*The first thing I did for all my drafts was consider what Professor Hays wrote. I felt that Professor Hays was the most direct source of insight for this revision task. Therefore, I always attempted to fix mistakes mentioned by Professor Hays before I tried to revise the assignment on my own. *

Professor Hays suggested that I create a title that was more specific and descriptive. I decided to change the title to “Reviewing The Conflict Behind Chief Illinwek” because it specified that this paper was movie review and summarized the movie. Next, I addressed common grammar issues that Professor Hays highlighted. My paper had two obvious uses of passive voice. The two passive verbs were changed to active verbs. This critical response also contained two citation errors that Professor Hays noticed.  In one of the parenthetical citations, I accidently wrote “In Whose Line” instead of “In Whose Honor.” In addition to adjusting this mistake, I also deleted a parenthetical citation that was unneeded.

As usual, I reread my paper after I fix all the recommend revisions that Professor Hays suggested. I feel that rereading the paper after all the major flaws are fixed can provide a better understanding of my paper. In attempt to revise the paper on my own, I used Purdue Owl’s Hierarchy of Concerns (Higher Order Concerns).  I felt that many of the Lower Order Concerns were addressed by Professor Hay’s comments, so I focused on my Higher Order Concerns. The Higher Order Concerns focused on Thesis, Audience, Organization, and Purpose (Higher Order Concerns). I felt that my thesis was focused and aimed towards a specific audience. Following the suggested methods by Purdue Owl, I attempted to improve the organization of my paper by summarizing each paragraph. By doing so, I realized that the Ken Burn’s Effect section belonged underneath a style of editing. To further develop my second to last paragraph, I felt that the film tools related to the pathos of the rhetorical triangle. Being much more familiar with the rhetorical triangle, I decided to expand on this idea.  The last thing I did was quickly scan my paper to delete redundancy. By doing this last check, I was able to words that part of the Banned Words Wiki.

I felt that this paper was the most interesting of all the critical responses that I had to complete. Writing an analysis for a documentary would have been a standard assignment, but I felt writing a movie review really added a higher level of enjoyment and interest. I learned that a movie review has aspects that a standard analysis does not include. For example, I feel that a standard analysis focuses more on the thesis of the documentary. A movie review though, focuses on how the editor/director tried to visually represent their thesis. Looking back, I feel that the editor/director actually deserves more praise for their production. Ignorant of the long tedious process of a research paper, I was not aware of how much work a documentary required. After finishing my research paper, I am able to truly appreciate how much dedication was put towards gathering the footage and information.

Citations:

“Higher Order Concerns (HOCs) and Lower Order Concerns                                   (LOCs).” Purdue Owl Online Writing Lab. Purdue Owl, 01 Mar.                   2013. Web. 02 Dec. 2015.