MOVIE: Mission Impossible III
While Summer isn't officially here, it is here in terms of movies. Mission Impossible 3 kicks off the summer movie season with a bang with an interesting and entertaining installment in the money-making franchise. Tom Cruise reprises his Ethan Hunt role and J.J. Abrams takes the director's chair. What makes the Mission Impossible franchise so interesting is the constant change of directors. If you look at other franchises like Lethal Weapon, Pink Panther, Indiana Jones, etc, the directors usually stay on board for the sequels. Even with the James Bond franchise you have directors usually doing several Bond films in a row. Mission Impossible was helmed by Brian De Palma and was all espionage with light action. Action maestro John Woo took the second one and made an explosive and entertaining action sequel even if it was a little over cooked. J.J. Abrams makes his feature film directorial debut with Mission Impossible 3, which is a little bit of espionage and a little bit of action. For those who don't know Abrams, he started out writing films like Armageddon and Regarding Henry. He then broke into the television scene with Alias, a pretty popular show. He became very well known recently for his latest show. Abrams is the creator of LOST, one of my favorite shows. So, I was excited to see his first movie. M:I-3 has Ethan Hunt trying to settle down and start a normal life, but he is thrown back into his old job when an arms dealer played by Phillip Seymour Hoffman wants him to track down the Rabbit's Foot. The Rabbit's Foot is some kind of weapon of mass destruction, and if Hunt doesn't retrieve it in 48 hours his fiance will be killed. What follows are explosive action sequences that sing the right tune to satisfy all of our action appetites. The movie is good, but I couldn't help feeling like something was lacking. I tried to pinpoint it, and the only thing that I could come up with was that it lacked style. Sure it had LOST written all over it. The tight close ups, starting the film by showing the ending and then rewinding back to the beginning, getting Michael Giacchino to compose an almost identical score to LOST, even re-creating a scene from LOST at the end, but still the movie didn't feel like it had an overall style. The reason why I liked M:I-2 was that it had John Woo style. The slow motion build up, the doves, and of course Hans Zimmer's amazing music. I'm just saying that Mission Impossible 3 is good, but it's not a definative action movie that stands out from the rest, let's see how Abrams develops his techniques with future projects now that he's broken into the movie scene. 答案补充 中文你就自己翻译一下吧 中个工具 然后自己改改就好了啊

我读过的许多书中唯一能让我真正感动就是著名作家海明威写的《老人与海》。
《老人与海》这本书讲了这么一个故事，古巴老渔夫桑提亚哥连续八十四天没捕到鱼，被别的渔夫看作失败者，可是他坚持不懈，终于钓到了一条大马林鱼。尽管鱼肉都被咬去了，但什么也无法摧残他的英勇意志。这本书向我们揭示了这样一个真理：人不是为了失败而生的，一个人可以被毁灭，但不能被打败。
以前，我做什么事只要有一点不顺利，就会退缩，有时还会说上几句垂头丧气的话。在学习上，我只要有几次考试不是很理想就没有信心。自从读了这本书之后，我知道了自己的不足，学习上不再因为一两次不顺利而失去信心，而是越考不好，就越要考好。
从物质上来说，老人搏斗了三天三夜的结果是失败了；但从人的精神、从人的自信自尊，从人勇于和命运作竭尽全力的抗争来说，桑提亚哥取得了胜利。
说到底，人的真正胜利也只能是精神的胜利。人在物质上无论取得多大的成就，都不能赢得我们崇高的敬意。而只有精神和气魄的胜利，才使我感动，才使我和追随老人的孩子一样，为他的悲壮落泪。

After I read these two different versions of Cinderella, I found there are many similarities and differences between them. First, I will go over the common things that these two books have. They both have very similar characteristics. For example, Cinderella is always a very beautiful and nice girl. She has to do all the hard and dirty work under the discipline of bad characters. Bad characters are commonly involved in these stories. For example, Yeh-Shen had a wicked stepmother, who promoted her own child, but was very mean to her. Rhodopis, a Greek slave girl living in Egypt, had her companion servants who made fun of her appearance and kept distance from her. Second, they have both have a similar plot and theme. Both stories have a good ending toward their destiny. In both versions of Cinderella, they finally get great rewards and marry to the royalties. Third, there are always some belongings being taken away from Cinderella. Elegant dresses, shoes, and rose-red slippers often play important roles in these stories. For example, in the Chinese version of Cinderella, Yeh-shen lost the gold shoes in a huge parade. The king got the shoes and found a long way to find the right person who could fit in it. Fourth, they are all attributed to the supernatural or animals. In the Chinese version of Cinderella, Yeh-Shen was helped by the Fish spirit, and Rhodopis was helped by the falcon. Fifth, the most but not the least, they are both illustrated by beautiful colors and textures to describe the story of Cinderella. This is especially true in the story of the Egyptian Cinderella, which presents great details of life in ancient Egypt. Certainly, there are also some differences between these two books. The Egyptian Cinderella was based on a true story of ancient Egypt to some extent .This is unlike other fairy tales, which use a lot of imagination. In the history of ancient Egypt, Rhodopis did marry to the King Pharaoh Amasis. Furthermore, there is no punishment to bad characters in the Egyptian version of Cinderella.
I like the Chinese version of Cinderella better because it originated from China. I have heard this type of story a long time ago. It has some sort of traditional Chinese culture values and elements inside the story as well. In addition, it was illustrated by Ed.Young whom I have very strong respect for. To conclude, no matter whether they are western or eastern versions of Cinderella, they all tell the great fairy tales that we like. One thing I have learned from these fairy tales is that we need to be optimistic when we encounter problems in our life. The final outcome will turn out great if we try very hard towards our goals and make it happen.