to me but this one happens to be different.  So this book is basically about texting and driving. It follows the case of this boy named Reggie who lives in Utah. He was the first ever case of texting and driving where the awareness for such an act was started. On his way to work he happened to be texting and driving, slid into the other lane, and then hit a car killing two scientists that were inside. Originally it was considered hydroplaning, but the cop thought it sounded to suspicious. So he pursues a deeper investigation, which presents the reader with a lot of facts and statistics about distractions behind the wheel. The goal of the text, which is why my mom wanted me to read this book, is to teach young drivers about the horrors of distractions while driving and how they are a serious matter.

            Matt Richtel achieves this purpose well throughout the text by the organization he uses. For the most part the book is laid out by a narrative style story and then statistics and facts. It switches between the two of these to make a logical story that presents facts along the way. For example in one part of the book Richtel would write, “The family drove to Bunderson’s office. It was located in a single story building near the county courthouse. It was unassuming to the point of being ugly, with a pink, unkempt exterior and a mass-manufactured mailbox with an eagle on top” (pg 69) and then later would say something like, “Reinforcing that finding is research by Dr. Gloria Mark, a professor at the University of California at Irvine, who found through survey studies that people are happier at work when they use Facebook more” (170). This constant switch back and forth makes the read a lot easier on the reader who is likely a teenager.

            I recommend this book to any young drivers.

TOW #11- “95,000 Words, Many of Them Ominous, From Donald Trump’s Tongue” by PATRICK HEALY and MAGGIE HABERMAN

            Patrick Healy is a senior writer for the New York Times who usually writes on political topics. This week he has recently written an article discussing one of the most controversial politicians, Donald Trump. Throughout the week, he and other staff members have collected many speeches, rallies, and massages from the politician. This article is the analysis of these 95,000 words in order to help portray his attitudes towards many topics. I believe Healy expresses this purpose well in the article. Throughout, there was a lot of talk of Trumps diction. He often uses negative diction to describe immigrants, terrorists, and even his opponents. One of my favorite quotes from the article was when Healy says, “In another pattern, Mr. Trump tends to attack a person rather than an idea or a situation, like calling political opponents “stupid” (at least 30 times), “horrible” (14 times), “weak” (13 times) and other names, and criticizing foreign leaders, journalists and so-called anchor babies” (Healy 1). Besides the diction, Healy goes into many other rhetorical devices that Trump uses such as first person point of view, a casual tone, and fear in order to persuade the voters. Over all, the article pins him as a “demagogues” which by definition is a political leader that appeals to popular desires and prejudices rather than using rational argument.

            One of the hardest things for me to decipher throughout the article was the tone that Healy was using. I didn’t know if Healy was using a positive tone, negative tone, serious tone, or a joking one. For instance he would say, “he forgoes the usual campaign trappings — policy, endorsements, commercials, donations — and instead relies on potent language to connect with, and often stoke, the fears and grievances of Americans” which sounds like he doesn’t approve of Trump, but later he would say, “’Such statements and accusations make him seem like a guy who can and will cut through all the b.s. and do what in your heart you know is right — and necessary,’ said Michael Kazin, a historian at Georgetown University” which is a quote that seems to praise him.

            Perhaps that is the message of the Trump Campaign, you either hate him or you don’t. Because this article was written for voters, it will certainly help them understand that’s going on with Donald Trump.