#i may not be a big fan of film analysis but choosing this movie for my project made it so much fun

[youknowwhoiamperiod]

final for my film class was a presentation and i fear i may have ate and devoured too hard 🤭

[missmis]

I’ve been having a lot of heated debates recently over which actors are the best in certain roles, so I thought long and hard about my ideal Les Mis cast.

For some roles, I have several actors (mainly Enjolras, because every guy who’s ever played him seems to be gorgeous). For some roles, there is only one person who just IS that character to me.

Now without further ado, here we go:

Jean Valjean: Alfie Boe, always. He perfectly conveys Valjean’s transition from angry convict to noble and almost saintly, plus his voice still gives me chills every time. I could write an entire post exclusively on the sheer perfection of his high note at the end of “Bring Him Home”, but that is a subject for another day. Honourable mention: John Owen-Jones because his voice is incredible, too-but he overdoes it on the anger sometimes.

Javert: ooh, that’s a tough one. I’d say it’s probably a tie between Earl Carpenter (who has the warmest and most powerful baritone ever) and Norm Lewis, who does the cold-hearted arrogance perfectly. Honourable mention: Richard Woodford, who used to be Grantaire and Javert’s understudy ages ago. Most people probably won’t know him, but he is honestly amazing- and a lovely guy.

Fantine: Carrie Hope Fletcher. Her voice can be powerful or soft as needed and she really captures Fantine’s pain. Honourable mention: Lea Salonga, whose voice is also gorgeous, but whose acting I find a little exaggerated sometimes.

Éponine: Samantha Barks will always be the one true Éponine for me. Her voice is incredible, she looks right (because in my head, Éponine is always dark-haired) and she portrays the whole unrequited love thing to perfection. And yes, I may possibly have a tiny crush on her... Or a big one.

Cosette: Honestly, Cosette always annoyed the heck out of me until I discovered Lily Kerhoas. She’s completely lovestruck-as the character should be- but she manages to turn Cosette into an actual person and not just a one-dimensional teenager who was put in to make all the guys look better. And that is honestly a huge accomplishment. Honourable mention: Amanda Seyfried, although her incredibly high soprano is a bit too much for my ears.

Marius: I loved Eddie Redmayne’s portrayal in the film version. His general adorable shyness steals my heart every time. I also love Rob Houchen, who has a gorgeous voice and who captures the innocence of the character. And Gareth Gates does hands down the best version of “A Little Fall of Rain” I’ve ever seen, because he actually seems to care that Éponine just died, unlike many other actors who’ve played this role.

Enjolras: As I said, there are so many amazing people who have played him. But if I had to choose one, it’d probably be Bradley Jaden (and no, I’m not just saying that because his man bun is a blessing to this fandom). I love his passion and the sheer power he brings to the character. Aaron Tveit is also up there with my favourites-he may not be the greatest singer, but he looks exactly like Book Enjolras and he gets that coldness and indifference-especially towards poor Grantaire- just right. Then there’s Killian Donnelly whose Irish accent I absolutely adore. Oh and lastly, Ramin Karimloo, of course-he may not look like your classical Enjolras, but the light of rebellion is ablaze in his eyes :)

Monsieur Thénardier: the one and only, the inimitable Matt Lucas. He is simply hilarious, which is actually kind of an ethical issue, because he almost makes me like Monsieur T. And every time someone says “Cosette”, I now hear “Courgette” in my head, which is entirely his fault.

Madame Thénardier: Katy Secombe. She’s mean, she’s funny, she’s brash, her facial expressions are everything and her voice can knock you off your feet. Especially great in combination with Matt Lucas. Honestly, I’d pay to see these two do stand-up comedy together.

Gavroche: Also a tough one. My favourite is probably Daniel Huttlestone in the film, just because he’s so adorable I want to adopt him. I also love Robert Madge’s mischievous and cocky Gavroche in the 25th and recently, Logan Clark, whose antics give me life.

Grantaire: He’s my favourite character, so I’m kind of picky about who plays him. Only two guys have found mercy before my eyes. One: George Blagden, whose pining for Enjolras was the only thing that kept me watching the film. I will never stop being pissed that they cut his solo in “Drink With Me”. Two: Keith Anthony Higham. He has the richest voice ever and he just gets Grantaire-the cynicism, the drama and the unrequited love thing. If you haven’t already, watch his 2008 version of “Drink With Me” with David Thaxton. Thank me later.

Courfeyrac: Fra Fee- I love his passion and his friendship with Gavroche in the film. Plus, he has a beautiful voice. Also the guy from the 2019 staged concert- I believe his name is Michael Sheehy, but I could be wrong. He is honestly hilarious.

Combeferre: Killian Donnelly. He gets the whole slightly-exasperated-by-all-of-these-irresponsible-idiots professorial vibe. And he has a very powerful voice.

Feuilly: Matthew Gent because of his lovely soft singing and his funny-as-hell facial expressions.

Joly: Jamie Muscato, who is just such an adorable goofball.

Bossuet/Lesgles/Laigle/the dude with a hundred different names: I don’t know the guy’s name, but he’s in the 25th. Firstly, because he’s actually bald and thus, about ten times more accurate than most other portrayals and secondly, because his voice is warm and soft and it’s actually a shame he hasn’t got more lines to sing.

Bahorel: Again, the dude from the movie- Iwan Lewis, I think he’s called. Just the right amount of recklessness.

Jehan Prouvaire: I haven’t really found anyone I like in this role yet. I’m not that big a fan of Alistair Brammer for some reason, so if someone could help me out here, I’d be grateful.

The Bishop: Also Earl Carpenter, because his voice is-for lack of a better description-like a nice, warm blanket. And I like Colm Wilkinson in this role, too.

I hope I haven’t missed any characters. If I have, please do point them out to me. I hope you’ve enjoyed my analysis- I tried to make it about more than just “Oh, I like this person because they’re hot”. Feel free to share your own opinions and remember: these are just my subjective ones.

[lucemferto]

WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT TECHNOBLADE (or A Narrative Analysis of the Dream SMP Doomsday Event) - Script

Heyo! Per request I am posting the script to my video of the same name here on tumblr. I must warn you that just reading the script will probably not give you the full experience, so I would encourage you to watch the video (linked above).

There might also still be a lot of grammatical errors in the text, because I don’t proofread.

Okay, so! I don’t want this to turn into a reaction channel OR a Dream SMP channel for that matter! I am planning on doing a big dumb, way too long analysis video on the Dream SMP which will – at my current pace – come out in five years. I am already way too late on this one.

Spoiler Alert for the Doomsday Event that took place on the 6th of January in the Dream SMP. Surely the worst thing to take place on the 6th of January 2021 … I’m sorry, what’s this about the Capitol?

In case you don’t watch the SMP and need context: The Dream SMP is a Minecraft Multiplayer Server, that, throughout the last year, has transformed from a normal Let’s Play to an ongoing new-media series streamed by multiple high-profile streamers such as Dream, TommyInnit or Technoblade. It comes complete with script – by which I mean loose bullet points – and story events. It has attracted a large fanbase specifically invested in the story and less so in the actual gameplay content. Like I said before, I will probably do a big video on the Dream SMP at some point in the future.

The storyline is long and complicated and trying to explain it all would take up the majority of the video and there are other channels who have already done a much better job than I could ever hope to do, so give them a watch. I’ll try to summarize all that is pertinent to what I will talk about in this video.

Okay, let’s speedrun this summary. Cue the music!

Major Players here are TommyInnit, a founder of the independent nation of L’Manburg, Technoblade, an anarchist who was deep in conflict with L’Manburg, Tubbo, Tommy’s best friend and current president of L’Manburg, and Dream, the ruler of the Kingdom of the Dream SMP (even though he is not the king, but we’re not going to get into that right now). Tommy had in the past been exiled by Tubbo for endangering L’Manburg’s shaky peace with the Dream SMP. Tommy had then teamed up with Technoblade, who was hellbent on destroying L’Manberg after some prior altercations – more on that later.

Tommy and Tubbo came into conflict during a festival set-up to celebrate the friendship between L’Manburg and the Dream SMP. After punching out their feelings, Tommy came to the realization that his friendship with Tubbo was more important than his vendetta against Dream and those who exiled him. Techno took that change of heart badly and teamed up with Dream to destroy L’Manburg … and that’s exactly what happened.

Techno and Dream, with little to no opposition, obliterated L’Manburg with no hope for recovery leaving its inhabitants stranded hopeless and alone.

… And that’s what you missed on Dream SMP!

Okay. So, usually I just put whatever thought slime drips out of my mouth hole into your subscription box. But then I asked myself: “Am I not taking this a largely improvised nonsense story from a bunch of 16–24-year-olds a little too seriously?”. And then I remembered. I’m a pretentious bitch. I made an 18-minute video explaining why the popular commentary YouTuber memeulous is secretly the time travelling Anti-Christ, REASON HAS NO SWAY OVER ME!

So, like the English Major drop-out that I am, I will present you with two theses, which I will then combine into one … supratheses! That word doesn’t exist, I just coined it, it’s mine! I am very smart!

[I know words, I have the best words!]

 Thesis #1: The Fandom focuses too much on Character Analysis in Favour of Narrative Analysis

The Dream SMP is truly something special. It is uniquely singular in how it tells a story of this scope through its chosen medium. While there is an overarching script that lays out the plot points of the future, each of the 30+ streamers on the SMP are their own cameraman, director, writer and actor. You cannot watch “the Dream SMP” – if you attempted that, you would be 80 by the time you caught up to the Doomsday Event. You have to choose whom to watch. You have to choose your focal point character.

Because by the way the story is told and consumed – aka in such a compartmentalized fashion; you watch one streamer and get one character’s perspective – it has sort-of unintentionally conditioned fans to look at the SMP and its characters less as one coherent story with messages and themes and more as sports teams they can root for. You’re Team Techno or Team Tubbo or Team Tommy or Team JackManifoldTV (formerly known as Thunder1408) and every other side is in the wrong! It’s like Twilight for a decade old children’s game about virtual Lego!

Okay, I’m exaggerating, but the amount of discourse perpetuated by and revolving around so-called “apologists” – a terrible term that unfortunately has caught on – is really not something that I think is good for how we interact with the story of the Dream SMP.

The Dream SMP is discussed a lot on character-based level, which is, like I said before, hugely advantaged by the way the story is consumed by its audience. With traditional, visual media such as film for example, the audience can be made more aware of what messages the narrative might try to communicate on a narrative level without the need for an explicit narrator to tell you the moral.

As an example, in a movie you could have a smash-cut from the Butcher Army’s discussions about neutralizing the danger Technoblade poses to Techno being nice around villagers or taking care of animals. This would communicate on an extradiegetic level, that the Butcher Army is in the wrong with their assumptions. Alternatively, you could contrast Techno’s declarations that power corrupts and that Tubbo’s administration is cruel with Tubbo choosing not to punish Ranboo for his association with Techno – thus the narrative would communicate that Techno’s view of Tubbo and by extension the government is one-sided and not true to reality.

Stuff like that helps the viewer understanding a story holistically and manages to communicate stuff like themes and morals without having to solely rely on in-character logic and argumentation, which, as Ghostbur put it so eloquently, is comprised of a bunch of unreliable narrators.

Character analysis is great if we want dive deep, if we really want to give a character flavour and understand their motivations. It helps make the universe feel like it is alive, like it’s real. But – and this might be a shocker for you – it’s not real. It’s written. It is construction – and as such, in its construction, it has messages and themes and morals, intentionally or unintentionally.

By being so focused on specific characters and their individual journeys, viewpoints and motivation we really run the risk of not looking at the bigger picture and fail to see what the overarching narrative is actually communicating. And we may also fail to understand how characters might or might not fit into the overarching narrative.

Speaking of which …

 Thesis #2: Technoblade experiences very little Meaningfultm Thematic Conflict

Okay, let’s talk about Technoblade. I’m sure I’m not going to get any hate for this one.

I want to preface by saying that I don’t watch Technoblade’s streams; I catch up though clip channels and summaries. I’m mainly watching Tommy, Tubbo and Quackity – which is honestly already more than I can handle – but I want to be clear that while I’ll try to be as even-handed as possible – like I explained previously – the way I consumed the storylines will undoubtedly leave me with some bias.

Also, needless to say, I’m talking about the character Technoblade, not the actual content creator, unless I specifically say so. That should be obvious.

Now, I’m not doing a Technoblade character analysis, because that would be hypocritical of me – seeing how I just bitched about the overwhelming amounts of character analyses in the fandom – but I’ll try my best to summarize what is necessary.

Technoblade’s interesting in that he is a very static character – at least inwardly – he doesn’t change much. He is very steadfast in his beliefs and ideals and has very little introspection. He doesn’t question himself; he doesn’t waver, he is never in a bind about whether what he’s doing is right or wrong. He is very much a parallel to early TommyInnit – who, of course, famously said “I’m always in the right”.

And I want to emphasize that I mean this in no way as a critique of Techno’s character. A static character provides a nice contrast to more dynamic characters and can balance them out. It can also be utilised by the writing as a character flaw – which is what I hope content creator Techno is going for.

Like Techno doesn’t have a lot of empathy in the sense that he is particularly skilled at or interested in trying to see the viewpoints of others. There is never an attempt to reconcile, for example, the goal of the Pogtopians to reclaim L’Manberg and install another administration with his desire for an anarchist society. This is also compounded with his overreliance on violence as the only tactic for conflict resolution – Techno has a whole thesis statement about violence being the only universal language. I’m sure you’ve heard the quote.

And lastly, what really drives this all over the edge, is his all-or-nothing approach when dealing with the enemy – he is not so much eye for an eye as he is – to use another biblical example – you make fun of me for being bald and I’ll sic two bears on you that maul and kill you and 41 other children.

There’s also the open and completely unacknowledged hypocrisy of a self-described anarchist working together with a man that installs and dethrones Kings with his every whim – someone who – and I cannot stress this enough – hits about every box when it comes to the definition of tyrant.

So, what I’m saying is that Technoblade is the Dream SMP equivalent of Dick Chenney. C’mon you know it’s true! He will bomb that freedom into your country whether you want him to or not. That’s some cogent political commentary in the year 2021.

Okay, so now that I’ve outlined his character, what kind of conflicts does Technoblade face. Well, it’s mostly physical or external. He fights a lot whether it’s against Quackity or Sapnap or bodying Karl Jacobs five times in a row. And – with the exception of maybe Sapnap – none of it is challenging. Technoblade is the best PvP-Player on the server – there really isn’t much tension to be had from a purely physical fight.

So, how are these fights supplemented emotionally. Well, internally there is not a lot going on. As I said before, Technoblade isn’t really an introspective character. Even during his shouting match with Tommy there’s not a sense that Technoblade is wavering or unsure of himself in the way that Tommy is. He exposits that one of the reasons, he acts like he does is that he feels dehumanized; that people only use him like a weapon and then discard or even try to neutralize him once he’s no longer useful.

But that is not something that Technoblade has to grapple with – it’s not conflict for him, it’s more conflict for Tommy. Technoblade is self-assured in that he’s a person and not a weapon – it’s almost like there was a character arc there, where Technoblade self-actualizes and breaks away from the people that want to use him. But we didn’t see any of it. Technoblade unleashes the withers; then he goes into retirement because he wants to be, I suppose, and then he returns to violence as a reaction to the Butcher Army. There is a story of vengeance here, but not any conflict about being used. There is never a point where we see Technoblade come to this realization or comes to assert himself.

In season 1 there’s never a push from Pogtopia where the narrative frames them as exploiting Technoblade. He fights with them of his own volition, he gives them weapons and armour of his own volition. Nobody pressured Techno into procuring their inventory for the fight. And in Season 2, he’s the one to approach Tommy about their potential partnership – he is in the position of power here, explicitly not Tommy.

Like, I’m sorry, if this ruffles some feathers, but I really don’t see this arc where Technoblade is being used. There’s a story of misunderstanding and maybe co-dependency – but not of dehumanization. This entire line of thought seems to solely reference that moment, where Tommy says to Sapnap “I have the blade” during one of their wars – which, to base an entire emotional arc around that without any further set-up, is, and I’m sorry to say that, incredibly flimsy.

Okay, so we covered physical and emotional conflict? But what about conflict on the narrative level? Well, that leads me to my suprathesis …

 Suprathesis: The Narrative is Unclear on how it treats Technoblade … and that’s Not Good.

Here’s a Hot Take: The narrative of Season 1 treats Technoblade way less sympathetically than that of season 2.

Let me explain. The narrative of Season 1 revolves mostly around Wilbur and Tommy. The emotional fulcrum of the overall narrative is Wilbur’s rise and fall from Grace – and Tommy succeeding him as symbol of L’Manberg’s “special”-ness. Now I will talk about all that more in detail, when I talk about Season 1 of the Dream SMP. So, you’ll just have to go with me on this one for now.

Technoblade, by contrast, doesn’t really have much going on thematically in Season 1. He mostly exists as a sort-of utilitarian character – he is an accessory to make story beats happen. Like him executing Tubbo doesn’t open up any sort of thematic conflict involving him – on a character level it sets up antipathy between him and Tommy and it grants us some insight into how he operates with his violence speech – but on a larger-scale narrative level it really just shows how far Wilbur and Tommy have drifted apart in how they react to the event.

His biggest contribution is during the Season 1 finale, but even there he plays second fiddle to Wilbur. Not just because Wilbur does way more destruction with his explosion than Techno does with his Withers, but also because Wilbur had an emotional and thematic climax to his arc and by extension the entire storyline. Like Techno’s is a cool moment and very epic visual but in terms of thematic relevance, his Theseus-speech is really more set-up for Season 2.

And Season 1 is very unambiguous about L’Manberg being good and Tommy’s ideals ultimately being morally justified – I mean, they have a whole speech about it in the end and it was built-up throughout the entire Season – Techno is cast in a … less than sympathetic light. He is, if not a villain, then definitely an antagonist.

But with Season 2 the narrative is either uninterested in or not very clear on exploring Technoblade’s flaws.

Like ask yourselves: is Technoblade’s character ever consciously challenged by the narrative? Are his actions ultimately shown to not be in the right? Are his beliefs about government and power ever called into question? Are the negative consequences that his actions cause ever shown to be larger than the “good” he does?

I think what exemplifies this the most is how the Butcher Army event played out on December 16th. Now, during that event, the Butcher Army, which was comprised of Tubbo, Quackity, Fundy and Ranboo, managed to apprehend Technoblade, who at that point was living the quiet retirement life, and tried to have him publicly executed – without trial.

Now, smarter people than me have pointed out that the Butcher Army had a bevy of in-character reasons that can justify or explain their actions. And that’s definitely interesting, but as I said before, I want to get away from that and look into how the Butcher Army is treated on a narrative level. Because this is one of the few instances where the otherwise grey-loving Season 2 has some very clear narrative intent when it comes to morality.

The Butcher Army is very deliberately framed as almost cartoonishly corrupt and violent. They very forcefully investigate Philza, mock him and then put him under house arrest – and there’s just no remorse in the script even from normally sympathetic characters like Tubbo.

Compare and contrast with the Tommy-exile scene, which is also an act of moral ambiguity and is treated as such. And things get even worse once the Army arrives at Technoblade’s abode and attack him after he softly tells them that he has left that live behind him. They then proceed to take his horse hostage, mock him and execute him without fair trial – and I haven’t seen it but from live commentary I gathered that Techno really played up the whole softie-schtick before the Butcher Army arrived. I mean, before the big Technoblade vs Quackity fight, Quackity had whole villain monologue for Christ’s sake.

And even afterwards, the Butcher Army really plays up the corrupt angle with Tubbo proposing a festival as a guise to publicly execute someone. And again, I know that on an intradiegetic there’s nuances and it’s not really comparable to the Red Festival, but in combination with what the audience has seen up until that point and with how much it feeds into the already established themes of history repeating itself and becoming like your predecessors, it really does not paint a pretty picture of the Tubbo administration.

You can feel the heavy hand of the script on your shoulder, which is a feat seeing how – as discussed before – that’s not something that can be easily accomplished in this medium.

And that is what I mean when I say that Technoblade is not really challenged by the script and is in this case even emboldened by it. Because after this whole ordeal the thought of Technoblade taking revenge by destroying L’Manberg doesn’t seem like such an extreme response to the viewer – even though in my opinion, it is.

As of right now it is too early to say how the narrative will judge Technoblade’s actions in the future. Will they be framed as extreme but ultimately justified or perpetuating a cycle of ever-escalating vengeance? Will we ever see a government that’s not just at best misguided and at worst completely awful?

Ultimately, I believe and hope that Technoblade will be challenged by the narrative, mostly because a character that cannot, believably, be physically challenged, who doesn’t have any meaningful internal conflict about what he’s doing; and who does come out on the other side having everything he always believed in be proven completely in the right by the narrative, would be incredibly boring. Not just to watch but also to play as.

As it stands now, if the destruction Techno, Phil and Dream inflicted upon L’Manburg is framed as ultimately in the right, I would find it personally a distasteful message to send. I would ultimately say that the “correct” way to counter corruption in government is to completely obliterate the entire country. Like we’re not talking simply disbanding the government – that’s not what Doomsday was – we’re talking complete and utter annihilation. And that would be cynical and depressing. Like, call me a big softie, but even bothsidesing this argument would be bad.

Like, I’m not calling for Technoblade to be transformed into or treated a monster like Dream. But I personally feel like the narrative needs to acknowledge that the Doomsday was something that was taken way too far and that it ultimately brought more harm than good. And Technoblade needs to held accountable by someone who is not a cartoonishly corrupt government-official or who is in conflict with him anyway, like Tommy.

I thought Philza or Ranboo could do that but seeing how their storylines are progressing I don’t believe that will be the case. But who knows, maybe Captain Puffy will come through for us. We stan a Queen.

 Conclusion

So, yeah, I made this entire video just to air out my grievances with how one-sided the mode of analysis is in the fandom, because no person actually involved with the production of Dream SMP will ever see this.

But after everything I am cautiously optimistic, that content creator Technoblade knows what he’s doing. He has talked in the past about how his character is a bad guy and he loves his Greek myths. After all what’s more Greek myth than hybris being rewarded with punishment? [Technoblade never dies] That bodes well for him.

Also, this isn’t the video I promised at the end of the last one!

[kotsume]

my observations as a content creator :) warning: it’s long

if you’re reading this, don’t think too deeply about what i wrote - it’s just my analysis of fan blogs and some fandoms (so it’s all from my perspective). do what you want with this information, and feel free to lmk what you think ;) 

*i tried to include as many anime-applicable blogs as i could remember*

multifandom reblog blogs (ones who track a tag):

@/allanimanga: lots of original content every day. does not reblog from tag anymore bc most members who had that job are inactive. i’m an admin and i’ve been told not to worry about reblogging from the tag, and just make content. has member privilege abuse from certain users; normally you make content for the blog and you get to reblog your stuff over in a 1:1 ratio, but they will just use the blog to promote themselves without contributing. it’s really sad but there’s nothing we can do bc most of the time it’s an admin.

@/animacia: was debating whether or not to put this one. reblogs mainstream anime (sailor moon, studio ghibli) and has a tag, but the tag itself does not seem to be actively used as the most recent post can see tagged for this blog dates back to june 2019 (more than a year ago). it’s an active blog regardless of slow tag activity. 

@/animationsource: active, but very picky? idk man they either do or don’t reblog your stuff. it’s a hit or miss with them. seems to have member privilege abuse/preference (explained up there). not too sure if they have a queue or just reblog sporadically.

@/anisource: active. seems to run on a large, backlogged queue bc their tag is full of stuff that has yet to be reblogged. edits will probably take a while to be reblogged, but they’ll eventually get there! 

@/dailyanime: new blog, but from what i’ve experienced, they will queue it, and your post will be reblogged in 1-3 days (it probably depends on how much is in their queue).

@/fyanimegifs: will reblog your stuff, but they have a very slow queue.

@/graphicsources: not really active; spontaneous at best. don’t count on them to reblog your stuff. 

@/fyeahshoujo: not really active, but not completely inactive.

@/fysportsanime & @/sportsanimedaily: active. seems to have a backlogged queue, but just wait and you’ll be reblogged! it will take some time because there are lots of posts.

@/animangascenery & @/otomokatsuhiro (#oldanimeedit - changes url from time to time? that’s why i included the tag they track): inactive unless a member looks at the tag. in that case, they will most likely reblog the tagged post. typically mass reblogs/queues from the tag every once in a while. 

@/bbelcher & @/fyeahmovies: will reblog ghibli and makoto shinkai stuff. bonus points if you have added a text description to gifs. 80% dependable.

@/filmgifs, @/filmtv, @/stream, @/movie-gifs, etc. (basically big reblog fansites that aren’t anime-oriented, but do reblog mainstream anime movies): 90% chance they will not reblog anything from you if there is no text description. add text descriptions to studio ghibli/makoto shinkai film gifs and make it pretty! use text gradients!! that will increase your chances of being reblogged by them. they don’t reblog seasonal anime.

a note: many creators use tags as a way of reaching a broader audience. it's really helpful for smaller blogs who would like to share their content to others, but do not have the means/numbers to do so. just bc some people don't utilize tags to their full potential, it doesn't mean it isn't useful, so pls don’t try to act superior to those who want more exposure. everyone deserves a chance at getting the attention they deserve for their hard work!

studio ghibli reblog blogs:

@/ghiblisdaily: great. amazing. i love them!! will reblog from you 99.9% of the time. probably the most reliable ghibli blog as of right now. uploads original content

@/fyghibli: used to be good at reblogging from tag, but has gone kind of inactive. i think they’re becoming more active again, but it’s very sporadic.

@/kikisdeliveryservices: they track a variety of studio ghibli related tags, and they do reblog a lot, but i don’t think they’re as consistent as ghiblisdaily. lots of original content.  

@/oh-totoro: not really active, but when they are (and they reblog from you), your activity skyrockets.

@/dailyghibli: not active.

@/daily-ghibli: sometimes active, a little wishy-washy. they seem to be reblogging a little bit more consistently now?

@/princessghibli: not active, but reblogs here and there.

@/ghibligif: a new blog, but decently active. will reblog post from their tracked tag within a day. lots of original content.  

main point: there are many studio ghibli blogs (wayyyy more than i’ve listed here), but only around 3-4 active ones. choose your tags with what you think will give you the best exposure bc if you have too much, tumblr will go “fuck you” and not show your post at all :)

random anime fandoms:

i’ll really only be including ones i’m in, or know a bit about.

haikyuu, bnha, kny, yoi: healthy and very active. content for these fandoms do well even if they’re not in season. has multiple active fan blogs (except for yoi tho - they’re all inactive for the most part).

noragami, ohshc, ons, snk, tg, swnku: active fandoms. edits will do moderately well bc most people have seen these. 

popular sports anime (knb, free, dna, tsurune? idk i don’t watch much sports anime): they do okay. i rarely see any new sports anime edits beside haikyuu, but people do love their sports anime. has active sports fan blogs.

pokemon & sailor moon: old but gold. lots of people love these anime bc it’s part of their childhood. still very popular amongst tumblr users.

violet evergarden: does moderately well. @/fyeahvioletevergarden will reblog your stuff if you choose to tag them (big boost)! with the new movie coming up soon, there may be a resurgence in activity, but the most recent movie did not have much content made for it, so that hope may be crushed.

tpn: not very active, but with the new season coming up soon, there will be a resurgence in activity.

ditf: kind of dead, but lots of people love zero two. edits do moderately well.

sao: dead. absolutely dead. i thought there would be some activity bc it’s in season right now, but no, it’s a dead fandom. low key sao sucks tho. idek where the plot is going; i’m just hoping for an end.

hxh, one piece, fma, code geass: i’m not in it, but i think they do okay bc they have a large following, just not as well as haikyuu or bnha (but they’re still very popular). it depends on your blog demographic tho.

mp100, opm, bsd, given: kind of medium-tier fandoms. not as prevalent as haikyuu or bnha, but there are still edits being made for these anime. they don’t really have any active fan blogs (besides given i think) bc none of them are airing rn.

makoto shinkai & studio ghibli films: they do great! everybody loves good scenery, and the films are very well known and loved by all!

some seasonal anime (spring/summer 2020)

fruits basket: well this reboot blew up and overshadowed everything in it’s path. tbh only edits posted on the first day of the new episode do well. it’s a very competitive fandom for creators. 

kaguya sama love is war: first season was good, edits did well. second season drifted off into the shadow of fruits basket. relatively obscure fandom for how popular it is amongst people (non-creators). 

tower of god: popular with creators. now that it’s not airing, no one gifs it. respective fan blog is doing its best with content from the manhwa.

fugou keiji balance unlimited: people were simping even before the first ep came out, and then the anime went on hiatus for a few months. now that it’s started to air again, everyone acts like it never existed in the first place... was a good fandom up until the hiatus and now it will probably take a while to recover.

god of high school: nonexistent even tho it’s a popular pick this season (summer 2020). in the shadow of fruits basket.

deca-dence, bna, great pretender, kakushigoto, the misfit at demon king academy, rent-a-girlfriend: *sigh* didn’t see much of it on my dash. lesser-watched seasonal anime in comparison to fruits basket and tower of god (all relative to tumblr). there are gifs being made, but you have to follow the right blogs.

main point: if there’s any seasonal anime paired up against fruits basket at the same time, fruits basket will win and the former will be left in the dust.

[aion-rsa]

Squid Game: Best Deadly Competition TV Shows & Movies to Watch Next

https://ift.tt/eA8V8J

Chances are, if you’ve started watching Squid Game, then you’ve finished watching Squid Game. Netflix’s Korean social thriller is highly suspenseful, driving viewers through its nine episodes to its chilling conclusion with an anxiety-inducing urgency. The story of 456 desperate people who play a deadly game for the chance to win a ₩45.6billion ($39 million) prize, Squid Game is a familiar premise executed masterfully, which means that if you’re looking for more stories like Squid Game, then you’re in luck; the “deadly competition” trope is a very popular one. Like other standouts in the subgenre, there is nothing quite like Squid Game, but there’s still many, many TV shows and movies worth watching if you’re looking for something that delves into some of the same themes and scenarios as the addictive Netflix drama. Here are our recommendations…

Death Race 2000 (1975)

Not technically a live-action adaptation of Hanna Barbera cartoon Wacky Races with a deadly twist – though that’s very much the vibe – this Roger Corman camp-fest is a cult favourite. The film stars Kung Fu’s David Carradine as the mysterious champion driver of the Transcontinental Road Race, an ultra-violent race across America designed as an outlet for the population’s simmering violence under a totalitarian regime – much like sports day at school, but with muscle cars instead of eggs and spoons. Health and safety guidelines are very much unobserved on the road, and the bodies soon pile up, as does a conspiracy that goes – you guessed it – all the way to the top! Brrm brrm. – LM

Das Millionenspiel (1970) & Le Prix du Danger (1983)

Two films, in two languages, from two different countries in two different decades, but both based on the same 1958 American short story. Robert Sheckley’s ‘The Prize of Peril’ is a prescient vision based on a television show where citizens volunteer to be hunted by trained assassins for the chance to win a life-changing sum of money. (Yes, there’s a chance that Stephen King, or at least his alter-ego Richard Bachman, read it before coming up with The Running Man). German film Das Millionenspiel was a TV movie that reportedly had viewers call in post-broadcast to volunteer to take part in the deadly televised contest, but perhaps that’s best taken with a pinch of salz. – LM

The Running Man (1987)

What’s more fun than a dystopian action movie based on a novel by Stephen King and starring Arnold Schwarzenegger in his 1980s prime? Nothing, that’s what. Arnie stars as a former police helicopter pilot named Ben Richards who is framed for a massacre he didn’t commit and forced to compete in a televised game show where prisoners are mercilessly hunted down by mercenaries. On top of that, the obstacle course is basically an even more fucked up version of Sasuke/Ninja Warrior. Fortunately, Arnie isn’t alone in his hatred of the totalitarian government that has doomed him to death just to entertain The People, and that’s how the revolution starts. Yes, it’s a campy movie with some very cheesy lines, but good for a few Friday night laughs. – JS

Battle Royale (2000)

Battle Royale is one of the most beloved examples of the “deadly competition” genre, especially for nerds like Den of Geek staff and readers. Based on a 1999 novel by Kōshun Takami, Battle Royale made an impression for its brutality and stark social analysis when it burst onto the international nerd cinephile scene back in 2000. The story follows a busload of school children who are knocked out and wake up on an island. Each is given a random weapon—from guns to household items, like a paper fan or pot lid—and they must fight to the death until only one remains. – KB

Series 7: The Contenders (2001)

The early 2000s were… what’s the term for a golden age of something terrible? A high-low point? The eye of the shitstorm? Either way, for the reality television genre, the early 2000s were it. The world dug its mucky snout into the honey pot of dehumanised abs, boobs and therapy bills waiting to happen, and decided it liked the taste. Some good though, did come out of it – satires like Danial Minahan’s 2001 feature debut Series 7: The Contenders. The film shows six American strangers picked by national lottery, armed with guns and forced to hunt each other down while the world watches in nightly instalments. It’s pacey, well-acted, darkly funny and carries your basic screaming ‘what have we become?’ message of many others on this list. – LM

Doctor Who, “Bad Wolf” (2005)

OK, I’m cheating a bit with this one, which isn’t a series or movie, but rather a single TV show episode, but it’s Doctor Who, so I’ll allow it. It’s hard to remember more than 15 years later, but, when Who relaunched in 2005, head writer Russell T. Davies was reinventing the wheel, resulting in some conceptually ambitious installments. This definitely includes “Bad Wolf,” which has a pretty strange premise for the first half of the season-ending two-parter. 

In the Davies-penned “Bad Wolf,” Rose, the Doctor, and Jack wake up to find themselves not only separated from one another, but in incarnations of various British TV competition shows like The Weakest Link, Big Brother, and What Not to Wear. Though these shows may seem similar to their 21st century counterparts, the stakes are not: the losers are killed. Honestly, this premise was a bit ahead of its time. Sure, this was five years after cult classic Battle Royale hit the scene, but three years before the first Hunger Games novel would hit shelves. The scenario is not only compelling and fresh, but Davies doesn’t linger too long before explaining how it is relevant to the season-ending mystery. – KB

The Hunger Games (2012)

A list of this kind would not be complete without The Hunger Games, one of the most popular and successful modern incarnations of the “deadly competition” trope. Like Battle Royale before it and Squid Game after it, The Hunger Games succeeds because it uses its violent premise to explore contemporary social anxieties. Suzanne Collins famously came up with the initial idea for The Hunger Games while flipping through the channels between competition reality shows and footage of the Iraq War. Given the massive success of both the novels and movie adaptations, it’s obvious that this story is tapping into some serious and unaddressed collective social trauma. The Hunger Games gave young people especially a chance for temporary catharsis through the guilt, fear, and pain that came with growing up post-9/11. – KB

3% (2016)

The thing about deadly competition stories is that most, if not all, of them are particularly class conscious. When one thinks of the type of person who would choose to participate in, or be forced into, a life and death game, it’s not usually rich people. Deadly competition stories are often about the exploitation of the poor. Perhaps no other entry into the genre understands that as deeply as Brazilian series 3%. This tale takes place in a dystopian near future in which the impoverished residents of the “Inland” can compete in a mysterious event known as “The Process” and potentially be granted access to the upper ranks of society. The Process is rigorous, with many of its participants eliminated and some even killed. How many actually make it? Well, check the title of the show again. – AB

Alice in the Borderland (2020)

There’s a reason why Alice in Borderland started trending as soon as Squid Game binges began: the 2020 Japanese science fiction show based on a manga of the same name, has a lot in common with its Netflix cousin—at least on the surface. Directed by Shinsuke Sato (who also helmed Gantz, another great “deadly competition” story example), Alice in the Borderland begins when three friends are abruptly and unexpectedly pulled into a parallel Tokyo where they must compete in a series of deadly games. The difficulty of each game corresponds to a playing card and, if they lose or refuse to play one of the competitions, they will be killed by lasers from the sky, naturally. 

While Alice in the Borderland’s initial premise has some things in common with Squid Game—notably, the shock of its characters upon realizing the deadly stakes of the artificial competition—the respective shows are not only grounded in different cultures (Japanese va. Korean), they also hail from different genres. While Squid Game is very much set in our own world, Alice in the Borderland is much more science fiction in tone and execution. (I mentioned the sky lasers, right?) Both are good shows, but their comparisons quickly fade once you look past the surface. – KB

High-Rise Invasion (2021)

The concept for High-Rise Invasion is as enigmatic and compelling as any anime can be. The anime (or original net animation as this is sometimes dubbed) picks up with our hero Yuri Honjō suddenly on top of a skyscraper with no memory of how she got there. Yuri soon discovers that she’s stuck in a world made up of entirely high-rise buildings and the bridges that connect them. What’s worse is that these high-rises are patrolled armed individuals wearing masks who seem hellbent on killing everyone who isn’t masked. High-Rise Invasion is slightly atypical from your usual “death competition” genre in that it’s not clear if this is even a competition. At the end of the day, however, the goals remain the same: survive at all costs. Until things get a little more complicated of course… – AB

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

What are your favorite examples of the deadly competition trope? Let us know in the comments below…

The post Squid Game: Best Deadly Competition TV Shows & Movies to Watch Next appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/2XUifin

[doomonfilm]

Ranking : M. Night Shyamalan (1970 - present)

Like most people, I was introduced to Philadelphia-native M. Night Shyamalan through the massive success of his debut film The Sixth Sense.  I vividly remember him being labelled “the new Hitchcock” right out the gate, which even then I felt was a lofty title to appoint to a director who hadn’t even given us a follow-up film, which can usually be taken as an indication of how much potential range one will have over their career.  His skill behind the camera was evident, and his first five years of output hammered home the fact that he had a knack for writing twist endings that in itself took on a meme-worthy life of its own.  Nobody is perfect, however, but unlike most directors that are suddenly met with criticism after a span as wunderkind and critical darling, Shyamalan took things in stride and did not fold, and as a result, his career has seemingly lost little to no momentum twenty years in.

Ranking the films of Shyamalan is, at heart, an exercise rich in folly, as his ambition and diversity almost calls for the films to be previously grouped into sub-genres prior to being ranked.  In my opinion, however, there is enough stylistic definition and clear-cut writing panache that makes his films definitively Shyamalan, so I hope that you’ll join me as we enjoy our ride on this fool’s errand.

11. After Earth (2013) They say always shoot for the moon, because even if you miss, you’ll land amongst the stars.  With After Earth, M. Night Shyamalan showed that sometimes you can shoot for the moon, miss it and the stars, and land somewhere in the void.  Lots of post-apocalyptic flourish and setup is used for what basically equates as a side-scrolling quest, and the choices made for the characterizations are so distracting in their oddness that it’s hard to invest yourself in the movie in any capacity other than a surface level dissection of the accent and dialogue.  Shyamalan does have a knack for building lore in his films, but he does way more telling than showing in After Earth.  If not for the ties to Will and Jaden Smith, this film could’ve sunk the Shyamalan ship.

10. Lady in the Water (2006) I’m sure that M. Night Shyamalan had good intentions when he decided to turn a story he created for the enjoyment of his children into a feature-length film, but not every idea needs to be seen through into fruition.  Many of the same issues that plague After Earth popped up in Lady in the Water, from the infinitely deep lore being smashed into exposition down to the extremely odd choices for characterizations, but unlike After Earth, at least there are recognizable aspects of the film that one can hang on to.  There are a handful of surprisingly strong performances, given the ridiculousness of the content, but ultimately all other elements are shadowed by the sheer absurdity of the root narrative.  I try not to pick on actors, but Bryce Dallas Howard just doesn’t do it for me in this flick.

9. Signs (2002) This is probably going to be the one that causes the most feedback in terms of position.  According to the masses, this film is the true masterpiece in the M. Night Shyamalan canon, but as an aficionado of alien invasion films, Shyamalan seems to zig at every point he should have zagged.  Mel Gibson and Joaquin Phoenix is an interesting coupling on paper, but if there is chemistry between the two of them as the film’s leads, it didn’t translate on screen.  And for God’s sake, don’t even get me started on having aliens who are harmed by water choosing to come to a planet that, from space, is CLEARLY MOSTLY WATER.

8. The Happening (2008) While M. Night Shyamalan had presented “dumb” twists prior to The Happening (we’ll get back to that shortly), the sheer vastness of the revealed enemy creates a sort of inverse danger arc in regards to the journey we were presented… while there does seem to be destruction, and a sense of danger about what will happen next (and to whom) is built up, it pales in comparison when one realizes that nature is the enemy, and if this premise were true, the events seen more than likely would not have been so random in their scale, location and severity.  Maybe I’m dumping a lot of speculation into this one, but when our male lead is doing what he does in most every film, and your female lead is given an uncharacteristically underwhelming performance, you get time to think about these kinds of things.

7. Glass (2019) All of the potential in the world was there for Glass to be a mind-melter.  What felt like the biggest, most elaborate twist in the entire M. Night Shyamalan universe had been revealed in the form of a secret trilogy that took nearly two decades to present itself, but sadly the landing was not stuck.  All of the grandness of the world built in Unbreakable and Split suddenly felt much smaller and less elaborate when our characters essentially found themselves grounded, and while we were sold the idea that all of what happened was some sort of elaborate group hallucination, the feats pulled off by Crumb are still sold to us as reality, leaving the lines blurred much more than what was likely intended.  We are even teased with a storyline that feels like mockery of what could have been, but in the end, Glass was the tragic landing that undercuts the brilliance that preceded it.

6. The Sixth Sense (1999) This film is a tough one to place, because in terms of its technical prowess and execution, it is not only a brilliant film, but a stunningly impressive debut.  The problem with this film, however, is the same that tends to plague even the best magic tricks… it’s amazing until the trick is revealed.  In the case of The Sixth Sense, the first watch blows you away.  The second watch, as a result, feels like a completely new movie, and is even more rewarding as it resolves itself once again.  Any viewing after the second one, however, is plagued by a lack of surprise, intrigue or anticipation, and what we are left with is a good movie with no wow.  Perhaps the best way to watch this film, at this point, is with someone who has never seen it and has somehow managed to avoid any spoilers, as it would be the closest one can get to experiencing this film with an uninformed eye.

5. The Last Airbender (2010) With a black cloud hanging over this film due to overwhelmingly negative backlash from fans of the Avatar animated series, I stayed away from it like one stays away from rotten garbage.  Interestingly enough, I had no dog in the fight, as I had never seen any of the source material, and only had a layman’s understanding of it as a result, with no emotional ties to anything about it.  I say that to say this… I can certainly understand how an adapted work can be met with brutal skepticism and aggressive analysis, and if even one stone of fan service is left unturned then the whole thing must be cast aside, but if taken on its own merits, this is a surprisingly strong film.  It hits the bullseye in terms of being an epic kid’s tale in all the ways that Lady in the Water did not, and it has the big budget feel that was missing in Glass.  Who knows... my thoughts on the film may change as I finally dive into the animated series, but as it currently stands, this film should be considered as a win in the Shyamalan collection.

4. The Visit (2015) What a truly bonkers movie.  Watching M. Night Shyamalan’s take on the found footage film is surprisingly kinetic, and thanks to some of the best casting found in any of his films, we are given characters that evoke emotion and make us either care about them or fear them.  There are probably even some who would claim that they “saw the twist coming”, and maybe I’m just a sucker, but when the curtain is pulled back on what’s really going on it feels like every loose string representing a question is suddenly pulled tight enough to choke.  There are just enough games present in the writing that, while we question the crazier things we see, we can also shrug them off with “acceptable” answers.  If you’ve managed to go this far without anyone spoiling the ending for The Visit for you, I highly recommend checking this one out immediately, as it is that vintage Shyamalan that many people are seeking out.

3. Split (2017) If this one were just a one-off, it would probably still sit extremely high on the list of Shyamalan films.  Anya Taylor-Joy is good in most everything she does, and James McAvoy is putting on a clinic in terms of range and character variety.  The film gets about as broad as it can without going over the top, and that size is translated in the tension that emerges from the captivity that Kevin Wendell Crumb puts the girls in, forcing them to his live wire and ever changing personality.  With much of the film boiling down to a few locations, and a freight train of a premise that is seemingly headed in one direction, it is natural to anticipate a Shyamalan swerve, but it’s the button at the end of the film that makes you realize the sheer existence of Split in itself is the twist.  For that feat alone, this film must be applauded.

2. The Village (2004) Remember when I brought up “dumb twists” earlier?  I’ll be honest with you… this was the film I had in mind, despite it being my favorite (albeit it not my top ranked).  Up until the moment of truth, everything presented in this film works : as a period film it is well-executed, the use of reds and yellows is iconic, the lore presented is actually shown and not left solely to exposition dumps, and Adrian Brody brings a performance level to his character that far exceeded what was necessary.  I also tend to be hard on Bryce Dallas Howard, but she steps up to the plate when the story is shifted completely to her shoulders.  The twist isn’t even actually all that bad, other than the fact that it may have been the most obvious premise for a twist, but I think that even a slight tweak in regards to the overarching location or the person who discovers Howard’s character would have greatly improved the execution of the twist moment.  Even though M. Night Shyamalan had already made a great movie (which is coming up in just a moment), this was the one that brought me off the fence and into the camp that supports Shyamalan.

1. Unbreakable (2000) It’s quite rare in the grand scheme of things to see a director make light year jumps in his second film, especially when their first film reaches phenomenon status.  Somehow and someway, however, M. Night Shyamalan did the impossible by topping a film on the Mount Rushmore of debuts with the film that feels like the most ambitious and well executed of his career.  A cursory search of the Bruce Willis filmography will show that outside of the first Sin City film and Looper, M. Night Shyamalan got the last of good acting he was giving directors.  The visual interpretation of the comic book world framing is so nuanced and subtle that, upon learning the context and intention of the film, each repeat viewing brings new attention to these very layered visual details.  The presentation of Elijah Price was so phenomenal that it ultimately caused expectations that crushed Glass upon arrival.  Even if the Eastrail 177 Trilogy didn’t quite live up to expectations, there is no denying that Unbreakable was a pitch perfect table-setter, and an impressive film to boot.

[fandomsandfeminism]

Full Transcript Below:

Hello! So this is my spoiler free review of Wonder Woman. I went and saw it Thursday night and wanted to share my thoughts with yall. So, for the sake of being spoiler free, in this video, I’m not going to give away anything that isn’t in the trailers for the purpose of just answering the question “Should I go see this movie?” I’ll make a more in depth analysis video later. Eventually?

The short answer, by the way, to “should I go see this movie” is yes. Yes, go see the movie. It’s...it’s really lovely.

A little background: I love wonder woman. I adore her. She’s my favorite super hero, without a doubt. My favorite runs for her are the stuff written by Greg Rucka and Gail Simone. I just think she’s such a great, fun, inspiring character.

And there were a lot of reasons to be really...nervous about a big budget DCEU Wonder Woman movie. The DCEU has not been doing well review-wise. Both Suicide Squad and Batman vs Superman were pretty universally panned with Rotten Tomato scores in the 20s. And Wonder Woman can be a difficult character to write. She requires this balance between idealism and ferocity, proficiency in battle and preference for peace. The Amazons need to be matriarchal and enlightened without being portrayed as misandric strawmen. It can be a hard tone to hit just right.

There was also some controversy about the casting of Gal Gadot, because of her service in and support of the Israeli army,  and I’m not really going to get into here. People have strong opinions about it, on both sides, and it’s not really the focus of this video. Some people may choose to not go see the movie because of this and that’s their personal choice. We’re not debating that here.

So, because of all these factors, a lot of people were concerned that, well, this movie would suck. And let’s be real- a bad Batman movie is disappointing, but we get new batman movies every 5 years these days. If the Wonder Woman movie flopped? We’d probably never get another chance.

So, now that the movie is actually out: What are reviewers saying? Well, it’s got a solid 76 on Metacritic, and it’s Certified Fresh and sitting pretty at 94% with  240 reviews on Rotten Tomatoes.

That’s tied with Iron Man and the Dark Knight. That’s higher than Logan and Avengers ( at 92%)  That’s higher than the 1978 Superman ( at 93%), it's higher than Lego Batman ( at 90%), it's higher than Hellboy, all the Spider Man films, and ALL the X-men movies.

In fact, the only superhero movie that is currently rated higher on Rotten Tomatoes that I could find is Pixar’s Incredibles.

Gail Simone went on a twitter fangirl rant over how much she loved the movie, and it’s preview night attendance was impressive. On Thursday night alone, Wonder Woman made 11 million dollars. That’s higher than Doctor Strange , Ant-Man , Thor  and Captain America: The First Avenger, and just below Guardians of the Galaxy

So reviewers and audiences are eating it up.

But will YOU like the movie?

Well, did you like Captain America: The First Avenger? Because if you did, you will love this. This movie has a very similar tone and execution, except, like, better and with Wonder Woman.

There are some...janky bits. Some odd pieces of CGI and slow motion that are kinda weird, and the movie is impressively long at 2 hours and 20 minutes. And there are a few adaption issues that may bother some fans of the comics, but those are kind of spoilery and I don't want tp touch them here.

But what I think this movie does that makes it shine is that it really captures who Diana is supposed to be as a person. (And considering it exists in the same franchise that has Superman and Batman carelessly killing people, that’s a surprising but good thing.) This is her origin story, and we see a young, naive Diana, full of vim and vigor, full of ideals and passion.

The movie knows when to be funny, and when to be sincere. It doesn’t shy away from idealism for the fear it will be cheesy. It never treats Diana as eye candy, never objectifying her despite her skin-revealing outfits. It really seems to embrace what makes Diana an icon- her morals, her symbolism.

The secondary cast is also fantastic. From the amazons, to Etta Candy, to Sameer, and Chief, and Dr. Meru, and yes, the Peggy Carter of this period piece- the lovely Steve Trevor. We get a decently diverse cast, and some surprising thematic complexity for a Superhero movie.

And, I’ll be honest yall, when we finally see Diana in her full, iconic, wonder woman outfit? Tiara and lasso and all? I cried. I cried a little in the theater.

I now I say this a lot on this channel, but this was not a perfect movie. And I’ll go more into that in the Spoilery video when I make it. But it is a GOOD movie, a fun, heartfelt, entertaining movie. And I think you’ll like it whether or not you adore Wonder Woman as much as I do.

[akria23]

Dom & Letty 3.0 - FOTF

“You will never be alone again.

I vow wherever you go, I go.

You ride, I ride.

You fight, I fight.

And if you ever die on me Dominic Torreto, I’m gonna die with you..”

 Those were Letty’s vows to her husband the night they got married and this movie presents them in action. In part 6 we got to see Dom fight not only for her but for their love, having to captivate her all over again. Now here in part 8 the roles have been flipped and its Letty’s turn to either fall in line with others thoughts or fight for her husband. The difference in their battles is the fact that Dom was fighting for a resurface of memories and their undeniable draw/chemistry – while for Letty it’s about faith. The question of would Dom do this, would he turn his back on his family…on her, and when all the evidence says yes, does she still have the power to say no. How much does she know her husband, how much does she trust him and their love. She comes through with flying colors.

Like I said even though this is a flip, there are big differences, one of those being knowledge of enemy. Dom knew who his enemy was, he knew what had went wrong with her and who was using that for his own purposes. But Letty doesn’t have this same knowledge. She doesn’t know who the big bad is or why Dom is doing things that are totally against everything he is. That’s where the faith comes into play, because she has to everything off the back of it. Despite others telling her that this may be who he has become she has to go off of what she believes of him and their love and remind them of all the great things her husband has done for them while they’re so quick to give up on or judge him. She reminds us of her position and exactly where her loyalties reside when she responds to Hobbs by telling him that he’ll have to deal with the both of them when he warns her that he may have to put Dom down. She’s not just willing to fight for him, but beside him – and that’s not in the hope that he’s still good, but in the certainty that something else is going on because her Dom would never turn his back, the fight for the family is all he’s ever known. You know its certainty because she places her life in his hands. In the briefcase scene there was this great subtext moment because here’s the reality, that moment after he shot the gun in the air and she turned around and told him that he wouldn’t shoot her because he loved her…this moment really was about choosing – he had a choice, stop her and his baby survived another day. Let her go free and choose losing that. He let her go. It doesn’t matter that she got caught unaware around the corner by someone else…because he let her go. The next scene – the standoff – is also important because here he is again choosing to protect his wife with the knowledge of what it will cost him if he shoots this man. Not only that, but it comes back to that faith again. Because this moment is really her time to prove if she believes her husband is doing this for a reason or because he’s turned bad. She has to either side with him (let the case go) or keep it and get the other guy a bullet to the head – putting Dom in further hot water (it doesn’t matter that she doesn’t know exactly what that hot water is, only that she’s aware of its existence if she believes her husband to be innocent).

In one of my old Dotty articles I claimed that Dom had elevated in his Alpha status, that he had become the kind to analysis his enemy then to plot and plan.  That his control was of self and his lead was of understanding his mates and those around him. This chapter really proved those claims. He planned and adjusted to everything that happened (which I’ll go over in more detail in the review). The only thing he really couldn’t plan or adjust for was his wife. As they say – a driver’s weakness really is his best partner knowing all his tricks. She was the only one able to keep up with him cause she knew his tricks, when she got the briefcase he couldn’t adjust and ended up choosing her not once but twice which led to the punishment of Elena dying (not that I shed a tear – I knew she was gonna die the moment I saw that baby). The enemy’s biggest mistake was thinking it was an either or game with Dom – not realizing that he plays the long game his plan would be getting his child and going back to his wife…instead what she did was taunt the him with one (Letty) and bait his with the other (baby Brian). Big mistake leaving Letty out of her equation because she left something out there to fight for him and for him to fight for. She thought the baby would over compass that, she thought the baby would shadow his wife – she was wrong. It not about choosing the baby over Letty/family – it’s about connecting the two.  

I see people saying things like the baby ruined the relationship, it ruined Dom/Letty. No the baby may have ruined the fantasy as you saw it…but he didn’t ruin that relationship. Every one of their chapters has shown that nothing comes between that love because that love is the factor. Letty is not bothered, or upset by this child…and why would she be? It wasn’t something that intentionally happened and when she told Elena that she understood her relationship with Dom, she actually meant it. The baby wasn’t/isn’t a threat to her marriage. It doesn’t mean Dom was in love with Elena, cause he wasn’t. It doesn’t mean that Letty can’t have her own kids with him, cause she can. It doesn’t mean she’s gonna mistreat baby Brian, cause even though he may not have come from her womb – he is still a part of her husband and like him family means everything to her. It doesn’t mean that their kids will take second place just because it came second – understand that there will be no distinction between these kids. Understand that just because this baby didn’t come out of her womb doesn’t mean he’s not her son too. That’s what the Fast & Furious has always been about –a family created not by blood but by bond. Dom and Letty are now parents – maybe not in the way we originally thought/wanted, but in a way that’s not wrong regardless.

One of my favorite things about this series and about this relationship is everyone understands that when it comes to Dom and Letty – the shit that’s between them is undeniable and there’s no walking away from it. When they reunite and he lets her know he hadn’t walked away, she says she knows. Dom and Letty see themselves as soulmates, as bonded, as ride or die. Whatever you wanna call it, it all means the same thing -Love- They’ll follow, they’ll ride, they’ll fight, and they’ll die for it. Isn’t that the ideal, isn’t that why we clamor for it, why we cling to and love it?  

We’ve gushed at their cuteness/power, we cried when she died, we cheered with a blood of vengeance when Dom sought revenge, we fought for the Letty comeback, and we all gasped and gave a standing O when we all saw Letty’s pic after the credits, we died and came back to life when Dom fought for her, their love and their future. We threw our hat into this ring a long time ago and I don’t know about you guys, but mine still resides there and always will as long as the franchise holds close those ideals that are so dear to me - Loyalty, Love, Family, Romance and the sacrifice/fight in the name of those things. As long as it centers and protects the Dotty goodness. Familia remember that we fought for this shit right here. Our OTP’s love is written all over this piece and that is in part thanks to us fans. Romance is thrown to the side in action flicks, used to create some angst by killing off one of the lovers or back-filler that gets no real shine.  But with F&F we get it all, the action, the romance, the family. Sixteen years and the pairing is only getting stronger. I loved this movie because it really defined the love this time around. I don’t just mean romantic love either. It really put the quote ‘you don’t turn you back on family…’ to work, because even though some of them had been misjudging Dom the moment his life was in danger – what did they do? Every time I think they can’t emote further, that they can’t make me feel more about the emotion that resides in these films and yet every time I’m wrong. With the Dom and Letty relationship when I say it defined the love…I mean it really cemented what love means to them – as a pairing not just from Dom to Letty. If I had to pick one word to describe their type of love it would be faith. We’ve seen the trait throughout their relationship over the years and in a big way in part 7 when he let her go on the faith that she would figure it out and come back to him (cause you can’t tell someone they love you). Like I said earlier, it’s her total being in this film - because their faith in one another is so strong, so is the certainty of their love. The reason they can trust one another so immensely, the reason they’re so loyal to one another, the reason they’re so willing to sacrifice, the reason they make each other so damn happy is because of that certainty. They give and know its to be returned with the same passion. They love each other and they always will. It’s the reason they work, the reason they always find themselves together. It’s the reason they’re so indestructible. It’s the reason we’re so damn blessed.

Notes: Videos not mine first one is Queen of hearts and the second is of course one of my all time favs - you know I always gotta in with a ConquerGravity video because the vids are just so damn on point to what I’m getting at. Every time I see a ConGrav vidseo it always makes me see a bigger picture of what I think and feel about this pairing and they’re relationship. None of the videos are new cause the new film just came out but oldies can make you feel new things. I didn’t put everything in this post because I am coming out with a review of the movie and theres a lot of points that connect to that so I stripped this down and left it as bare as possible. I went and saw the advance showing...but I’m going again tonight to see it so I’ll write the review after and hopefully have it up by later Sunday night. Sorry this is so long with no images...

Other Dotty / Vincelle Works:

Dotty Ship Awareness Part 1 / Dotty Ship 2 / Dotty NonCasual /Future Wishes for F&F / Vincelle Actor Relate Awareness

Other Fast and Furious Post(s):

Brian & Dom

[olbis]

HS Quotidien Interview

Hi folks! Here is a transcript of Harry’s interview with Yann Barthès. I didn’t want to spend too much time on it, so I apologize if there are a few typos. However, I moonlight as a lyrics transcriber so it should be pretty accurate... This includes a bit that was cut in the replay version, so don’t be surprised. 

YB: Welcome to Paris.

HS: Thank you.

YB: How are you?

HS: Um, good. I'm good.

YB: Can you answer in French? Comment ça va? (= how are you?)

HS: Umm, I have… a little bit…a tiny bit… Très bien. Et toi? (= very well and you?)

 YB: Well, very well, thank you. Thank you very much for being here. We always start interviews with international stars with this question: can you give us your five favourite words in French? Or a sentence that you know in French? I was told you know some.

HS: “Comment vous-faîtes un café si délicieux?” (=how do you make such a good coffee?)

YB: Ah, ah, ok.

HS: (mumbles something I can’t understand) It’s all I have.

YB: Do you often use that sentence?

HS: … no. Yes! Yeah…

YB: Who or what comes to mind when you think of France?

HS: …. um… best people I’ve known… I think *her* (points to a fan). And then I guess…Fabien Barthez.

YB: (slightly surprised) Fabien Barthez, yes. (note: he is a French footballer who played in the 90s) So Harry, you are 23 and you are one of the biggest pop stars in the world. You know that everyone is watching you very carefully (note: the French expression YB uses, which is not mean, kind of implies: waiting for you to trip or fail) with your new album, Sign of the Times. Why did you choose this song? Why Sign of the Times? It's very far from what we expected from you.

HS: Yeah, I think I, uh, I wanted to… I always liked music that makes me feel something and I, you know I think…writing it, I kind of felt something and wanted to put that out. I think it is a good indicator, um, for me of what the album means to me. So that’s why I wanted to go with that first. I think.

YB : Billboard Magazine wrote that this single is, I quote, “one of the most ambitious song in pop music of the past decade”. Not bad… do you have friends at Billboard?

HS: (cute little laugh) I don't know anyone at the Billboard.

YB : Upon listening to it, we think of David Bowie, of Queens… Who else inspired you?

HS: Um, I mean…. I think, I think, everyone, anything, any song you’ve ever listened to growing up or throughout your life that you’ve enjoyed (…he then says something I can’t catch) so I think a lot of different things but I think, uh,  I wanted to… I wanted to just write, and see what came out …. and see, you know I didn’t know what I sounded like, to make an album, so the process was as interesting for me as I think it will be for people listening to the album for the first time.

YB: Do you know any French singer?  This is a trick question… and don’t say Serge Gainsbourg!

HS: I know Woodkid.

YB: Woodkid?

HS: Woodkid, yeah. He directed my music video so, uh…

YB: Why did you choose him?

HS: Um, I just think, I think his videos are amazing. I think he is a really, really talented guy. And I love French people. So I wanted to work with ‘em.

YB : (makes faces at Harry) When you are in Spain, you say that you love Spanish people…

HS: No? Great tie, by the way. Good tie.

YB : Really? (looks for the label for half a second) Uh, it’s French.

HS: I’m sure. Wouldn’t be a Spanish tie, would it?

YB: Can I see your loafers? I was told you have great loafers. (zoom in on Harry’s Gucci rainbow shoes). Wow, yeah. What is it? It’s not French, it’s Italian. (a fan in the audience then says it is Gucci).

HS: It’s not, no.

YB: It’s from the European Union.

HS: (laughs) Probably, yeah.

YB: It seems like everything is very easy for you. Has everything really been easy for you?

HS: Um, was what simple?

YB: Well, your life. You have a dream life. With 1D.

HS: Oh, I mean, I feel very lucky to be able to be making music, I feel very lucky to able to make this (points to his album) and I feel very lucky today being in France (… says something I don’t understand…) singing this song. And uh, yeah, I can’t complain.

YB: And what was less pleasant?

HS: (pauses) Um… I don’t know.

YB: One thing…

HS: Um, I think, I think when you care so much about something it’s hard to get to a point where you feel like you’re finished. I think you always feel like your adding, like you wanna add something to make it better. So I think the hardest part was getting to that part and be like, ok, it’s finished. Um, yeah.

YB: You said in the May issue of Rolling Stones that a big part of your album was inspired by a women. (Leans forward and asks sarcastically) Really?

HS: No, I think, I think, honestly, I think the album is much more about me than it is about anyone else. I think if I said the album is about a woman, it kind of feels like… and I…uh, I don’t know, I put a lot of work into it so I don’t feel, I don’t feel like it revolves around a woman. I feel like, it is a lot about me and things like (??) Yeah, I feel like it’s more about me than about anyone else. (makes a cute sassy little face)

YB: How do you navigate going from a group adventure, being in a boyband, to a solo career as an adult?

HS: Um, I mean, it’s been a lot of fun, I think. You know, we were very lucky to get to do some amazing things. And at the moment in our lives, we’re at a time when everyone is trying their own thing and having a good time. It’s been amazing to see everyone do so well. So if I can, kind of, do as well as the other boys, that would be amazing.

YB: Do you talk or text them everyday? Whatsapp?

HS: I don’t have that. But yeah, we talk, yeah. Yeah, absolutely, yeah. It’s uh, and everyone’s been bringing stuff out and it’s been, it’s been a lot going on, so it’s been… it’s been a good time.

YB: Here is the album cover. Can you describe it? Why this photo?

HS: Yeah… Um, so… (cute little sound) I worked with, um, I worked with a photographer, Harley Weir. I’m a massive, massive fan of her, of her work. And uh, it was an amazing opportunity to get to work with her and I think she’s incredible. And I felt like, this was what I wanted…

YB: Why is it pink? Why the water, why the back? Why…why?

HS: (shrugs)

YB : It’s beautiful! But why pink for example?

HS: I dunno man.

YB: (fakes surprise) Really? That, you don’t know?

HS: I don’t know. Um, I don’t know. I don’t think I’ll ever want to…

YB: (interrupts Harry) Some say it is the colour of rock’n roll?

HS: (pauses). Apparently so. I dunno. I think, I think, it means something to me and I think if it means anything to anyone else. I wouldn’t want to take away from that by explaining it. I think the cool thing about stuff like photos and art is you can just leave it, you don’t have to explain it.

YB: So everyone can see whatever they want, is that it?

HS: Yes, exactly.

YB : Have you seen that? (shows a video of fans reacting to Sign of the Times). Your fans film themselves listening to your song for the first time… So there are some very relevant analysis… (the video continues to play out) Do you read what people say about you on social media, here on YouTube, or Twitter, or Instagram. You use Instagram, right?

HS: Yes, I use it a little bit. (To the crowd that sounds sceptical) Yeah, I use it a little bit! I mean I wish everyone was having as good a time as the girl that was (makes vague arm movements). That, that’s what I do when I listen to it. So…

YB: Do you do your own Insta posts, with your own fingers, or is it someone else?

HS: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, I do mine.

YB: Do you still vote in Redditch?

HS: …in?

YB: Redditch.

HS: Where I was born? I don’t live in Redditch anymore.

YB: So you don’t vote there. When was the last time you voted?

HS: No, London, yeah.

YB: Do you have an opinion on Brexit?

HS: Um…

YB: Welcome to Europe by the way!

HS: Thank you very much, thanks for having me. Um, I mean I don’t… I don’t really comment on politics. Um, to me I think anything that brings people together is better than something that keeps people apart. Uh, that’s, yeah…

YB: And yet, you do support legal equality. Man, woman, heterosexual, homosexual. It is politics, isn’t it?

HS: Um, I don’t know, that doesn’t feel like politics to me, I think. Stuff like equality feels much more like fundamentals. I feel like everyone really is equal. That doesn’t feel like politics to me.

YB: Do you know that your fans are very fetishist. They know every tattoo, every piece of jewellery you have, they have a heart attack when you cut your hair. So clearly, here, you are playing on their nerves. Today, you are playing on their nerves.

HS: (a bit coy) Ok. Is it?

YB: Yes, of course. (shows pictures of Harry’s tattoos) Yes, clearly. What is your favourite tattoo?

HS: Um, I think uh… probably, I don’t know actually.

YB: What is the last one?

HS: The latest is this one, there (points to the Arlo tattoo). And this guy (point to Jackson). And this guy (points back to Arlo).

YB: Jackson?

HS: This guy (point to the bottom of the bee? I’m not sure). This guy (points to another tattoo on his right arm, off camera, and then to the rose).

YB: (laughs) All at the same time?

HS: Yes, it is close. (it is what I hear but the French interpreter translated it by “there is a lot”)

YB: And your hair? What’s the deal with your hair? How many tons of hair products have you used when you were in 1D (note: in French, there was no connotation of the 1D era being over or not)

HS: (sigh) Yeah, like a lot. I think a lot, yeah.

YB: You are in the next Christopher Nolan movie. It’s called Dunkirk.

HS: Yeah.

YB: How did you end up there?

HS: Um, I auditioned.

YB: There, there we see you (as images of Harry in Dunkirk are shown on screen)

HS: There I am. Yeah, it’s me. Um, yeah, I auditioned. Um, yeah, it was great, it was an amazing experience. It’s gonna be a really cool movie.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

YB: Harry, it feels like we've known you since you were just a kid. The world discovered you in 2010 on the seventh season of X Factor. (shows a clip of Harry’s audition) So in this video you are alone but Simon Cowell, member of the jury, has an idea. He puts you together with Zayn, Louis, Liam and Niall and you become One Direction. You are the one who came up with the name One Direction and the five of you sell millions of albums. One Direction is quickly considered as the new Beatles, you fill the biggest avenues in the world, the whole planet talks about you. When you travel, we feel for your eardrums… you become the pride of the UK. Prime Minister David Cameron even makes a cameo in one of your videos… you sing in front of the Queen… but in 2015, bang!… Zane leaves the band. The fans can’t get over it… but they can rest easy now, one of their favourites is on the cover of Rolling Stones, he will be in the next Christopher Nolan movie, plays Mick Jagger on SNL… but what you don't know is that we already met in 2012 (shows a clip of Harry talking in French)… you were doing promo in France… and now I have questions for you.

First, when you are in the car (Harry is shown on screen surrounded by a crowd of fans, trying to get to his car) and fans are coming at you from everywhere, do you see that? (shows a photo of faces squashed against a window).

HS: Uh, I think I actually lost my shoes that day. And then I got in the car… I got in the car and I was like, I don’t have any shoes (… note: I can’t make out what he says next.)

YB: I have a second question. Do you always do that before going on stage (shows a clip of Harry and Zayn having their teeth and nostrils checked out). Do you still do that? Shall we do it?

HS: No.

YB: Really? You won’t do it?

HS: (shields himself with his hand and shows YB his teeth and nostrils) Thank you. 

YB: What is the weirdest question you've been asked in an interview?

HS: Um… Mm… um, I think it actually was a French interview. I got asked if I would uh, if I would pee in a sink.

YB: Why, indeed, that is weird!

HS: It was the first question!

YB: Well, it sets the mood!

HS: Yeah

YB: And what question do you never want to hear again? Did I ask it?

HS: (turns to where the audience is giving suggestions) Which one? Oh, crush.

YB: What?

HS: Crush.

YB: Oh, that… (makes a heart of his hands) Ok, good. I haven't asked that. Phew. Do you know that at a young French writer has just published a novel about you? It's called « Styles », it's published by Jean-Claude Lattès. It is a novel about the writer’s obsession with you. It's in French so well…

HS: Aaah?

YB : You can translate it. I'm giving it to you

HS: Is this true?

YB: It is true. He dedicated it to you. Jean-Claude Lattès is a very serious publishing house. It is called “Styles”. So read it.

HS: Thank you

YB: Thank you very much Harry styles for coming on our show. His first self-titled album comes out on May 12th. Thank you very much, have a good trip back

 I really loved that interview. I thought Harry was very relaxed and it was lovely to see him having a good time, laughing and interacting with the audience. I liked that YB addressed Harry as an equal, joked and was interested in what Harry thought as a musician and as a person. All in all, it was very respectful and set the record straight on many RS controversial points.

Also, there a was segment later in the show called #fakenews and one of the joke was someone saying “Harry Styles doesn’t make real music” and then getting slapped across the face and a big #FAKENEWS coming on screen! 

[noahfence1d]

We, as the viewing audience, are drawn to celebrities and famous people in ways we are not even aware. Within the lives of the celebrated lie the hopes and dreams of the rest of us.

As sitting ducks, if you will, or sitting persons, our minds are like sponges for incoming data and information, because the mind by its very nature is curious. If not for that, it would be difficult to survive. So the mind, and the brain activity that comprises what we have come to consider as “the mind,” rapidly assesses, absorbs, and decides most things in milliseconds. With the process so swift, oftentimes we haven’t a clue as to why we decide what we decide when we decide it. Our minds are swept away by deluded assumptions, as we bet all we have on our “rightness” when, in fact, in that very instance we are wrong. I know because I have been guilty of it countless times myself. Therefore, our minds, so to speak, often have minds of their own.

There is research pointing to the extent to which the viewing public is hijacked, unawares, into to the deluded thinking that comes with celebrity dynamics. From hours of viewing our favorite TV shows, listening to our favorite podcast, or following our favorite social media star, we have made decisions and taken for fact many un-factual things. After repeatedly tuning into the reality TV show of the time: from Survivor, to Lost, to the Biggest Loser, to the coast-to-coast Housewives shows, to the new Celebrity Apprentice, our brains are bathed in this unreal “reality look-alike” genre. Water cooler fare is now consumed with the minutia of the unreality, from Kim & Kanye to our favorite “housewife” to [fill in the latest bachelor & bachelorette here].

In the context of worshiping celebrities in ways that find us blind-sighted, there is actual research on the topic. In my doctoral dissertation on the psychology of fame and celebrity, I examined much of it. The following are some quotes and paraphrased sections of my research analysis, and its underlying query into the relationship between celebrity and the rest of us. My operating question was:

To what extent ... do celebrities carry the hopes and aspirations of the society that celebrates them? And what is at stake for the celebrity if the public over-identifies with his or her pop icon image? In order to understand the celebrity’s being-in-the-world within the experience of being famous, it is important to look at both sides of the celebrity/fan relationship, because it is ultimately through fan appraisal that celebrity is defined.

Researchers Horton & Wohl first described this media oriented one-way relationship between the celebrity and a “fan” in 1956, as a parasocial relationship. In 1987, Rubin & McHugh defined parasocial relationships as “...a type of intimate, friend-like relationship that occurs between a mediated persona and a viewer. ...As time goes on, predictability about the character is increased. The character is reliable. The fan is loyal.” The research shows that parasocial relationships are encouraged by several factors: (1) degree of reality approximation of the persona and the media, (2) frequency and consistency of appearance by the persona, (3) stylized behavior and conversational manner of the persona, and (4) effective use of the formal features of television. According Rubin, Perse, & Powell‘s 1985 study, Loneliness, Parasocial Interaction, and Local Television News Viewing, “these factors work together to make the persona a predictable, nonthreatening, and, hence, perfect role partner for the viewer.”

By examining celebrity as a cultural linchpin within a growing global fascination with fame, being famous, and those who are famous, we can better understand a dynamic that plays out at an unconscious level, controlling our thoughts and behaviors in ways it would be best to become aware. Are we choosing opinions and and worldviews with at least some degree of personal agency, or are we absorbing messages flooding into our consciousness and embedded in unconscious drives derived from external media sources, each faction aligned with its own seeds of propaganda (to further their own causes and missions), strategies of disinformation (to deflect attention away from actual intelligent analysis), to that which hypes and ballyhoos the particular “brand” in question (with motivational undertones that seek out personal, corporate, and institutional advancement and fiscal growth at all costs), with the results, oftentimes, of humanity be damned?

I remember in college reading the book Subliminal Seduction, which spoke to the way advertisers and others seek to sneak triggers into our subconscious mind chatter so that, on autopilot, we act out buying behaviors that bring us into their purchasing tents. This sort of manipulation of perceived needs underwrites the advertising industry, and in some sense, capitalism itself, which in its present form cannot exist without consumers to buy products which generate the capital and churn the markets, profits, and growth. We become unwitting “fans” of the products we consume, and create parasocial relationships with the celebrity barkers and salespeople who tout the product’s exceptionalism.

Many years ago former music writer, now Winchester University senior psychology lecturer, David Giles decided to conduct research on the parasocial aspects of celebrity relationships after observing the lifestyle of musicians he interviewed. While he was attending a concert in Switzerland to interview “a very minor pop band who were never going to make it big,” he reports realizing that “all bands in the music business were surrounded by sycophants.” Most all celebrities are.

A sycophant, as described by the Merriam Webster dictionary is “a person who praises powerful people in order to get their approval.” And charismatic celebrities can make sycophants from even the most grounded of us, who will throw away all self-respect and exhibit “fawning” behavior when in the presence of a famous person. The problem begins when fans over identify with celebrities. Film director Martin Scorsese describes the mind-hijacking dynamic of parasocial adoration in The King of Comedy, his meditation on the sublime absurdity of the fan-star relationship in which abject allegiance to a fantasy figure is played out in real life. In the movie, out of a sense of fame-lust, a couple of obsessed fans (Robert De Niro and Sandra Bernhard) kidnap their favorite TV star (Jerry Lewis). Scorsese described how he sees the fan’s out-of-whack attachment to celebrities:

You really get to love them. They don’t know you. But you love them. But you love, I think, what you imagine they are. You put more into the person to a certain extent than they may even be giving out on the screen, because they represent a dream. You lose yourself in those people. Finally when you do “satisfy the request of a fan,” after saying a few things—after [they] say, “I really loved your last film. I thought you were great. You really meant a lot to me.” Well, like what’s next? Ultimately what do they want? What do they want from you?

In a study investigating levels of what is called “Celebrity Worship” in the general public, a full 1/3 of the population was found to suffer from what the authors describe as “borderline-pathological” levels of “Celebrity Worship Syndrome,” evidencing a preoccupation with a favorite celebrity.

In the 2003 study, researchers Maltby, Houran & McCutcheon defined the phenomenon as a three-tiered parasocial relationship hierarchy between fans and celebrities, with an “Absorption-Addiction” model to explain the etiology of Celebrity Worship Syndrome:

According to this model, a compromised identity structure in some individuals facilitates psychological absorption with a celebrity in an attempt to establish an identity and a sense of fulfillment. The dynamics of the motivational forces driving this absorption might in turn take on an addictive component, leading to more extreme (and perhaps delusional) behaviors to sustain the individual’s satisfaction with the parasocial relationship. Several studies based on the Celebrity Attitude Scale ... are consistent with this proposed model and suggest that there are three increasingly more extreme sets of attitudes and behaviors associated with celebrity worship.

The questionnaire sheds light on the depths of the parasocial relationship, as the three levels of absorption move from a low level of Entertainment-social, defined through survey answers such as, “My friends and I like to discuss what my favorite celebrity has done,” to the intermediate level, characterized by Intense-personal feelings, defined by responses like, “I consider my favorite celebrity to be my soul mate,” and “I have frequent thoughts about my celebrity, even when I don’t want to,” to the Borderline-pathological level, reflected in answers like, “If someone gave me several thousand dollars (pounds) to do with as I please, I would consider spending it on a personal possession (like a napkin or paper plate) once used by my favorite celebrity,” and “If I were lucky enough to meet my favorite celebrity, and he/she asked me to do something illegal as a favor I would probably do it.”

Interestingly, in their 2002 investigation,

McCutcheon, Lange & Houran

conclude that in both pathological and nonpathological forms of Celebrity Worship, the deeper levels reflect an attempt to soothe an “empty self”:

Addiction [to celebrities] has likewise been conceptualized as a search for a solid identity and social role ... and compulsive and obsessional elements are noted at advanced stages of addiction ... Thus, while absorption can partially account for the vividness of delusions related to dissociative experience ... the progression along our hierarchy of celebrity worship might reflect increases in the thresholds of the need and capacity of psychological absorption. In other words, worshippers might develop a “tolerance” to behaviors that initially satisfied their need for absorption. As a result, celebrity worshippers must progressively evidence stronger dissociative behaviors in order to feel adequately connected to the celebrity.

In fact, the study’s author James Houran told Katie Couric on the Today Show in 2003 that there is no refuge from celebrity influence:

We’re not just a media saturated society but an entertainment saturated society, and so we turn to these celebrities for all aspects of our life. Now these figures are larger than life. Celebrities just don’t sell us products anymore; it’s not just for entertainment. But now you start seeing entertainment being part of mainstream media, mainstream news shows. You can’t get away from it. We are bombarded by it wherever we look.

Celebrities, rather than being authentic and freely expressing human beings, are actually images that are framed, groomed, packaged and highly produced solely for the purpose of dissemination through mass media onto our living room television sets, and through the Internet to our device screens. As audience members, we are spoon fed these images, more or less helpless to what we see, hear, and feel. For example, in 2000, researchers Auter & Palmgreen found that “there was a positive relationship between television viewing level and parasocial interaction in adolescents.” While the level was less than they thought, the researchers believe the more a person views a celebrity, the more invested in a parasocial relationship the fan may become.

In the place of role models and examples of altruistic heroism, we search for solutions to our problems by living through forms of media escapism, and the celebrities who rise up from it. Even as far back as 1983, author Barbara Goldsmith wrote in a New York Times Magazine piece titled, The Meaning of Celebrity that:

Image is essential to the celebrity because the public judges him by what it sees—his public posture as distinguished from his private person. Entertainers are particularly adept at perfecting their images, learning to refine the nuances of personality. Indeed, the words “celebrity” and “personality” have become interchangeable in our language.

As a result, she described a society that:

...encourages us to manufacture our fantasies while simultaneously destroying our former role models and ripping away the guideposts of the past. The result is that we have created synthetic celebrities whom we worship, however briefly, because they vicariously act out our noblest or basest desires.

Unknowingly, through our bonding and parasocial relationships with various celebrities, perhaps we are seeking something that is Freudian, after all, casting us in our own psyches as abandoned children, fearful and buffeted by existential and emotional vagaries that rise up, and leave us raw, exposed and vulnerable in a world where regardless of how diligently we strive, we discover how little control we actually have over our life’s path.

As suggested by sociologist Ernest van den Haag in Goldsmith’s article, the blind worshiping of celebrity, in the end, in all its forms, may amount to nothing more than our basic, hungering and continuing need for authority figures, like our parents.

[comm3p18audiencestudies]

Blog Post #3

Thursday, November 30th, 2017

                 When reflecting on chapter 7, I decided to analyze my own media reception. Media reception is “the study of audience interpretation of media that occurs in specific contexts” (Sullivan, p.162). The textbook mentions that “Television continues to be the most important and widely used media technology in the domestic context” (Sullivan, p.171).  I am in agreeance with this statement because even though older analog television models have been updated and eventually phased out by sleeker, digital T.V.’s, this classic form of technology continues to be a staple device in my home. Over time; my family has swapped out desktop computers for laptops and tablets, and landline telephones phones for smartphones. But our television has remained in the same location, no matter what. It has become an unspoken tradition amongst my family, to gather in the living room around the television after Sunday dinners, even if we are not fully engaged in what is being broadcasted on the screen.

 The textbook later continues that “the introduction of new media technologies has not fundamentally altered the amount of television use in the home” (Sullivan,p.171). I am not in total agreeance with this statement. In recent years, the internet has interfered with the rate at which users consume broadcasted television content. In seminar, we were asked what digital platform we used most to consume our media, our answers were unanimous; smartphones and laptops. Streaming and social media platforms such as Netflix, YouTube, and Facebook, have the ability to satisfy our viewing needs all in one channel. By 2017, viewers have ultimately transformed into the producers. Convenience has become a key factor in media consumption as viewers opt for on-demand content over limiting scheduled content.

How The Internet Is Killing Television (Short Film)

I found this video to be very interesting. Although the textbook raises very good points on the evolution of television, I believe that a lot has changed in the past 5 years. As an individual that was raised and continues to live amidst a digital revolution, I am often unaware to the ways that the internet has altered my lifestyle. I have become so attracted by the perks of the internet that I will change my habits. For example, when moving into my student home; I opted to pay a for a monthly Netflix subscription and stream programs, as opposed to paying for additional cable. 

This is not to say that the television is a dying fad. This chapter suggests that we are creatures of habit. The television has proven to be a source of communication amongst my friends and family. In my home, it has always been a rule that we were not to argue or get upset over a luxury that was meant to provide entertainment. Instead, whoever turned on the television, was in control of what everyone watches until their program was finished. This may pose an issue in other families, but for us, this often acted as a bonding experience as it was a chance to get to know a little bit more about what the person in control is interested in. Because I live in a large family of males and females ranging in the ages of 79 to 15, it has provided me with a broader spectrum of popular culture and media content. I would probably not have any knowledge of subjects like politics, cars, or even soap operas if I was simply scrolling through my Facebook timeline that only consists of content that my friends are interested in. 

Ultimately context plays a major role in how we view media. This term refers to “both a place and a web of interpersonal relationships and interactions within the time and space” (Sullivan, 163).  There are many situations where I opt to put down my laptop and cellphone, in order to watch television. This term also relates to the article, The Influences of Sports Viewing Conditions on Enjoyment from Watching Televised Sports: An Analysis of the FIFA World Cup Audiences in Theater vs. Home (Kim et al. 2016). Going to the movie theatre has always been an exciting event for me. There is something about the atmosphere of sitting in a large dark room, to watch a film for the first time on the big screen, that made the production so much more special. Today, it is much easier and cheaper to stream a film from home, but that just doesn’t give the same feeling. Kim et al., explain that atmosphere, suspense, and togetherness as factors that compel sports audience members to choose between the theatre and at-home television.  They concluded, “Such intensified patriotism involving national competitions then should influence the levels of suspense and the overall evaluations of the viewing experiences” (Kim et al, p.406) Although I have never experienced watching sports at a movie theatre, I have gone to large social events such as Jurassic Park at Maple Leaf Square to watch the Toronto Raptors playoffs game. For the entire season, I chose to watch the games within the comfort of my own home with friends and family; which is an activity that I enjoyed because of the intimacy. Just before the playoffs, I went to a local bar to watch the semi-finals, where I experienced an atmosphere that I had never experienced before. When the game began, patrons kept to themselves; but, as the game continued, I watched as everyone laughed and cheered together in for the Raptors. By the end of the game, the entire bar was ecstatic! I became so consumed with excitement; more for the crowd than the game, that I became adamant on going to Maple Leaf Square.

Toronto Raptors Pre'Historic Game 7 @ Jurassic Park

Although I enjoyed my experience and intend on visiting Jurassic Park again, this is not an event that I will take part in during every Raptors game. This is because attending Jurassic Park did not take away from my experience of viewing the game at home.  I still enjoy watching sports with friends, family, or even alone indoors for the reasons that I cannot satisfy from attending Maple Leaf Square. 

The concept of audiences as fans can be applied outside of sports too. Chapter 8 in the textbook defines fans as audiences that “…are deeply engaged in their favorite media texts.  Fans often reinterpret media content and create their own cultural productions in response” (Sullivan, p. 193). The first personal experience that comes to mind is Walt Disney World in Florida. Growing up, I was a super fan of the Disney franchise. For my 10th birthday, my parents surprised me with a trip to Disney World. Although I was aware that the movies were fiction, I was still so infatuated with the characters and storylines. Our first stop at Disney was a brunch in the Magic Kingdom featuring some of my favorite (and not so favorite) characters from the movie Cinderella. At one point in the dinner, two young women dressed as Cinderella’s evil marks-sisters stopped at our table to make conversation. While in character, the two step-sisters continued to make snarky comments about Cinderella. At one point, I became so offended by their comments that I began to defend Cinderella and even made a few jokingly snide remarks towards the two step-sisters. After a few more minutes of banter, the sisters made their way to other tables where I could overhear other children engaging in the same type of conversation that I did.

The Disney franchise has become so successful mainly because of the fandom surrounding it. Although their content is geared towards younger children, people of all ages are able to take part. During my stay at Disney, I witnessed as my parents even got in on the fun by taking pictures with their favorite characters that roamed through the theme park. Disney has expanded by opening addition theme parks in California and even Japan, proving that this global sensation shows no limits in terms of language and cultural barriers.

Fan audiences are such an important aspect of popular culture. As someone who is interested in many different genres's of music, film, and television; I have learned that I am apart of multiple different fan audiences. Social media has allowed me to become an interactive fan member as I am able to use these communication platforms to connect and share with other fans across the world. More and more live television programs are beginning to incorporate social media features to engage their audiences. When watching broadcasted events such as the MTV Music Awards, audience tweets sharing their opinions are displayed in the corner of the screen as the program airs. When this feature was introduced, I found it to be very intriguing as critics including myself, are often skeptical of whether viewers choice awards programs are truly reflective of public opinion, which ultimately allows viewers to feel as if they are valued members of the production.

Chapter 8's corresponding article, Crowdfunding: A Spimatic application of digital fandom (Booth,2014), was particularly fascinating to me as I have taken part in crowdfunding on multiple occasions. The reading explained that Crowdfunding campaigns are successful if they are able to, "… engage their fans in a more participatory manner – acknowledging previous fan work, noting the saliency of fun activities in the past, appealing to fan attention in the future – highlight the temporal existence of a fandom" (Booth, p.151). My most significant event is taking part in a Go Fund Me campaign for my boyfriends' band. For several months they had struggled to raise enough money to go on tour across Canada and the U.S. At one point, I had jokingly suggested starting a Go Fund Me campaign but I was not aware of the success it would bring about. Within a week later, my boyfriend had started his campaign to raise $5,000 to put towards touring and equipment costs. They offered merchandise such as t-shirts and an online copy of their album to every person that donated money to their campaign. With the combined promotional efforts of the band, family, and friends; they were able to generate enough awareness using social media to raise $5,500 in 2 months. Although this was on a much smaller scale than a major film or television production, it was still amazing that the internet could accumulate support from people (even strangers) all over the world.

[captainbashybae-blog]

The World is Doing Fine, Kurt Anderson

I came barging into Rosetta Brooks’ Critical Practice long after she discussed Kurt Andersons’ piece on cultural devolution. In fact, two weeks later, I still haven’t deigned a response that seems appropriate for the amount of times I read the following article linked below.

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2012/01/prisoners-of-style-201201

 Last week, someone possibly read my hastily crafted analysis of the Bee Movie, a movie whose entire identity centers around the memes spewed out on the Internet. If I had my way, much like Barry the Bee, I would probably wear the same thing every day out of convenience. And if my mother’s constant nagging held any validity, I have the fashion sense of a strange fruit bat.

Ostensibly speaking, I should have no right to comment on Anderson’s lamentation on the Millennial’s inability to craft its own style and identity; I wear shirts with reprinted Keith Haring designs, I have the music tastes of an 80s diner jukebox encrusted with grease, and I choose to wear jeans the way they’re supposed to be worn. What’s an unfashionable, 21-year-old millennial like me to defend the originality of my generation?

For one thing, Anderson is right to blame the Internet on our obsession with nostalgia. As he puts it:

““We seem to have trapped ourselves in a vicious cycle—economic progress and innovation stagnated, except in information technology; which leads us to embrace the past and turn the present into a pleasantly eclectic for-profit museum”

It’s honestly no secret that people romanticize the past. We forget that the gun slinging, horseback stories of daring and heroism was juxtaposed with the stench of manure and riddled with disease. We conveniently overlook the fact that despite our fascination with the Victorian England world of Jane Eyre, life was probably more like the one written in an Edith Wharton novel. And for all the love we give to the DeLorean now, Dan Harmon, co-creator of Rick and Morty, said the car “was obnoxiously 80s” and agreed the car was a total piece of shit that can barely go past 80 miles an hour on a highway much less 88.

The Internet is just a much larger voice piece to echo our romanticism; we’ve done the same thing in television, books and even through word of mouth on a much smaller scale. In the day and age of the Internet, people don’t have to discover old trends by going to the annals of dusty libraries. We don’t have to rely on MTV and record stores to curate out tastes in music. While a lot of this discovery is through rose-tinted glasses, it’s nevertheless an opportunity for cultivating different tastes without a need to follow a specific decade. To say it’s a devolution of culture is a near sighted interpretation of this trend.

Not to say that there isn’t cultural originality. But as Duchesse wrote in response to Anderson’s piece in her blog (http://passagedesperles.blogspot.com/2011/12/why-personal-style-hasnt-changed-kurt.html), the Radical New style of fashion is expensive. Elevated to some high art, the fashion flaunted at the runways of Fashion Week go for tens of thousands of dollars. People wait in long lines for a white sweatshirt marked up 800% because of a simple logo printed on it. We may look at the thrift store style of Macklemore and appreciate the humble, if slovenly, appearance of Post Malone as exceptions to a trend of high fashion among the elite, but even their clothes cost thousands of dollars.

Fact of the matter is people buy seemingly dated clothes because its accessible and affordable without looking tacky. A good pair of jeans, even after all of its iterations and changes, are just a durable pair of pants to wear on a weekly basis. As Duchesse concluded, “Let's continue to borrow from the past without guilt, to wear our coats longer, carry a cloth tote instead of an It Bag, resist the trill of the fashion timer.” As she also wrote, unemployment is still pretty high, families still struggle in debt and the opportunity for high art to be shared among the masses isn’t there like in the decades of the past; there’s still room for innovation.

At the end of the day, like I said before, I find Anderson’s article short sighted and limited towards a definition that can only work in an era without technology.

One can rightfully argue we see nostalgia play a big role in a necessity to make constant reboots, sequels and rewrites of beloved classics on the big screen. New stories and characters are made on a constant basis, but it’s true that corporate executives choose to invest in tried and true ideas and properties to draw in nostalgia and guaranteed profit.

But Critics of the growing trend of superhero movies often forget that Superman was just a one-dimensional Luddite who personified a response to the Industrial Era and Batman was at one point a campy, goofy character who had bat credit cards and shark repellent.

Without Max Fleischer elevating the Man of Steel’s character in animated form, we might never see Superman become a beloved icon. If it weren’t for the countless writers like Alan Moore and Bruce Timm redefining the character in their own ways, Batman wouldn’t be the nuanced figure fans are infatuated by to this day.

At the same time, the people responsible for redefining existing characters for another medium also use that chance as an opportunity to make their voice heard. Edgar Wright was tasked to make a film adaptation of Scott Pilgrim, a series of comic books written by Bryan O’Malley and went off to make Kingsman and Baby Driver, original movies that are modern successes. Hayao Miyazaki was tasked with animating the TV show version of Lupin the Third, a comic book series written by Monkey Punch. Not only is the character vastly different from the original, but Miyazaki made a movie fans of Lupin consider the character’s most iconic interpretation. Miyazaki went on to make Studio Ghibli soon afterwards.

This is all to underscore that the trend of reinvesting in old properties isn’t a failed opportunity to evolve as a culture. And in all honesty, I see our lack of a singular identity a fantastic thing to celebrate than something to lament. I stopped this discussion on movies, but the same can be said for all sorts of things. Cooking can be vastly different or the same from the past depending on the chef, sports despite the same rules have a different culture to observe. Whether Anderson likes it or not, our cultural identity is not easy to define, and it may not be wholly original—it’s for the individual to decide.

[thewritingheaven]

Star Wars: Feudal Japan Inspired Trilogy (film)

Some years ago I had this idea regarding the STAR WARS universe. And I think I’ve got something special in my mind.

INTRODUCTION

First of all I must say that I am a Star Wars fan but not a knows-everything type of fan, so I feel it’s necessary to show some background while still being honest: I know the universe, I’ve watched all the movies for years and I love it. But I am sure there are other people that could help to evolve all the present ideas, and it would be a pleasure to work together, the realization of a dream that is creating art not only for personal reasons. But I am posting this text here as a way of exercising my writing and general capacity of creating conceptual ideas.

I’ve always felt interested in the universe created by George Lucas, strongly believing that Disney has not only the power but the talent to expand these stories. I feel connected to the fact that it’s one of the best pieces of entertainment focused on discussing the fact that more important than having good ideals, you must choose the right path in life and live by it. Light and darkness are a common theme not only in the saga, but present in our lives. So, I guess it’s a relevant franchise beyond the commercial factor, specially for connecting so many people by the love they have for these stories.

BACKGROUND AND A BRIEF ANALYSIS

I knew Star Wars probably 22, 25 years ago, when I was a child.

I remember being fascinated by the fact that in the same universe we have so many archetypes of badassery, rich imagery and concepts that, at the same time, resemble both what is ancestral, classic and, in some ways, even religious; yet good humor and profoundly futuristic characteristics, but without losing the vintage aspect of things. It’s like if Feudal Japan and the most amazing stuff in a imaginable future had a baby.

Being the first movie from the seventies, I guess it has the all the pros of a era were the world “futuristic” wasn’t only connected to shiny, technological stuff - but with a deep sense of wonder and a very specific “design/functionality/style” approach, but without being… Boring.

We have the simplicity of practical effects, the sophistication of puppetry and special effects, rich soundtrack and even though there were limitations, they rarely seem present, revealing a strong sensibility towards art and respect for/knowledge of the technology at that time. Until now these are great movies, and I think this is what makes them so special - good works of art and entertainment are atemporal.

IN SHORT, THE SYNTHESIS OF MY IDEA

A big part of this universe is the relation between Darkness and Light. The good and the bad. The moral choices and, more specifically, their implications. As a kid, what used to make me more impressed were the Lightsaber duels, and I think I am not alone - these usually have the imposing characteristics of a duel were at any moment someone can be injured not only by the opponent, but by their own weapon, at the same time maintaining a “dancing” factor to it; so it’s like a mix of fencing, with all the think-before-you-strike, and the quickness and thoughtful nature of a samurai combat. And is specifically with my eyes focused on the Feudal, ancient and martial side of things, that I present what I’ve been thinking about.

A CHANGE OF COLORS

The most interesting things to me, as an illustrator, sometimes are related to aesthetics. And as a design student I’ve noticed how it is important to tell a story not only by words, but with imagery, sound and everything related to the message you expect to transmit. Semiotics.

In western culture it’s nearly automatic the association of dark tones and pitch black with “evil”, “darkness”; while white, or colors that tend to be full of brightness, being associated with “good” and “light”. In my proposed idea the relation between “white/good” and “black/evilness” is present, but not factually more important than the way the characters evolve based on their actions. And what do I mean? Let’s talk about the characters.

A FLOWER MADE OF INTENTIONS AND HER MUTE WARRIOR

Darth Vader. Kylo Ren. Paupatine. Anakin… What they have in common, beyond their lust for the Dark Side? They all wear black. Well, surely there’s more to it. They all are passionate; but in the wrong manner. They all know that there’s a good side, there’s the light, there’s the Force - nevertheless, they choose to be connected to the somber, darker nature of it.

The same applies to the Jedis, but on the contrary, their resilience and profound self awareness regarding the Force not only prevails over their fears. It shows to them that no matter what is personal to them, there’s the laws, what is right - and the universe depends on it. So, they must work to help other people and not follow their own personal, selfish plans.

The idea of having a Sith wearing all white always made me smile.

Darth Vader is the synthesis of a fallen spirit, a man that could be the best Jedi and… he is. Somehow. But his fall to his knees when confronted to his fear and pain, what molds his destiny even more than his so discussed nature. With Kylo Ren, we have a man that expects to be so great as his grandfather, but fails to understand that only through self awareness and understanding, it’s possible to master the Force making the most of it.

But what if now, the evil one wear white? If his saber isn’t red, not even only one. But two - one blue, one green. Like a sci-fi Samurai in the veins of Miyamoto Musashi, that dared to walk his own path. Now we have the silent, the thoughtful beast; the warrior yet to be named. But every warrior needs a reason… and his reasons might be bigger than being the best.

Imagine the following scene.

A child in the desert. Suddenly, a massively imposing aircraft cuts through the sky, bringing shadows over the dunes. The kid drops his toy, a X-Wing. His mother hugs him, watching without reaction while an army of Stormtroppers wearing all black exiting the spacecraft.

This time the antagonist has different colors. And things aren’t really that clear… even visually.

His mask, resembling those of samurai warriors in Feudal Japan, is much closer to Vader’s one - yet there’s a mystery attached to it. After laying his feet on the desert, there’s comes his right hand and lover, the one who knows his secrets and plans. A shadowy flower with Asian eyes, and an never ending, magnetic stare.

This is only the beginning…

CLOSING WORDS (REGARDING MY IDEA)

I think there’s much more that I could add to the concept, but the hypothesis of working on something like that with more people is awesome and inspirational. I’ve always associated STAR WARS with Feudalism and Light/Dark, I think I am not really alone regarding the topic, and I guess it could turn out to be a very special trilogy.

Conceptualized some years ago. Written in May 11, 2017 Revised in September 2017.

[nmskinne-blog]

A Productive Semester

If there has been one single motif that I have picked up from my semester from WRT 205, it is that writing, good writing, must always be done with purpose.

But luckily, I did not learn only one thing.

As a history major, I find myself writing frequently, but I’m always stuck analyzing the past. This course shattered that routine for me. Not only was I assigned to read about current events, but I was encouraged to analyze, formulate opinions, catch-up on controversies, find my own perspective and voice, and most importantly, I was taught how to tell the world these of things.

My first big revelation came with the New York Times Exclusive “25 Songs that Tell Us Where Music is Going”. This particular article was written by several authors, each adding their own opinion and creating a sense of meaning to a song, offering several perspectives that I had never considered before. The songs were seemingly completely random, all of different genre, some old some new, some pop some rap, some R&B, and soundtrack. Although some of the songs had been around since my father was my age, the authors carefully weaved together words that allowed the song to become relevant again. For example, writer Jody Rosen added Lionel Richie’s “Hello” to the list, despite the song’s 1983 release. She described the song as 

“A magnificently cheesy ballad that we’ll never stop listening to” 

and that the song 

“has seduced a new generation that discovered the vintage video on YouTube”.

 As a fan of the song, not only did I understand what Rosen was getting at, but I understood how a yearning love ballad from the 80s could tell me “where music is going”.

Another significant thing about this article was the use of media and flashpoints. Giving us this article early on, if memory serves before the first project was due, allowed us time to see and explore great options for our own writing and websites.

After the first project, I remember it was all interviews all the time. Which I didn’t mind so much.

Although we had discussed what a good analysis entailed before this point in the class, things never seemed to click into place for me until we listened to Terry Gross’s interview of the Handsome Family. She used a quote to describe their music from Absolute Sound Magazine:

 “Rennie's creepy modern tales of sudden death, paranormal mysteries, descents into madness and God-fearing maladies unsmirkingly meld with Brett's achingly beautiful melodies and tender ballads.” 

In class, I remember discussing how important of a choice this source had been. Gross had used it to steer the rest of her interview and she must have heavily and accurately analyzed it in order to do so.

To elaborate, this particular interview helped me shape my own and it caused me to go back and explore our source “Writing Analytically”. Here, it expresses several ways in “what it means to have an idea”. Out of all six instances on display, the one that stuck with me was the third:

 “An idea answers a question; it explains something that needs to be explained or provides a way out of a difficulty that other people have had in understanding something.”

I attempted to do the same thing in my own project. I pulled a quote from an online source and based some questions off of it in order to get somewhere. I used the particular quote: 

“Human beings are the only animal species that creates theatre. Understanding theatre helps us understand what it means to be human” 

and asked my interviewee about it. Luckily, my steering led us in some kind of direction, at least.

I considered the review to be the most difficult project. I had never written something of the sort before and struggled to choose my subject. Eventually, I think I discovered what reviews could be all about. My favorite was Pete Well’s review of Guy Fieri’s restaurant. His sarcastic and rude call outs of Guy Fieri really made me laugh and realize that reviews could be fun and meaningful and one could display their thoughts and feelings in a variety of ways. Anthony Lane from The New Yorker was the one who truly inspired my writing, however, because in the end I didn’t feel the need to greatly insult Berry Jenkins’s best picture winner “Moonlight”. When researching Lane, I discovered his review of “La La Land”. This was a film that I had expected to absolutely adore, but instead, felt something that was close to hatred. I didn’t understand why it was such a big hit at all. After reading Lane’s review, I realized the significance of the movie and learned to appreciate the creative choices that were made when making the film. For instance, 

“First, [the film] looks so delicious that I genuinely couldn’t decide whether to watch it or lick it. The cinematographer, Linus Sandgren, shot it on film, and the colors, rather than merge into the landscape, seem to burst in your face.”

The final project, admittedly, was the most fun for me. I not only got to use a topic that I love, but I got the chance to speak about it with someone who knew and understood exactly what was going on. Controversies happen every day and exist in so many art forms that it’s a wonder art is still a universally accepted thing, but thank god it is!

Since I already tune into an online livestream of Eurovision every May, it was exciting to get to do a lot of research on this year’s competition and learn about the politics that are behind some of the strict rules. The most important thing I learned with this project, was that there are always more than just two sides to every story. There were certain perspectives that I found based off of who loved Russia, who didn’t, who decided they were going to tweet about it, who just wanted to see the competition continue, and then there were the people who were outraged over Samoylova’s ban. Upon speaking to my Russian professor, who was very knowledgeable of the controversy, I discovered that there was a whole other topic related to Ukrainian pop that purposefully tries to get on Russia’s nerves and has recently greatly succeeded. In fact, I learned so much that I felt it best not to include everything within the post!

In the end, there are many things I learned from WRT 205. I discovered a voice through new ideas, learned how to wield it and use it and turn it into something that others would be able to appreciate and enjoy. At least I can honestly say that’s it’s been a seriously productive semester.

Navigation: 

Arts Encounters:

1

2

3

Projects:

1

2

3

4

Other:

Mentor Reviewers