Keller's chapter traces Lasse Allstrom's adaptation of Chocolat from text to film, highlighting choices the made with particular attention to "the introduction of the Mayan motif into the film" and how it generates "a mythical subtext" for both the narrative and the chocolate imagery. He discusses changes in time period and character occupations with much detail.

Based on Shugart's essay, please critically evaluate Keller's chapter. Regardless of whether you watched the film, how do you read Keller's chapter next to Shugart's? They speak about the same film from very different lenses. What stands out? What is missing? What (if anything) do you find problematic about Keller's or Shugart's film analysis? How does attending to the author's point of view help you to read their work critically? How does this type of reading reveal film analysis as a political act that is not neutral/"objective"? Or does it?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

Solution Heres a critical evaluation of Kellers chapter on Chocolat considering Shugarts essay and the concepts of authorial perspective and film analysis as a subjective act Understanding Keller and ... View the full answer