The paper begins more generally with the discussion of general media portrayal of archaeology before moving into a more analytic discussion of the film. I thought the inclusion of this first paragraph about the mass media was effective, as it explains to the reader why archaeological accuracy is important and addresses the “So what?” question, adding an additional level of significance to her paper. Her discussion of the film is also successful, as she has many specific examples to help demonstrate her ideas. For each example, she explains its relevance in the film, its level of accuracy, and the implications this has for the film overall, which helps the reader understand the significance of each example. Finally, her argument flows in a coherent way, beginning more generally then moving to more specific aspects of the film, with clear transitions between topics. This allows the reader to move through the paper without being distracted or confused by statements that seem irrelevant to the overall
The paper begins more generally with the discussion of general media portrayal of archaeology before moving into a more analytic discussion of the film. I thought the inclusion of this first paragraph about the mass media was effective, as it explains to the reader why archaeological accuracy is important and addresses the “So what?” question, adding an additional level of significance to her paper. Her discussion of the film is also successful, as she has many specific examples to help demonstrate her ideas. For each example, she explains its relevance in the film, its level of accuracy, and the implications this has for the film overall, which helps the reader understand the significance of each example. Finally, her argument flows in a coherent way, beginning more generally then moving to more specific aspects of the film, with clear transitions between topics. This allows the reader to move through the paper without being distracted or confused by statements that seem irrelevant to the overall