User:Lakeley/Adina Pintilie/Student19877 Peer Review

Notes for Lead portion:

Overall, I think the lead portion is very well done, neutral, and introduces the topic of the article to the reader in a great way. I think the one thing I would change in this section is the following sentence; "Her decade-long creative multi-platform study on intimacy, current body politics, and the aesthetics of extended moving image creation encompasses  performance, cinema, and virtual reality, and is supported by long-term partnerships and cross-disciplinary research ." I think the wording may be a little bit confusing and the sentence may need to be broken up. I may write instead something like; "Pintilie's work has largely consisted of a decade-long creative multi-platform study on intimacy, current body politics, and the aesthetics of extended moving image creation. This study, supported by long-term partnerships and cross-disciplinary research, encompasses (maybe "employs" would be a better word) the concepts of performance, cinema, and virtual reality."

Notes for Early Life section

One grammatical error I noticed was the use of "he" when I think you meant to use "she" like in the rest of the article. This mistake is in the second sentence. Also in this sentence, I think you should make it clear Manekino is a production company. For example you could write; " She is the co-founder of the production company, Manekino Film, as well as a director and film writer." Also in this section, I noticed you refer to the subject as "Adina" when you may want to consider referring to her by her last name instead, now that her full name has been previously stated. I really like how you talked about the motivations/circumstances surrounding Pintillie's work. However, I feel like instead of the title "Early Life," A title more like "Personal Life" may be more representative of the topics covered in this section. Also it may be nice if there were more details about her life that do not directly relate to her work (e.g. family, upbringing, spouses, schooling, etc.), but I'm sure you tried to do that and there maybe just wasn't a ton of information about that.

Notes for Career section:

One thing I noticed about this section is that you use quotations around the film title, it is more expected for film titles to be italicized in writings. The title of films should also be capitalized. Also, the first time you mention a film you should put the year in parenthesize after it (ex: Touch Me Not (2018)). You described this film in a neutral, but very interesting way that made me want to watch the film. However, I found some of the sentences within the section a bit confusing. In particular, the following three sentences; "A thought-provoking examination of bodies and our perceptions of the other . Receiving lots of backlash on it for its scenes of nudity and scenes of intimacy . Adina Pintilie's honest study of intimacy and sexuality, billed as the most contentious Berlinale Golden Bear in history, persuades the audience to join in its exploratory storyline . It is a unique way to interact with the views with the actors and truly engage with the storyline." I think these sentences are confusing because they contain the predicate of the sentence, but not the subject (the film). For example, I would rewrite the first sentence as; "Touch Me Not is a thought-provoking examination of bodies and our perceptions of the other." The film then becomes the subject of the sentence which makes the sentence much clearer. Also, you may want to add more about when and how Pintillie's career started and maybe talk about upcoming projects if information about those is available.

Notes for Filmography section:

The only note for this section is that you could make this into a table if you wanted. Professor Horak had stated that it may be a good idea to do so. In the table the columns could be named: Year, Title of Film, Role (writer, director, etc.). This may make the information look a bit more organized.

Notes for Award section:

This section looks very good. When you mention the awards you provide a citation for each, which is great. The only thing I would change is italicizing the film titles and putting the year of release of each film in parenthesis, beside the title (if the film hasn't been mentioned before in your article).

General info
(provide username)
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)