Academic Master

English

Peer Review Response Guide

Do not think about grammar, style, punctuation, etc. unless there are places where you literally cannot understand what is being communicated. Feel free to note those individual sentences.

  1. What seems to be the paper’s argument? Write it in your own words (this bit is important).

The main argument of this paper seems to be that different philosophies regarding youth, family and social class lead to the a variation in the portrayal of romantic relationships by the British and French New Waves, as shown in Saturday Night and Sunday Morning and The Umbrellas of Cherbourg.

  1. Does this argument make some sort of claim about the two films and relate to the overarching subject of the course, neo-realism and the various new waves of cinema?

Yes No

  1. How does the first paragraph work as an introduction to what the paper is going to be about? Is there a sentence that clearly says the argument you wrote above (a thesis)? Does the paragraph bring in any information that isn’t necessary for the paper?

It states the two films which are being talked about and goes on to state which aspects of the films will be discussed throughout the paper. There is not one specific sentence that describes the thesis but the first three paragraphs do end up giving us a sense of what the paper is about. If it is possible to condense these paragraphs into a more concrete thesis that would probably help the paper out a lot. There is a great deal of unnecessary information in the first few paragraph that could easily be condensed, such as the specific scenes which are to be discussed later in the essay.

  1. How does the analysis of details from the original text support or not support the overall argument of the paper?

The essay takes a great deal of time to explain what the films are about, but does not actually get into a lot of actual analysis. It is hard to actually tell what the paper is about. The details shared in the paper regarding do not have an obvious connection to the thesis, and it doesn’t really feel like there was a real attempt to make that connection in the first place. It feels like it is more of a summary of the two films rather than an actual analysis and an attempt to prove a thesis.

  1. Are there places where you, as a reader, wanted more details from the original text? If so, where?
  2. Are there places where you lost the thread of the argument or wondered how the evidence being brought in from the primary text supported the overall argument of the paper? If so, where?
  3. Other comments (about structure, etc.). You can write down and address questions the writer has here.

SEARCH

Top-right-side-AD-min
WHY US?

Calculate Your Order




Standard price

$310

SAVE ON YOUR FIRST ORDER!

$263.5

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

Pop-up Message