This week I was tasked with responding to insight about a film that I have yet to view in its entirety. Though I am familiar enough with the film to gain some sort of grasp, having seen trailers, segments, and reviews on its matters, I still believe any opinions I have about the film itself should be taken with, as the kids say, a grain of salt. Despite this, I believe Mr. Sandridge has formulated a solid take on the film and its connection to the theories of humor that have been so frequently presented and represented in our class thus far.
Initially, I went into this post with the mindset of: oh, this kid is gonna talk about a movie and how it ties into the three theories, big whoop. Upon actually reading the entry, however, I received a nice little backstory; insight into the context of which Sandridge initially viewed the film, and the effect that it has had on shaping his and his friends’ humor. I like this addition, and felt that it was easier to connect to a film that I have only seen portions of prior to this current write-up that you happen to be reading.
Now, onto considering this entry’s relevance in terms of classroom relation: I believe Sandridge’s words remain firmly planted in what we attempt to achieve through these blog posts. Describing a piece of comedy and its influence, then tying it all together with things we have learned in class. I wholeheartedly agree that, though all forms of humor are usually present in one way or another within a piece of comedy, incongruity remains a personal favorite in terms of effectiveness.
Overall, this was a solid write-up. I have to go and give this film a try in its entirety now.
I disagree: I don't think the kids these days really say grain of salt. I do agree that we should move beyond just applying the three theories though and I think the post does it.
ReplyDelete