1
HOLLYWOOD/EUROPE: A TRANSNATIONAL FILM CULTURE
ASSESSMENT DETAILS SPRING 2015
Assignments
This course is graded on the submission of three short essays. Each paper is equally weighted, and
the overall grade for this course is the average thereof.
Students must use a different film for each paper, and may NOT use any of the films screened on
this course.
It is strongly advised that students reach out to me to confirm that their choice of film is viable.
Paper I
Each student is to submit a 1,300 word essay in response to a prompt derived from sessions 1 and 2.
Prompt: The work of both Andrew Higson and Mette Hjort can be used to show how in a general
sense transatlantic flows of people, capital, ideas, and products complicate one of the founding
myths of Western audiovisual culture: that Hollywood is an American institution, and is thus distinct
from Europe. With this point in mind, show how specific transatlantic flows related to production,
content, and circulation complicate the American status of ONE Hollywood film not screened on
this course.
General Advice: This prompt invites students to use a well-chosen example film to map out the
various ways transatlantic flows complicate the rhetorical separation of Hollywood and Europe.
Accordingly, strong papers will detail a wide range of these flows, rather than just focus on any one
flow in great detail. Scoring well on this paper will therefore necessitate both an engagement with
the theoretical literature and a consideration of the production, the content, and the circulation of
your example film.
Deadline: 12 Noon Wednesday 4 March 2015
2
Paper II
Each student is to submit a 1,300 word essay in response to a prompt derived from sessions 3 and 4.
Prompt: The presence of European-based companies within the structures of Hollywood, along with
Hollywood’s long-standing involvement in “arty” output, are two key ways in which the realities of
global cinema undermine the deeply entrenched distinction between Hollywood as a producer of
American Entertainment and Europe as a source of “Art Cinema”. With this point in mind, show
how ONE Hollywood film not screened on this course complicates the oppositions that frame
Hollywood as a purveyor of entertainment and European cinema as a benefactor of enlightening art.
General Advise: Where scoring well on paper one involved considering a large number of
phenomena in relatively little depth, performing strongly on paper two involves placing greater
emphasis on film content and its implications vis-à-vis the rhetorical distinctions often drawn
between Hollywood’s output and that of Europe. Accordingly, strong papers will engage directly
with the different reputations of Hollywood and European cinema, before explaining how the
content and execution of a well chosen example film complicates this commercial entertainment vs.
art distinction.
Deadline: 12 Noon Wednesday 18 March 2015
Paper III
Each student is to submit a 1,300 word essay in response to a prompt derived from sessions 5 and 6.
Prompt: Discussion of Americanization has continually suggested that Hollywood imposes
“quintessentially American” culture on Europe, and does so in a manner that uncritically promotes
"American values". However, oftentimes commercial necessities dictate that Hollywood films tread
a fine line between appealing to their principal US market and making concessions to major
European markets. With this point in mind, explain how and why the makers of ONE Hollywood
film not screened on this course uses images of Europe and Europeans and/or America and
Americans to be specifically marketable and appealing to these two key profit centers.
3
General Advice: Paper three involves considering the implications of audience-targeting and
content-tailoring with respect to the cornerstone discourses of Americanization. Accordingly, strong
papers are likely to consider how commercial objectives, topical discourse, and the perceived needs
of the targeted audience(s) coalesce in a Hollywood film that uses images of Europe/Europeans to
invite self-reflection among Americans and/or that is intended to appeal specifically to European
markets.
Deadline: 12 Noon Friday 3 April 2015
All Essays are to be submitted in PDF or word format to richard_nowell@hotmail.com - students
should include their name and the course title in the name of the files they send
Penalties for Late Submission of Work
On the day following the due date - 5 marks out of 100 deducted
On the 2nd
day following the due to date - 10 marks out of 100 deducted
On the 3rd
day following the due date - 15 marks out of 100 deducted
On the 4th day following the due date - 20 marks out of 100 deducted
After the 4th
day following the due date - all marks deducted
Feedback
Students will be emailed individually with detailed personal feedback on their papers. Feedback is
designed to be constructive. It will therefore spotlight the paper’s strengths and shortcomings, and
offer transferable advice on how the paper might have been improved.
Grading/Evaluation: Grades from A-F will be awarded based on the following criteria:
Grades from 1-4 will be awarded based on the following criteria:
Argumentation/Understanding Sources/Evidence Communication
4
A
(70< )
Insightful, vigorous, and
demonstrating considerable depth of
understanding, and a significant
amount of original thought;
addressing question directly through a
wholly coherent synthesis of ideas;
demonstrating a degree of mastery
over subject; demonstrating a deep
and thorough understanding of key
concepts.
A wide range of
sources consulted;
sources employed
with significant
discrimination and
sound judgment;
thorough assessment
of evidence; use of a
broad range of
examples.
Near-Faultless typography
and layout; near-flawless
turns of phrase and
expression; sophisticated and
precise vocabulary; clear
structure; exemplary citation
and bibliography.
B
(62-69.9)
Perceptive and insightful; some
evidence of original thought; mainly
addressing prompt directly; mainly
coherent synthesis of ideas; thorough
and somewhat critical understanding of
key concepts.
A fairly wide range of
sources consulted; solid
assessment of evidence;
sophisticated use of a
fairly broad range of
examples.
Very Solid typography and
layout; few errors in
grammar; mainly
sophisticated turns of phrase
and expression; mostly clear
structure; strong citation and
bibliography.
C
(54-61.9)
Strong understanding addressed, for
the most part, to the prompt; a
synthesis of ideas; solid
understanding of key concepts;
evidence of minor gaps in knowledge,
and minor misunderstandings of key
concepts.
Relevant sources
consulted; evidence of
some assessment of
evidence; use of
mostly workable
examples.
Good typography and layout;
comprehensible and largely
error-free grammar, turns of
phrase, and expression;
clearly structured; solid
citation and bibliography.
D
(46-53.9)
Addressed to prompt; limited
synthesis of ideas; too much
description compared to analysis;
general understanding of key concepts;
some misunderstanding of key
concepts.
Restricted range of
sources consulted;
superficial
understanding of
evidence;
Solid typography and layout;
comprehensible and largely
error-free grammar, turns of
phrase, and expression;
reasonably clearly structured;
some attempt to provide
citation and bibliography.
E
(40-45.9)
Loosely addressed to the prompt;
little synthesis of ideas; mainly
descriptive rather than analytical;
patchy understanding of key concepts;
some major gaps in knowledge and
some misunderstandings of key
concepts.
Few relevant sources
consulted;
limited range of
examples, some of
which are poorly
chosen.
Patchy typography and
layout; numerous errors of
grammar; somewhat limited
vocabulary; some ambiguous
or inaccurate turns of phrase;
weak or missing citations
and bibliography.
F (Fail)
( <40)
Barely if at all addressed to the
prompt; no real synthesis of ideas;
mainly or entirely descriptive
significant gaps in knowledge and
major misunderstanding of key
concepts.
Few if any relevant
sources consulted;
very limited range of
examples, many of
which are poorly
chosen.
Poor typography and layout;
countless errors of grammar;
limited vocabulary; myriad
ambiguous or inaccurate
turns of phrase; weak or
missing citations and
bibliography.
5
General Advice
Superior quality essays deliver insightful analysis in the form of a clearly written, well crafted,
and neatly structured piece of writing. Some scholars grasp intuitively from an early age the
mechanics of strong essay writing; they are few and far between. Instead, it is often helpful to
recognize that following certain protocol, and that following certain “tricks of the trade”, can
help to elevate scholarly work. The following advice may therefore prove helpful.
Introduction
The opening paragraph of your essay should perhaps directly state the following points:
What is generally assumed and how/why such positions have emerged.
How your essay will develop, expand, or nuance such positions.
What you are going to argue.
What general areas/examples your essay will cover in support of that argument.
How, more broadly speaking, your essay might offer transferable ideas.
In following these steps, you are essentially sign-posting your essay. Consequently, the
relevancy, importance, nature, and clarity of the information that follows will be maximized.
Main Body of the Essay
It might help to organize the main body of your essay thematically – i.e. into those general
areas/examples your essay will be covering in support of its argument. Given the short length of
this essay, 2–4 sections would seem a sensible number.
Within each section, try to ensure that each paragraph is argument driven by:
Working in a top-down manner; i.e. by first delivering statements and offering examples as
support thereafter.
Beginning each paragraph with a declaration that encapsulates the content of the entire
paragraph.
6
Then offer key examples in support of the statement (do not over-exemplify, chose the most
powerful examples, perhaps highlighting why they are so important)
In doing so, you ensure that your argument is prominent and that your line of argumentation is
easy to follow. It also ensures that the significance of your examples is apparent to the reader.
This strategy therefore ensures that your essay showcases your high-impact analysis rather than
becoming overwhelmed by the necessity to offer descriptive examples. In short it should provide
a way of preventing your essay from becoming overly description – the product of an essay
reading like a chain of examples without any real argument.
Conclusion
The concluding paragraph of the essay should perhaps be comprised of two parts:
The first should reflect upon what you set out to do and how you achieved it. Think back to points
1-4 of the introduction as a guide.
The second part should elucidate point 5 of the introduction by gesturing if possible to the
implications of your argument; what new questions it opens for consideration; what it might tell
us about parallel, earlier, or subsequent developments.
Writing Style
Aim for clarity and precision over entertainment-value and elegance. You are writing
informative and persuasive scholarship; not entertaining commercial prose. Try to keep your
writing style simple. Read the paper aloud to yourself to see if it makes sense – you wrote it, so if
you cannot understand it, what chance has anybody else of doing so. Use a spell check!