The Good, The Bad and The Ugly is a great film, and often regarded as one of the greatest films of all time. I never much paid attention to how the film was lit, but on examination I don't know what I think of the lighting. Maybe i'm totally wrong, but the lighting seems quite obvious when you pay attention to it, which makes me thing it could have been done better? Certainly the lighting is masterfully done, in the way it properly exposes the characters faces and splashes off and around certain props and objects, adding a great deal of dimension to many of the shots. But it does look quite obvious, once you pay attention to it, especially when you can see multiple shadows coming from a single character. All that said, the lighting is still pretty masterful and I'm very intrigued to properly analyse it. The first shot of the scene has extremely beautiful (even though it is obvious 😉 ) lighting. As the cowboy stands in the hallway you can tell that there is a strong key light coming from the left of the frame, that will light his face once he steps out of the shadows. It seems like there is another light, maybe coming from high up near the roof, lighting the right hand side of the frame, near the back of the hallway. Most likely facing towards the character to light him from his right hand side, to seperate him from the background. The lighting setup of this shot is extremely beautiful the way it enhances the various pieces of wood and props within the frame, and how they've managed to keep the cowboy drenched in shadows as he sneaks around, even though there is quite a lot of light within the frame. It looks like they may have used a cutter to achieve that effect as its a very specific area, essentially just the top half of the cowboy thats drenched ins shadow. Theres also this curious black circular shadow which exists at the very top of the door near the cowboys head which permanently stays extremely dark, much darker than the rest of the shadows in the frame. I wonder how they achieved this effect? Maybe a... How does the author change the way he watches the film? A. he is critical of the editing B. he is fixated on the costuming C. he analyzes the lighting D. not enough information
C

Relatives of a dying lady I was caring for kicking and screaming not to give their Mum pain relief because they were so terrified / knew it would probably be the thing to end her life. She had a horrible aggressive cancer that ravaged her whole body and needed very regular doses of strong pain relief which - as she had a terminal illness and was receiving end of life care - did not have an upper limit so to speak. She had pain relief as and when needed to make her comfortable and that often results in people ultimately overdosing. Mum had Alzheimer's and was howling and writhing in agony so we were giving her pain relief but daughters knew it would probably result in her death - which they were right about possibly happening and in their grief and panic, started trying to prevent us from doing anything. Didn't want us getting near her at all and we had to go through an awful scenario of trying to explain what we had to do for Mum and why and when they still wouldn't have it or allow us near, we had to do what nobody wants and go against their wishes by administering the pain relief anyway. One daughter screamed the place down, threatened to have me arrested and struck off / said she would go to the papers and tell them about how we killed her Mum and in the end she had to be removed from the bedroom. Her Mum was given the pain relief, immediately relaxed and fell asleep then died peacefully in her sleep about 15 mins later. The saddest thing is her daughter wasn't able to be there and see her Mum dropping off so peacefully and her last memory will forever be of her screaming and thrashing about as she (daughter) was physically removed from the room. Tragic. After the end of the story, the daughter probably A. laughed B. cried C. not enough information D. was nervous
B

Q: SEOUL North Korea shut down its Punggye-ri nuclear test site on Thursday to demonstrate its commitment to denuclearization in advance of the planned U.S.-North Korea summit. The development came hours before President Donald Trump called off the highly anticipated meeting. The South Korean government welcomed the North's unilateral nuclear concession to help facilitate a broader agreement with the United States to completely end its nuclear weapons program in exchange for ending punishing sanctions and security guarantees. "We are hoping that this action will become the opportunity for complete denuclearization in the future," South Korea Foreign Ministry spokesman Noh Kyu-duk said. However, while the closure of the nuclear test complex is a significant symbolic gesture, analysts are skeptical it will seriously inhibit the Kim Jong Un government's ability to carry out further nuclear tests in the future. "That renders the test site unusable, but not forever and it's not like North Korea has a shortage of mountains or people to make new tunnels," said Jeffrey Lewis, the director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Program at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies in California, during an interview with Vice News. North Korea conducted all six of its nuclear tests at the Punggye-ri underground site that includes at least two extensive tunnel systems, according the 38 North website that monitors the North's nuclear activities. Each nuclear test conducted at the site was progressively more powerful, with the first bomb detonated in 2006 producing an estimated 1-2 kiloton yield, much less powerful than the 16-kiloton bomb the United States used on Hiroshima during World War II, and the last test in 2017 producing close to a 250-kiloton yield. There were reports that the last nuclear test in September of 2017 triggered a tunnel collapse rendering the site unusable, but analysts say there were still two other tunnels that could be used for future tests. Earlier this year North Korean leader Kim Jong Un... Who did Noh Kyu-duk speak for? A. South Korea Foreign Ministry B. North Korea C. The United States D. not enough information
A: A

Q: I lost sight in one eye when in college, I had two preschool children at the time. I was walking through the house one morning and suddenly I could see NOTHING out of one eye. When I told my husband,who was right there when it happened, he assumed my eye was just blurry or something had gotten in the eye. He took me to the ophthalmologist who verified that I could not see out of the eye. Then we subsequently got the worse news that it was a neurological condition with a long name I do not remember that there was nothing he could do about. He said that I would either get my sight back or I you and all we could do was wait and see if it came back. This was right before finals that semester but he told me I absolutely could not be studying or using my good eye for reading or basically anything that would strain it or I could end up losing sight in that eye also. Needless to say, as a mom of two children ages 2 1/2 and 6 months,I could not afford to lose ALL of my sight! So, I had to wait. I could not drive like that either which made matters worse. Both my husband and I were in school fulltime (until then), fortunately it was the end of the semester, unfortunately it was BEFORE finals. My sight did come back but not for about 5 months. When it first started to come back I still couldn't drive because although I could see I did not have my peripheral vision, that did not fully come back for quite a while. I cannot imagine it a person who goes totally blind goes through, I just know for me it was not an easy to to go through. The author dealt with this issue for a period of time equivalent to: A. two years B. not enough information C. six months D. one year
A: C