Do you agree with Professor Faulkners observations or take umbrage with them?

Student’s Name
Institution’s Name
Course Name
Date: 19th September, 2011
1. Effectiveness and reaction to Professor Faulkner’s essay
It is not effective to render Boudu realistic as expressed by the author Renoir. If he could be so, then he ought not to have been mischievous in Lestingois‘s house. Lestingois ran to his rescue only to turn around and betray him. This is very disgusting. He was not realistic when he (Boudu) tossed away shirts he was given to fit, refusing to eat meals given and continuous spitting on the floor. These are among the major unique deeds that portray him as unrealistic person. While in the host’s house, he further questioned the conservative nature of the family instead of appreciating them for the opportunity he had.
Reaction
Professor Faulkner categorize the movie in two parts, he sees Michel Simon who has acted as Boudu as performer and being brilliant. He captures the setting of the film as very interesting and one which can be replayed in both the old and new generation. He cites that Boudu’s story is a real reflection of the societal differences namely political, social, and cultural. A disparity in both wealth and power is also quoted by the professor as one of the factors. The professor also stressed on the importance of the title of the film. He laments about the narrative geography of Boudu Saved from Drowning as critical to its meaning. This is from the point where Boudu comes from the city center then goes to the outskirts.
Professor states that the author has turned an immoral play into a film very satirical. He suggests that this is at the expense of his middle class book-seller M. Lestingois. He argues that abject state of Boudu and marginal social ...