movie analysis

10 Common Paper Pitfalls

Used in FAMST 46: Introduction to Film

Fall 2014

1. What is your thesis?: The paper has an unclear underlying argument, or the thesis is only

present in the paper's opening and closing paragraphs.

2. Lack of detail: Paragraphs bringing in examples from the text seem more like plot summary

since the author relies on broad, general descriptions of scenes rather than picking out specific

formal/aesthetic details that support their argument.

3. Optimus Prime syndrome: Opening and closing paragraphs rely on sweeping generalizations

about CINEMA or the film's importance “for all time.”

4a. Director as Mastermind: The paper constantly refers to the director as “manipulating” or

“tricking” the spectator. Be careful of claiming a director's intentions when you cannot know

them.

4b. Director as Genius: It is not necessary to praise the director’s skill. Such statements

are more suitable for a film review than an academic analysis.

5. 5-Paragraph Essay Overload: The paper’s thesis statement states 3 elements of the film to

be discussed, but makes no unique argument about these elements: “Through flashbacks,

characters, and narration, The Conversation moves from the beginning of the film to the end.”

6. Over-hedging: The paper relies on phrases like “In my opinion” and “I think.” This weakens

the paper’s argument. If you are writing it, the reader knows it is your opinion—no need to state

it.

7. Who’s your audience?: The tone of writing sounds more like a casual blog post or popular

film review than an academic paper. The title does not sound academic or allude to the paper’s

argument.

8. Lost at sea: The paper does not have clear and defined structure. It is hard for the reader to

distinguish the purpose of each of the paragraphs. Within paragraphs, the writer goes off on

tangents or introduces new ideas that are not related to the paragraph’s topic.

9. Who do you think I am?: The paper makes overarching assumptions about viewers’

responses to a film without doing the proper audience research to support these assertions.

10. Lack of polish: The paper has not been edited or proofread closely.