Film Court arguments

Film Court arguments - F ilm Court Trial #2 The defense :...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Film Court Trial #2 The defense : Lawyers for Dave Eggers must defend his reputation and his film, Where the Wild Things Are, by showing the film is not promoting violence without consequence – the defense must show that the film does reveal the consequences of violent behavior. In fact, the defense must prove that this film ultimately promotes non-violence by having the main character, Max, reject his fantasy world of animal and return home. Lawyers for Dave Eggers are counter-suing for slander and monetary damages. The defense’s argumentative burden is to 1) prove that although the film contains violent scenes, as well as enacts fantasies of violence, it does not promote violence because it provides consequences for aggressive behavior – also the defense can show the true message of the film by citing specific plot points, scenes, dialogue, character development, etc., and 2) prove that the message of the film will not promote violence in young adults, and may, in fact, promote family values. The adventures were portrayed as Max’s imagination
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 01/25/2011 for the course WRIT 39AP taught by Professor White during the Fall '10 term at UC Irvine.

Page1 / 2

Film Court arguments - F ilm Court Trial #2 The defense :...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online