Coca-Cola, Nike, Reebok, Adidas, UPS, McDonalds, FedEx, Dairy Queen, Kodak. You may ask what these brand names have in common. These brand names (and many others) all represent trademarks. “That sounds expensive! How can I afford for the protagonist in my film to be drinking a Pepsi and eating a slice of Dominos pizza during dinner? I will have to cover up all of the labels.” Unfortunately, this is how most filmmakers think. The thought that producers must obtain permission and cough up more of their dwindling production budget to use every label, sign, or shingle in their film is not entirely true. This concept is a very misunderstood notion of trademark law.

The important part of a trademark is what the mark represents. A trademark represents the source – it identifies who made the goods you are buying or who provided the services you are enjoying. So the big question remains, “Can I use someone else’s trademark in my film?”

The good news is that as a filmmaker, your right to include a trademark in your film is clear. You have a right to include the trademark in your film as long as the trademark or the product bearing the trademark is used as it was intended to be used without any consequences of its use being abnormal or out of the ordinary. Therefore, as long as a filmmaker is using a trademark or logo as it was intended to be used, and do not disparage or tarnish the trademark or logo in your film, you may include such trademark or logo without asking permission to do so. Simple, right?

Like any other rule, there is always one caveat. You as a filmmaker do not have the right to commit trade libel, not even in the name of entertainment. Trade libel occurs when a product or service is falsely accused of some bad attribute. For example, if you showed someone in your film eating a McDonald’s hamburger, then that person immediately keeled over because the food was poisonous, that would libel the trademark.

Another major question that arises sounds something like this, “So if I can use a trademark in my film in a non-libelous manner, why would I want to pay a license fee to clear it?” While the law does not require the filmmaker to obtain permission to use these items in film or television shows, there may be some good business reasons to do so anyway. For instance, broadcast television is an advertiser- supported medium. Therefore, if you used Coca-Cola labels on every beverage, and these beverages are prominently visible on the television screen, you have essentially given Coca-Cola free airtime.

I do not think the network broadcasting your show would be too thrilled giving away free airtime. Additionally as a filmmaker, you may potentially create more than one film. By showing goodwill and possibly paying or asking permission to use a trademark in your current film, the trademark holder may be willing to support, or even finance a portion of your project (assuming of course the trademark holder liked the use of their product or trademark in the film). So while permission to use a logo or trademark may not always be necessary, it might make good business sense to get permission anyway.

“Change is inevitable in life”. Everything around is changing with the passage of time. Each individual get a chance to bring a change in his life. Some people prefer to spend their lives doing the same things and avoid change. Others, on the other hand, are not afraid trying new things. They believe that change can be a good thing. Well, in the film Les Miserables, you will meet a man who was incarcerated for nineteen years because of stealing a piece of bread then decided to change for the better and make things right again. This character is none other than Jean Valjean. This review will focus to him. A person who undergoes change-from someone with confused morals to a man with more morals than most, whom with respect learns to love and share. The story happened in the country renowned for its sophistication-France. It is in the 1800’s while the French revolution is happening. As the story is being told, see how this ex-convict transformed from a miserable criminal into a heroic, courageous, and a peaceful man.

The story started when the convict Jean Valjean was released from a French prison after serving nineteen years for stealing a loaf of bread and for subsequent attempts to escape from prison. When Valjean arrives at the town of Digne, no one is willing to give him shelter because he is an ex-convict. Hopeless, Valjean knocks on the door of Monsieur Myriel, the kindhearted priest of Digne. Myriel treats Valjean with kindness, and Valjean repays the bishop by stealing his silverware. When the police arrest Valjean, Myriel covers for him, claiming that the silverware was a gift. The authorities release Valjean and Myriel makes him promise to become an honest man. Eager to fulfill his promise, Valjean masks his identity and enters the town of Montreuil-sur-mer. Under the assumed name of Madeleine, Valjean invents an ingenious manufacturing process that brings the town prosperity. He eventually becomes the town’s mayor. Unforeseen, he met a young girl named Fantine that has an illegitimate daughter named Cossette. He promised to the girl that he will adopt her child and treat her like its own. As time pass by, Cossette and Jean Valjean found a new, peaceful life for a time in the convent but the two eventually left the convent and lived in Paris again. Cossette falls in love with a young man named Marius. The political situation deteriorates in Paris, and the city experiences a violent uprising. Marius joins the fight out of despair. Jean Valjean joins the fight to watch over Marius, though part of him wishes Marius to be out of Cossette’s life forever. Valjean saved Marius’ life, though Marius does not know who saves him. After Marius heals, he again pursues Cossette for marriage. After that, Marius found out that it was Valjean who saved him. The newlyweds rush to Valjean’s side just in time for a final reconciliation. Happy to be reunited with his adopted daughter, Valjean dies in peace.

Symbolism is something that is woven profound inside Les Misérables; it stows away in stolen silver candles that prompt recovery, and the yellow travel permit that indicated social foul play. About the candles, they are not quite recently that. They symbolize a more profound importance. After Jean Valjean is discharged from jail, the special case who will take him and treat him like a person is the Priest of Digne. Unfortunately, still made up for lost time in his old methods for agony and submitting malicious just to survive, Valjean takes the silver the Priest utilized amid the supper. The silver speaks to the Bishop’s objective of approaching Valjean with deference; henceforth, later when a policeman gets Valjean with a great deal of silver in his rucksack and returns him to the Priest, the Priest reacts by saying that he had given Valjean the silver as a blessing and instructs him to take the candles also, advising him that they are worth around two hundred francs. He likewise advises Valjean to recollect forget that he “guaranteed to utilize this cash in turning into a legitimate man”. Not just that, the Priest discusses reclamation and redeeming quality when he says: Jean Valjean, my sibling, you never again have a place with insidious, yet to great. It is your spirit that I purchase from you; I pull back it from dark contemplations and the soul of destruction, and I offer it to God. Concerning the yellow ticket, when Jan Valjean at last leaves the correctional facility, he was given that paper. At to begin with, it resembled a ticket to flexibility yet it’s definitely not. It’s more similar to a ticket to much more wretchedness. That is on the grounds that the Yellow Ticket is an image of social dismissal. Jean Valjean is required to convey it with him constantly so as to indicate individuals that he is an ex-convict, or else he’ll be disregarding his parole and backpedal to imprison. The issue is that this ticket makes individuals dismiss him wherever he goes. As Valjean says to Priest Myriel, “This is my ticket-of-leave – yellow, as you see. That is the reason everyone dismisses me”.

Discuss greatly unreasonable. Whatever he did was take a chunk of bread to encourage his starving family, and he got tossed behind bars for a long time as a result of it. Now that he’s served his chance and is out, the purported free world is by all accounts more regrettable than imprison-in light of the fact that at any rate he could rest and eat in prison. Because of that yellow ticket, Valjean unfortunately discovers “the importance of freedom when it is joined by a yellow ticket”, which is not by any stretch of the imagination freedom. The yellow ticket symbolizes the unpleasant way society treats its untouchables. It demonstrates to us that “opportunity” doesn’t mean a mess if what it implies is that you’re allowed to starve and bite the dust.

As someone who is not fond of watching musicals and theater play, the movie, Les Miserables has been an eye opening to me that films like these are a must watch. The flow of the story is very organized and well composed. The cinematography and effects were surprisingly good given that the movie was from 2012 and the way characters portrayed their roles is very astounding. The dialogues were wonderfully delivered by the characters with the right expression, emotion, and feelings that the viewers can also perceive the excitement and enthusiasm in every scene. Though some of the characters have a limited time of exposure, their role left a big impact on the viewers. As for the character of Jean Valjean, it was excellently done. The actor is very fit to that role.It was just a little bit disappointing because at the end, Jean Valjean died. But all in all, the movie was perfect. It gave the viewers the clear vision on how the French Revolution started and ended. To end this, I would like to congratulate the persons behind this very good film. They all deserve a big round of applause.

If I understand Othello correctly the viewer is supposed to be enveloped in a sense of suffocation, a feeling of being smothered, as Iago’s box closes around the others, capturing them. That doesn’t happen in this production at all, and one of the reasons it doesn’t is that the production is so beautiful. The sets, the costumes, the cinematography, all of it – it’s excellent, even breathtaking, to the point of distraction. (Compare the sense of asphyxiation in Trevor Nunn’s film with Ian McKellen and Willard White and the BBC film with Bob Hoskins and Anthony Hopkins – in those we feel really choked.)

I’m a firm believer that the “style over substance” type of aesthetic can go a long way, and justify a lot, but it usually can’t go all the way and justify everything. The true stars of this production are the costume designer Debra Hanson; the cinematographer Glen Keenan; the production designer Callum Maclachlan; and even the composer of the haunting theme, Philip J. Bennett. So – what of everything else?

I understand the necessity of time limitations in a television adaptation of Shakespeare, and I understand Orson Welles edited this work enormously also, but that isn’t justification. Chopping this play to two hours from its true three and a half is too much. It turns the play into Shakespeare for adolescents. Too many key speeches and scenes have to go. In particular the bawdy jesting between Iago and Desdemona as they leave the ship cannot be hacked off, as it gives too much insight into both of those critical characters. The cuts hurt.

Too: showing the corpses at the very start, and then flashing back, is a mistake. (It was a mistake when Welles did it as well; it will always be a mistake.) I can’t get behind this kind of re-writing of Shakespeare in any way, shape, or form. And this isn’t the only way Zaib Shaikh re-writes. He gives Roderigo the line “… this Muslim” (meaning Othello) at one point, which Shakespeare certainly didn’t write. The point is reinforced by having Othello exchange his necklace (a star and crescent) with Desdemona for hers (a cross) at the beginning, when they’re married. I don’t see anything wrong with the visual message of the necklaces, but again, re-writing the Bard, putting in words he didn’t write? A no no! Show, don’t tell.

The camera here is relatively bland. What about the acting? Christine Horne as Desdemona and Peter Donaldson as her father are sensational; I’ve not seen earnest, wholesome goodness just ooze out of Desdemona like this before. In the thankless role of Bianca Nazneen Contractor isn’t bad, and Ryan Hollyman looks like a great Roderigo. No one else is a Shakespearean heavyweight, to say the least. Compare Frank Finlay’s “Are you mad?” in the final scene to Matthew DeSlippe’s here and you’ll know most of what you need to know.

And yet, in spite of all these complaints, this film is aesthetically splendacious, reason enough for me to recommend it to anyone.

Without any doubt, movies can boost different types of emotions. For example, they can make you suffer cry, and laugh. Apart from this, they can also provide you with the strength that you need to deal with the routine challenges of life. This is the reason that experts have introduced the term film therapy. Let’s find out about it and check out some of the benefits of watching movies.

According to psychologists, movies and TV series offer a lot of benefits for viewers, especially those who are suffering from some type of mental health issues, such as depression and anxiety. Let’s check out some of the benefits to give you a better idea of this concept.

Benefits of film therapy

According to the film therapy experts, given below are some of the benefits that the viewers of films can enjoy.

If you watch a movie, it can help you relax, disconnect, and have a great time with your loved ones. It can also help you face the fears of your life. Therefore, you can deal with them in a better way.

Film therapy allows you to find solutions to your problems. Many movies can help you identify your problems via empathy and identification. Apart from this, they perform a cathartic function as well. In other words, you may experience passion with no side effects in real life.

Film therapy can help you relax as it can redirect your attention to something else. As a result, you can reduce your anxiety level. Besides, watching your favorite title can help you to raise your motivation level. The characters can energize your real life.

Movies are also a source of happiness and laughter. Without any doubt, they can have a great impact on your physical and mental health. They can help you shed your cathartic tears, which is good for your mental health.

They can help you rethink your negative thoughts. Basically, watching movies can help you take a look at different perspectives of your life. All of this can help you change your attitude. They can also help you to boost your creativity level. Since they help you see different perspectives of your life, you get more innovative flexible, and creative with the passage of time.

If you want to improve your personal relationships, you may want to watch your favorite movies with your family members and friends. Good films can help you reflect on your spiritual and existential questions. Besides, they can help you deal with an irreparable loss in your life.

Movies can inspire move and elevate you. As a result, you can become a better person as time goes by. You can enjoy a much better strength, which we all need to live a happy life. The great thing about watching movies is that they can put you in moral situations that you may have never been to.

Long story short, this was a brief description of some of the primary benefits of film therapy. If you have been going through tough times, we suggest that you spare a few hours on a weekly or monthly basis and watch your favorite movies. This can help you feel better and be more productive in your life.

The Children of Men is a dystopian novel written by British author P. D. James that was published in 1992. The 2006 film Children of Men by Alfonso Cuaron is based on the book.

In both the book and the film the action is set in England, a few decades in the future, where worldwide sterility has been strucking for a quarter of a century. In this dying Great Britain, we follow Theo Faron, drawn into a small group of dissidents trying to protect a woman who has inexplicably become pregnant and whose child is likely to be used for the tyrannic government’s own agenda.

And that is basically all the similarities between P.D James’ book and Alfonso Cuaron’s film. Saying the film is an adaptation of the book would be wrong; Cuaron inspired himself from P.D James’ universe, borrowing settings and character names but that is all.

While the first half the film sets us into a realistic very actual disintegrating society with video screens everywhere, terror attacks and a government department called Homeland Security, the second half completely overlook this dystopian theme and become a reflective action movie.

In the book, the theme of the broken down society is omnipresent and we are often reminded about the grotesque desperation through scenes of women pushing dolls in pushchairsor people organising christening ceremonies for newborn pets. Science is seen as the fallen God who has failed to explain and cure the mass infertility and religion is either a consolation or an emptiness for people. The elderly and infirms have become a burden and are pushed to accomplish the Quietus, a mass suicide ceremony. Youngsters from poorer countries are lured into England only to be treated as slaves and sent back to their country when they become too old to work.

P.D James’ book is, more than everything else, a pertinent analysis of politics and powers and offers an interesting view on how some tyrants come to power, in particular through the character of Xan Lyppiat, the Warden of England and Theo’s cousin. Exceptionally self-confident, he easily seized the title of Warden in an apathetic society where people have lost all interest in politics and happily gave away full power to one man. Xan is no less than a despot, having reduced the Parliament to a merely consultative role and his five people Council never disagrees with him. His rule is advertised and approved by the mass as the fitting answer to the country’s threats. It condones the forced labour of immigrants and encourages mass suicides of the old. “What we guarantee is freedom from fear, freedom from want, freedom from boredom. The other freedoms are pointless without freedom from fear.”

About Xan’s personal motives, when asked by Theo, he answers, “At first because I thought I’d enjoy it,[… ] I could never bear to watch someone doing badly what I knew I could do well.” And when he finally grew fed up with power, he claimed that no one in the Council was capable enough to replace him.

Going back to the group who hope to oust Xan, Theo warned them, “If you did succeed, what an intoxication of power”. The warning hangs about the whole novel and it is a theme the film could have explore deeper. Xan is called Nigel and is a secondary character, appearing in a single scene. He is not the Warden of England but a government minister which limit the whole ‘seduction of power’ theme.

If Theo is the most faithfully adapted character from the books, he still was toned down in the film. He is less ambiguous and more sympathetic, a former activist who lost his son to an epidemic flu. In the book, he is an Oxford history teacher who accidentally killed his daughter towards whom he felt more jealousy than love.

The ends are also drastically different. Cuaron chose an optimistic ending, where Theo saved the mother and child from the claws of anyone wanting to use them, putting her under the protection of “Human Project”, a scientific group dedicated to curing infertility. The film ends on a black screen with the sounds of children playing.

The ending of the book is astutely ambiguous, with Theo putting on the Coronation ring, symbol of the Warden’s power, apparently succumbing to the ‘seduction of power’ he warned against.

As P.D James said, “The detective novel affirms our belief in a rational universe because, at the end, the mystery is solved. In The Children of Men, there is no such comforting resolution.”

In my opinion, both book and film are great and I think they complement each other pretty well. My favourite moment in the film is the Bexhill detention camp which allows us to see first hand the abuses the refugees endure and that were only mentioned in the books (Isle of Wight). This part is so accurate it is impossible not to draw a parallel with today’s world. However, P.D James goes even deeper into that whole decaying hopeless civilization and reading the Children of Men is an eye-opening and maybe also a warning to what our society is turning into.

Dream Big was a film produced for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints by the Brigham Young University Motion Picture Studio in the year 1987. This film begins with a team of little league football players playing in a scrimmage game. The host of this film is none other than the legendary quarterback Bart Starr. Bart Starr played for the Green Bay Packers and helped lead his team to win the first Super Bowl.

In this particular film Bart Starr introduces the story of another legendary figure Glenn Cunningham. The film then switches from the little league game to a flash back to the early part of the 20th century, he begins to tell the story of Glenn Cunningham thought by many to be the greatest miler of all time.

The story tells how Glenn Cunningham grew up in humble circumstances and because of a very bad accident at his school house where he studied, his legs got burned very badly. The accident also cost him the life off his brother. Though he was hurt he was determined to walk again. Glenn and his parents massaged his legs back to full capacity. When they got tired of massaging his legs he would work and massage his legs himself. Glenn had been told by the medical doctors of the day, that he would never walk again, however, soon he began to walk, run and jump about just like any other boy. His determination kept him going. He entered into track at school.

The Story then talks about his career as a miler. He won many races indoors and outdoors. Though this story took place long ago the message remains the same that we should never give up our hopes and our dreams.

The film ends with Bart Starr bringing it back to modern times and explaining that those who are successful have drive and dream big. Though neither Glenn Cunningham or Bart Starr are members of the LDS faith members can celebrate with them the victories of those who have the drive and the determination to be the very best they can be at whatever they choose to do.

Glenn Cunningham is an inspiration to many people, his favorite scripture says it all, “But they that await upon the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint.” (Isaiah 40:31 KJV)

“I had a dream my life would be so different from this hell I’m living.” This quotation came from the film Les Miserables, directed by Tom Hooper. The film was based on a novel by Victor Hugo. The film was in the 1800’s during the period of Restoration. The major happenings were taken in Paris, but some of it took place in the neighboring towns. This review focuses on the character that symbolizes the good but poverty-stricken woman driven to despair and death by a cruel society-Fantine.

Les Miserables features Fantine as a mother who was abandoned by her lover, Tholomyes. Upon knowing she was pregnant she had no choice but to take care of her child on her own. She gave her daughter under the provision of the Thenardiers. She began working in a factory, owned by Monsieur Madeleine. During her stay there, her co-workers stole a letter from her and it is written that her daughter needs money because she’s sick. Her co-workers spilled the news to the foreman, and eventually she got fired from her job. As a result, she began to find ways on how she’ll be able to provide for her daughter, she then began selling her locket, hair and tooth. When she had nothing more to sell, she sold herself as a last resort. One night, a man told the inspector that she was trying to harass him. Without a doubt, the inspector held Fantine to imprison her. Monsieur Madeleine instantly got into the situation to save Fantine only to find out she’s fatally ill with tuberculosis. She was brought to the hospital where Madeleine promised her that he will take care of Cosette then Fantine faced her death.

The film shows the inferiority of the female gender in the society and that women were seen as sex objects. Hugo demonstrates the hypocrisy of the society that fails to educate girls and excludes women such as Fantine while encouraging the behavior of men such as TholomyeÌ€s. Since it was the 19th century, it is a disgrace if a woman has an illegitimate child. So Fantine had two options: place her child in the care of a willing family so that she could earn a provisional wage or abandon the child at the local hospice making the baby a ward of the state. So why did Fantine choose the former? Because abandoning Cosette at a hospice, although cheaper, easier, and faster, would have been a death sentence for the little girl. That time, half of all illegitimate children were given over to the state, and over half of those children ended up dying in the first year. The hospices were filthy, understaffed, underfinanced, and overcrowded. That’s why Fantine decided to just let her child stay with the Thenardiers. A mother’s determination, sacrificial love and perseverance were greatly shown in this film. Yet when we look into our culture, we see a society dismissing the virtues of motherhood that she embodied-the virtues of sacrificial love and persistent loyalty. On the latter part of the film, Fantine was fired and began selling her hair, tooth and herself. Over time, a man called her names and she defended herself, the man then told the inspector, and Fantine was supposed to be imprisoned for defending herself from harassment. This plot illustrates the being “nobody” of a woman and being powerless. Though the society was in the 19th century, nothing much has changed over the years. We still live in a community wherein men are considered superior over women.

The film didn’t fail in retelling the happenings in the past. The actors gave respect and dignity in their given characters and performed really well. Furthermore, the set design, costume design and soundtrack were really effective in understanding the movie more, since the designers used the attire that was worn during the 19th century aligned with the set design. I highly recommend this movie to every individual in our society, especially for the government officials, teenagers as well as the adults. Hugo’s style of imaginative realism, a very believable creation of an imagined world, emphasizes the two major predicaments of the 19th century: degradation of man in the proletariat and oppression of women. In this case, we can see that nothing much has changed through the years, these predicaments remain up to this day. Nonetheless, the film is full of life-changing lessons, it was a great film and it is definitely worth your time.

“There is always more misery among the lower classes than there is humanity in the higher.” A French historical novel of 19th century that ignites people’s emotions and sentiment, Les Misérables which was written by Victor Hugo, a poet-novelist, and dramatist of the Romantic Movement. This eye-opening work depicts the state between the rich and the wretched, how powerful the government is and how frail the commoners are. This gives the viewers an excruciating experience about the history of France as it was written by the well acknowledged writer and was adapted into a film directed by Tom Hooper in 2012. Thus, having this review will focus more about the discrepancy of power between the government and the commoners.

Prisoner 24601. After spending nineteen years in jail and galleys for being guilty for stealing a loaf of bread and attempting to escape from the bars several times, Jean Valjean is finally released by Javert, the officer in charge. When he arrives at the town of Digne, he is repeatedly refused when asking for shelter and employment. This is mainly because he carries with him a yellow ticket which makes the fact that he is an ex-convict known and in result to this, he is discriminated and looked down to. Forlorn, he knocks to the Monseigneur Myriel, the bishop of Digne who shows him kindness and hospitality. Still, he repays the bishop by stealing his silverware. He is then arrested by the police, yet, the bishop covers him with a pious lie claiming that the silverware is a gift. In exchange, Myriel makes Valjean promise to become an honest man. As he strives to fulfill his commitment, in time, he masks his identity with a new name, Monseigneur Madeleine and manages his own factory who then becomes the town’s mayor. But his past keeps haunting him. Valjean and Javert meets, the law and the ex-convict. Once again, his desperate life continues as he keeps on running from the law for he promptly breaks parole. He meets Fantine who is a worker of his and later becomes a prostitute forcefully. She is mistreated by affluent people and so, with his generous heart, Valjean saves him from despair. However, Fantine dies on his hands with her dying wish: to find her daughter Cosette. With the abide by Fantine’s wish, he did find Cosette who has been living terribly with her wicked guardians. He adopts her and becomes the foster parent of Cosette. From then, they lived together from place to place running and escaping from Javert. As years passes by, Cosette turns into a lady who questions Valjean about his identity and eventually meets Marius who then fell and declare his love for her and she reciprocates. However, with the assault coming against the France regiment, Marius is one of the revolutionaries who will revolt. Except for Marius who has been saved by Valjean from death, the revolutionaries all lost their lives at the hands of the regiment including Gavroche, a revolutionary brave young boy. After the revolt, before Marius and Cosette’s marriage, Valjean exposes his past to the young man and eventually estranges himself from Cosette and Marius. Being cognizant that Valjean saved his life from the grave, Marius, together with his lover, finds Valjean who later reveals his true identity by giving Cosette a letter with all of his confessions as he dies peacefully.

The most evident theme Hugo condemned and presented in the film is probably the huge gap between the rich and the wretched or in common term, the outcasts that causes the latter to either stay in their state or just get worse. While the upper class with their power, and wealth continue to put themselves in higher place, able to manipulate and order who are below them This exposes how innocent people turns into beggars and criminals. Meanwhile, Valjean is an obvious victim of this class system as seen in the film how the yellow ticket which should grant him freedom but on the other hand, a ticket that grants him to even more misery. This symbolizes the social rejection and shows how terrible the society treats an outcast. This forbids him to have a peaceful life especially when no one would dare converse with an ex-convict. He would knock on each door that unfortunately, his attempt for employment and shelter was always put down. Javert shows how merciless the law is back then in France. Jean Valjean’s life is put in despair because of stealing a loaf of bread. Even though he is free, he is still under the government’s hands as he keeps on running from Javert who is trying to arrest him for he breaks parole. Les Misérables translated as “The Miserable” leads viewers to think that the film is probably revolving around these men, women, and children of France is that time who could barely make it through the misery of everyday and hardships of each breathe. The film also showcased how these people are treated inhumanely, removing their access to food, shelter, education, human rights involving class systems equality and one presented by Fantine’s suffering; the low treatment to women and the objectifying approach used for them. Fantine symbolizes impoverished women that is driven to despair and death by the atrocious society. Fantine’s daughter, Cosette, even though she eventually had prosperous life, once suffered from the consequences of the unjust society with Gavroche, a young boy who bravely joined the revolt who symbolizes the youth, both had little to no access to food, shelter, education, and a sturdy family to lean on. Although they were young when they faced all these they had no choice but to compromise. Gavroche is one of the dead bodies that can be seen after the revolution since he is killed by the regiment. This flaunts how merciless the government is regardless of age. Another scene that depicts how cruel the life is for an outcast to live for the rest of their lives and that in such cases they need to estrange themselves from their love ones is that after the revolt, Jean Valjean distant himself from Marius and Cosette for he is an ex-convict. He dies peacefully with contentment for only having Cosette’s face seen for the last time. His whole life being a misery, his whole life being prisoner 24601. They gave him a number, and murdered Valjean.

Les Misérables is a highly recommended film that fit all ages. This exposes the history of France and as well as the issues of the society back in the time. The symbolisms can be recognized easily by the viewers. The film triggers the viewer’s passion and sentiment by bringing them the experience through the scenes. The sound effects make the movie more dreadful, the songs are well arranged and in addition, the actors are very consistent for their roles making the audience feel the atmosphere as if they are in the actual scenes. Hugo commends the unjust class structure of the nineteenth century which is well seen in the film. All in all, Les Misérables is a movie and a novel that is not to be missed.

My bread and butter as a videographer (especially a Chicago videographer) is filming interviews and testimonials. I have filmed hundreds of such interviews, I have worked with other videographers setting up interviews and I have seen many more video interviews all over the web. Over this time I have learned a few important keys to making a good and engaging interview.

First point, be brief. When I set up a video interview I usually end up talking to my subject for 30 -40 minutes. However, an effective interview video with one subject is 1.5 minutes to 2.5 minutes. When I get a response from my subject that is long, verbose, and it feels like he/she is wondering with an idea, I let them finish, complement them on how good their response was and ask them to summarize it in 2-3 sentences. Sometimes it takes a few takes. Hence, allow 40 minutes for an interview.

Secondly, make the interview conversational. There is nothing more boring and flat than reading questions to the subject. As humans, we are social beings. Yes, the subject understands that ultimately he/she is talking to an imaginary audience and he/she is just being filmed. However, I have seen shy people open up to me when I engaged them with conversations. They forget the camera is pointing at them and they give me content that is rich and personal. At times, as videographer, you can’t engage in conversation or you don’t feel comfortable doing it, and prefer just attending to the gear. If this is the case, it is worth bringing another person to whom the subject can talk (and engage).

Always use at least two cameras. Having multiple angles makes the editing much easier. You can easily cut the interview and jump from one camera to another during the transitions. Cutting interview filmed with one camera creates distracting jump cuts. Additionally, having multiple camera angles makes the video more dynamic. Sometimes, I even add a little slider movement to add more dynamic feel to an otherwise static shot.

The sound quality is huge. In my video production I use high end lavalier microphones. The lavalier mic is close to the subject and you get much more voice signal and less environment noise. Truthfully, most viewers watching these types of videos will not be able to tell the difference between a video shot with a $30k camera and something shot with a smartphone. However, bed sound is immediately noticeable. Bed sound screams “amateur” video. If you don’t have a good lavalier mics you can use a shotgun mic. Ideally, you want to get the microphone as close to the subject as you can. You can mount such microphone on a stand and run the cable to the camera. Mixing of the sound is also crucial. To get that professional sound quality you always want to add a little compression to the sound, so the loud parts are attenuated and quite parts are turned up. I often use a little EQ to remove the low end of the sound spectrum. When mixed with some music, the voice that is compressed and lightly EQ will cut through the mix easier.

Lastly, to make a video interview engaging you need to have something visual to cut to. Often this is called B-roll. B-roll shots are visuals scenes that support the story the subject is telling. However, sometimes I use photographs from the subject and build a collage that visually tells the story. When I do this type of a collage, I actually prefer photos that are not taken professionally, as they better represent the reality of the person being interviewed.

In summary, a video interviews need to be cut to about 2 minutes, they need to be conversational, recorded with good sound and multiple cameras. When done well, they are one of the more powerful marketing tools for any business, product or service.

In universities, academicians explore new ways of teaching their students. To be more effective in what they do, they come up with ideas on how to make their points come across as clearly as possible. Some do outdoor activities while others give as many exams as possible. There are also some who rely on creating visual presentations. For example, “performing” or showing a movie. This essential activity may require attention especially with regards to copyrights. It is important to make sure you are not violating copyright law.

Compliance with copyright law

Many if not all material you find on the internet is protected under US copyright laws. These laws provide the copyright owner exclusive right to reproduce and distribute copies of their works to others. However, any other person who copies, downloads and uploads a copyrighted work without a written permission from the content owner is committing a crime. They can be charged with copyright infringement.

The most common way of unauthorized reproduction involves peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing services like BitTorrent. Through P2P connection, users get to share music or movie files. Those who get caught doing this kind of illegal activity will be subject to sanctions.

Obtaining copyright permissions

According to Stanford University Libraries’ page about copyright and fair use, the basics of getting permission involve five simple steps. First, in every situation, you have to determine whether or not you need to ask for permission. Remember that creative work created or published after 1922 is protected by US copyright law. With exceptions such as “fair use,” you need to check if your unauthorized use may still be legal. Also, you have to know and minimize the risk of not asking for permission. Second, in obtaining permission, it is crucial to identify and know the owner of the work you want to use. The third step in getting permission is to identify the rights you need. This means, finding out the exclusivity, term and territory involving your permissions agreement. Since, getting permission takes one to three months, the fourth step involves planning ahead for the permission and negotiating whether payment is required. Obtaining copyright permission must be done before you want to use the copyrighted work. Finally, get your terms of agreement in writing. It is a mistake to rely on oral permission.

It is best to educate everyone about the importance of complying with copyright laws. We can start by discussing about film copyrights on practical applications as well as the entities that protect them. Make them understand their responsibility and the penalties associated when you commit copyright infringement.