Sentences with phrase «uses omniscient»

Annie Parkhouse (letters) Michael Mazzacane: The opening pages of «Judge Dredd vs Razorjack» uses omniscient narration quite well.

Kathryn Davis uses omniscient point of view to transform the palace of Versailles and tell a story larger than the main character.

Indeed, in a conversation I had last week with journalists at a well - known newspaper, reporters there expressed unease that Google might not just freeze their files, but use its omniscient view to identify their sources.

Not exact matches

If God is omniscient, he must already know how he is going to intervene to change the course of history using his omnipotence.

Only a Creator God, who is omniscient can think these things up — amazing, use John as counter to the Greek Ioannes — it's almost laughable, like the 10 plagues — thanks for sharing!

In short, if you are an Omnipotent and Omniscient deity how can you be jealous (even using your definition) without appearing insecure and possibly phobic?

This mechanical efficacy denies freedom, although the novel successfully uses an objective point of view (not, of course, an omniscient point of view) to make the reader infer a self behind the evidence.

why don't you start with why humans invented religion in the first place, the origins of the books of the bible, the multiple «christ» (copied) stories throughout the history of time, fossil evidence of evolution of man and all species, all the discrepancies in the bible, knowledge of all the gods that humans have believed in through recorded history, the political uses of christianity in the time of it's origin, the fact that every other religion has followers who believe just as strongly in their own god / book, that fact that if you had been born in another part of the world you would be a different religion and going to «hell», and that a good, kind, omniscient god wouldn't allow all the suffering and evil to happen, and wouldn't need «help» as christians like to tout... and then we'll get to all these ridiculous fools.

At times, Perry courts those comparisons, especially to Anderson: Schwartzman plays Philip like a version of «Rushmore's» Max Fischer who never gained perspective, while the film employs the same use of fake book covers and an omniscient, literary narrator (Eric Bogosian instead of Alec Baldwin) as «The Royal Tenenbaums.»

Easton's omniscient narration sets in and we back up a year in time, and see Easton taking a rap for the mobster he used to work for, Punchy (Joe Mantegna).

Doug Liman's 2016 military thriller The Wall offers a similar premise to Downrange — a single - location thriller featuring a soldier pinned down by a deadly, omniscient sniper — but its execution is smarter, and it actually uses the concept to symbolize the character's inner torments.

Want some examples of great use of Omniscient POV?

On a technical level, the omniscient voice, which I think is incredibly difficult to sustain, is used masterfully and acrobatically throughout to deliver all kinds of structural surprises and to convey a sense of overarching vision.

Do you think the novel is more effective told this way, from a closed point of view, or do you think it would have had more impact if she had used a third - person omniscient narrative?

And your use of the omniscient (and at times irreverent) narrator is particularly effective in Whichwood, since it gives readers a bit of distance from all the death and gore.

At worst, it can feel like the author can't make up her mind about which type of POV she wants to use and keeps slipping into omniscient.

Bradford's «Pickett's Charge,» which goes on view tomorrow, uses a reproduction of Philippoteaux's painting to create a collage that questions the very possibility of having an omniscient, objective perspective on that — or any — historical event.

I am non-responsive to: «righteous hindsight»; «whipping boy»; «overegg the ad superbiam»; using the name «David Rose» like it is an «a priori» pejorative term; your curious (to me) concern over me adding a word (auditability) to my own original thoughts as they take on an evolving context in a polite (well, up till a little while ago polite) conversation with you; your presumptive omniscient self - serving claim of knowledge of my «due diligence»; implying there is a problem endorsing parts of the IAC report but not others; etc, etc, etc...