Rationale – Film Review
What I wrote was a film review on the newly released Sherlock Holmes, directed by Guy Richie. I wrote this as a critique from the daily mail. My intention of this piece was to show that Guy Richie tried to turn Sherlock Holmes into a hardboiled detective and failed. To begin with I tried to adapt the tone and language of an average film reviewer. I did that was by adding a lot of descriptive adjectives as I summed up a part of the movie, and I feel that worked quite well. I then began to compare the genres hardboiled detective and classical detective. I discussed how the two types are perceived and concluded that in this case, the director had failed properly fuse the genres. I went listed some of the traits of the characteristics of a hardboiled detective, to further show that Sherlock Holmes had not been turned into a hardboiled detective. I then made sure not to completely destroy the movie, as I quite liked. Instead used misdirection in that I had the audience consider the fact that Guy Richie was making a commercial movie, which there are limits to. I then spoke to both the plot and narrative, and how the movie has failed to provide an open plot that continues beyond the point that the narrative ends, which a true hardboiled detective story does. One thing that really frustrated me in making this piece was the fact that blue banner newspaper readers do not necessarily care about genre, which I was obliged to speak to. Otherwise I like my finished product, and I feel that I successful proved that in spite of Guy Richie’s strong attempt to turn Sherlock Holmes into a hardboiled has failed.
Monday, 8 March 2010
Monday, 1 February 2010
DOHA Prep - G77
Ministerial Decleration
- The goals of the WTO is made extremely clear, and the EU and US should know what they are entering with this conference.
- There should be no confusing between the EU and US during the talks. - Should've been resolved before it.
The Wrecking
- The arrogant, walk-out attitude is the one that wrecks these talks
- Most interests seem to be that of special political ones, instead of those for the common good
- Farm-talks have always been the most contentious, and caused the collapse of DOHA
- Small groups have been proved to be more effective, with less fuss and more speed
- The fact that we can't reach an agreement, may well pose a threat to the trading system as a whole
- The talks changed dramatically, leaving most rich countries feeling as if they had to sacrifice their own interests to the foreigners
- America will only undergo radical changes, no minor ones.
- The longer the talks go on, the more the WTO will get to insult the western nations, which will only lessen the chances of success
- The world leaders assembled to try and make the world a better place. They failed.
The global trade talks have collapsed because the world's biggest economies prefer failure to compromise. What comes next?
- Countries with emerging economies are against reducing their own tariffs
- The EU and big emerging economies want a compromise, the US want a complete slash in trade agreements
- DOHA lite is insufficient due to EU's poor proposal
The WTO Doha Development Round
- Every member has a veto in the final say
- EU accused of being insufficient by the US, only offering to reduce tariffs by 39%, as opposed to the proposed 54%
- 8% of world trade is agriculture - 2.5 billion in the industry, mainly in the developing countries
- Developing countries unable to compete with the vast subsidies in Japan, US, EU
- EU offered to cut overall-trade distorting subsidies (OTDS) by 75%, US only wanted to cut 53%, which EU then argued would lead to an increase in subsidies, since they would then spend 22.7 billion instead of 19.7 billion. The WTO permit is 48.2 billion.
- The goals of the WTO is made extremely clear, and the EU and US should know what they are entering with this conference.
- There should be no confusing between the EU and US during the talks. - Should've been resolved before it.
The Wrecking
- The arrogant, walk-out attitude is the one that wrecks these talks
- Most interests seem to be that of special political ones, instead of those for the common good
- Farm-talks have always been the most contentious, and caused the collapse of DOHA
- Small groups have been proved to be more effective, with less fuss and more speed
- The fact that we can't reach an agreement, may well pose a threat to the trading system as a whole
- The talks changed dramatically, leaving most rich countries feeling as if they had to sacrifice their own interests to the foreigners
- America will only undergo radical changes, no minor ones.
- The longer the talks go on, the more the WTO will get to insult the western nations, which will only lessen the chances of success
- The world leaders assembled to try and make the world a better place. They failed.
The global trade talks have collapsed because the world's biggest economies prefer failure to compromise. What comes next?
- Countries with emerging economies are against reducing their own tariffs
- The EU and big emerging economies want a compromise, the US want a complete slash in trade agreements
- DOHA lite is insufficient due to EU's poor proposal
The WTO Doha Development Round
- Every member has a veto in the final say
- EU accused of being insufficient by the US, only offering to reduce tariffs by 39%, as opposed to the proposed 54%
- 8% of world trade is agriculture - 2.5 billion in the industry, mainly in the developing countries
- Developing countries unable to compete with the vast subsidies in Japan, US, EU
- EU offered to cut overall-trade distorting subsidies (OTDS) by 75%, US only wanted to cut 53%, which EU then argued would lead to an increase in subsidies, since they would then spend 22.7 billion instead of 19.7 billion. The WTO permit is 48.2 billion.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)