Capstone Essay

Why have you brought the film into the discussion? There are significant differences in the lore, which is why I did not discuss the film at all. The only significant connection is Connor MacLeod's appearance in the premiere episode "The Gathering," the purpose of which was to seduce film fans to watch the series. The very nature of the prize in the series is completely different than that expressed in the films that preceded it. One of the films explains where Immortals come from; yet the characters in the series never learn this. So when you bring them together you encounter irreconcilable inconsistencies.

You need to explain what the quickening is. Also, you need to make clear that Ramirez is a character in the original film, which requires you to identify it and Connor MacLeod. Also, the character is not cited in parentheses. In television you can cite the writer or director; however, in film, traditionally the director gets credit.

You mention "The Gathering," however, you do not mention a single character from the series; and the guidelines specify that the premiere episode must be used to establish the mythology which drives the game. That is the connection to the real world; people are driven by beliefs which put them into conflict with each other. The series (as well as the films) uses Immortals and their game as proxies for the perpetual conflict of mankind. The series just does it better; because over time you can see the interplay between their world and ours; as well as the choices that are always available.

The two paragraphs on Chopin should be combined into one. The introductory sentence to the second of these paragraphs should be the overall topic sentence. You will need enough of an overview for the reader to understand why Louise shouts "free."

The paragraph after the one on "A Taste of Armageddon" is a perfect example of the necessity of contextualizing your material for the reader. Up to that point, I am familiar with all your references, many of which would be unfamiliar to anyone else reading your essay. Then when you come to the next paragraph, I am completely unfamiliar with the references, and therefore cannot follow your argument. As soon as the references are unclear to the reader, the argument begins to break down.

I find the conclusion a bit unwieldy and problematic. I am not clear that your conclusions follow from the argument you have made. Moreover, what you have missed in introducing the world of immortals is the fact that they are driven by a mythology that has been handed down to them from a source which is as mysterious to them as are the sources of the worlds countless religions. Look at the madness of the past 5 weeks since Election day, The president has lied, filed lawsuits, and riled up his support base. His supporters have made death threats, intimidated elected officials, and are clearly attempting to subvert the legal and democratic process of electing a new leader. They worship Trump as though he were a god; and are willing to go to any lengths to keep him in power. But why? What has he done for them? How can they possibly justify their illegal actions? What evidence do they have that anyone other than their idol has committed any crimes; and why do they turn a blind eye to his countless lies, crimes, and ineptitudes?

Ultimately I have to wonder why you have complicated the process by going beyond what I gave you. "The Gathering," "Band of Brothers," "The Hunters," and "The Watchers," really set up the conflict for you. And the great thing about "The Hunters" is that it moves the conflict from a war between members of a single culture to a race war between humans and immortals, which practically screams out how stupid humanity behaves in response to belief systems they do not fully understand.

There is nothing wrong with adding in additional sources; however, there needs to be a clear thread, which runs throughout the essay. This is missing, which is why the conclusion seems to come out of nowhere; because it does not flow clearly from what you have been presenting up to that point. For example, your reference to marriages is completely disconnected from what you discussed relative to Chopin's story. Each body paragraph should remind the reader of the overall point you are making, with a different piece of evidence.

Finally, there is no counterargument and no rebuttal.