They Say I Say: Evaluating and Using Sources

1. Who is the author of each text? How do the authors present themselves? James Franco and Anthony Lane are the authors. James Franco presents himself by focusing on himself and how much he knows about Wes Anderson. Anthony Lane presents himself as knowing what he is talking about.

2. What is the purpose of each text? What appears to be motivating the authors to write? The purpose of each text is to review the movie "Moonrise Kingdom". It almost seems that what is motivation James Franco is to show everyone how much he knows and what all he has done, just to make himself look good. Where as Anthony Lane is promoting the movie and summarizes the plot.

3. Do the texts demonstrate ethos, or are they full of errors (either mechanical or argumentative)? No matter the answer, give some examples: James Franco does not demonstrate ethos. One thing he says is "one thing about Nana is that she is incapable od saying anyone's name correctly" completely out of context. In Anthony Lane's he says "that lodge inexplicably in the heart" and actually talks about the potential of the movie.

4. Do you agree with the authors partially or in full, or do you disagree with them? I agree with Anthony Lane because he gives a good argument and shows the movie's potential. Where as James Franco doesn't really give an argument at all much less even an opinion.

5. Where do the authors seem to offer direct, or first-person, argumentation? Anthony Lane shows it by saying "we may look back on Anderson's works as we do on the boxes of Joseph Cornell- formal troves of frippery, studded with nostalgic private jokes, that lodge inexplicably in the heart." Franco just relates everything to himself.

6. What don't the authors talk about? Are there flaws or holes in their arguments? Do you agree with the evidence the authors present and the way they present it? How can you "enter the conversation"? James Franco doesn't really talk about his view of the movie. He just brags about himself and relates everything back to him. I agree with the evidence Anthony Lane provided which I stated in the last question. I think he was trying to say that there's more than meets the eye when it comes to this movie.