#title is just like. relationship network of the actors (actors as in participants)

[masterbaiting]

the german ttoi penetration diagram from the thick of it macht, medien und marionetten by lisa brose, julia linn and michelle magaletta. if you even care

[jbaileyfansite]

Interview with Vanity Fair France (2023)

Jonathan Bailey: celebrity, LGBT rights and cycling, words from an actor “in search of transformation”

New darling of cinema, Jonathan Bailey, the actor who played Anthony in Bridgerton, is taking a step aside in fashion. For Vanity Fair, he talks about his relationship with celebrity and the importance of LGBT representation on screen. Confidences.

What should a person dream of, after having experienced dazzling success all over the planet? Jonathan Bailey was only waiting for one thing: to get on his bike and cycle through the south of France. A memory comes back and his eyes sparkle: “A year ago, I visited Aix, Manosque and Marseille. I was dazzled by the energy of the latter and the beauty of the street art. » So, as soon as he could, this cycling enthusiast took a getaway far from the fog of his native England for a fashion shoot on the Côte d'Azur. At 35, the actor says he is exploring “new facets of his personality”, by posing in front of a camera lens or acting in front of the camera.

In perpetual “quest for transformation”, he is now ready to delve into the “darkest corners” of the human soul, he explains. Far, far from the role of enamored viscount which propelled him to stardom. In 2020, Jonathan Bailey made a notable appearance in the Bridgerton show, on Netflix.

The series tells the adventures of two aristocratic families during the English Regency, between tails, top hats and romantic intrigues. In the first season, he was content to be the protective brother of the heroine, the fiery Viscount Anthony Bridgerton.

The second season propels him to the center of a sentimental intrigue. And Netflix broke a record, with 193 million hours of viewing in the first three days of broadcast. A line of dialogue went viral, cited thousands of times on social networks: “You are the bane of my existence and the object of all my desires. » The whole world fell under its spell. What followed were magazine covers, front rows of fashion shows, red carpets of posh evenings…

After that, the actor changed register and dared to tread the boards of the West End theater in London with a play with the evocative title, Cock. A return to his roots for someone who started, at the age of 6, with the Royal Shakespeare Company. “I feel feverish if I’m not on stage,” he explains. "Acting keeps me fit as an actor. » Another challenge: he will soon be starring in the highly anticipated Wicked, adaptation of the musical comedy dedicated to the witches of The Wizard of Oz, alongside Ariana Grande and Michelle Yeoh (Oscar winner for best actress in 2023). Could he be stalked by madness of grandeur? Never. “There is no guide to learning how to deal with fame,” he admits. "I just focused on my first passions, notably music, surrounded by my friends, my older sisters, my nephews. » A secret: he also got back into some gymnastic movements - which he admits are still "'slightly kooky'. By that I mean: eccentric and approximate."

Some habits deserted along the way. With fame, he lost his anonymity and a little of his tranquility. “I will never give up public transport,” he says. "On the other hand, I tend to “underdress” so as not to attract attention. » His relationship with clothing has thus changed. He is just beginning to master the subtle art of matching his jewelry (like here with Mazarin jewelry). “I’m exploring more of the jewelry world as I get older and more confident. » Until then, he only had one fear: accumulating coins to the point of “resembling the donkey Bourricot”, loaded with mismatched fake coins. No risk. On his wrist, he wears the Omega watch of which he is the ambassador. A big first for him: “I participated in the launch of the Summer Blue Seamaster range this year,” he explains with pride. "I felt the connection of the house with the people of the sea. The travelers, the adventurers. The surfing and paddle enthusiast in me was delighted.»

This digression into the fashion sphere allowed him to meet his favorite designers – Daniel Lee, Jonathan Anderson, Giorgio Armani. Because, in fashion as in cinema, he only aspires to work with “creative people”, he admits. A second of reflection, a burst of laughter. All things considered, he would see himself as a “sheep of a sherpa”. Literally, “sheep” of a creative master who would take him into his merciless universe.

His only condition? Uphold the values that are close to his heart. Starting with LGBTQIA+ representation on screen, which he missed so much during his childhood. He remembers, moved, his meeting with Matthew Rhys, who plays a leading character in the American soap opera Brothers and Sisters: Kevin Walker, a gay lawyer. “This actor was a game changer for me,” insists Jonathan Bailey. "I found a bit of my family in the characters of the series. In the middle, he played a guy who led a fulfilling life and had a wonderful partner.»

The British actor is delighted to see today the very popular “Elite, Heartstopper or even Gossip Girl” taking over, with diverse and varied narrative arcs aimed at young audiences. He himself made his contribution, since his career took off on Netflix as an openly homosexual actor playing an heterosexual character. “It’s as rare as seeing gay actors playing gay characters and being praised for that performance,” he emphasizes. We will soon find him in Fellow Travelers, a historical mini-series centered on a romance between two men in which he co-stars with Matt Bomer. Proof that an actor can absolutely play anything.

To the aspiring actors who follow him on the networks, he provides a lesson: “Representation is crucial, but being an artist also means being able to inhabit a character totally different from your own experience.» He is moved by having the luxury of choosing his projects, thinking back to the time when he went through auditions and accepted all the roles that came his way. When he talks about his job, Jonathan Bailey spins the love metaphor. “When I like a project, I feel a romantic spark. I let myself be carried away by something obvious. » Love at first sight guaranteed.

Source

[kseniyagreen]

The drama Beyond Evil as a philosophical parable about human relationships.

The drama begins in the spirit of the classic detective story. A young policeman, Han Joo Won, arrives in the small provincial town of Manyang, the place where a murder took place 20 years ago and remains unsolved. Han Joo Won is talented, educated and has connections at the very top - his father is deputy chief commissioner of police. Han Joo Won is also full of enthusiasm, bordering on obsession, to solve a case that his father never solved. According to the laws of the genre, we have a limited number of suspects connected by a long history of relationships, keeping their own and other people's secrets. And the biggest secret seems to be Han Joo Won's partner, police officer Lee Dong Sik. Twenty years ago, he was arrested on suspicion of the murder of his sister, but released for lack of evidence.

The plot of Beyond Evil is well twisted, and a new intrigue is revealed behind each denouement. But at the same time, already in the first episodes, I felt that Beyond Evil could be more than just a good detective. And I was not wrong.

From the very first episodes, we plunge into the drama, like into a fabulous whirlpool. We get to know the life of a provincial town. We watch Lee Dong Sik intently, trying to figure out what is behind his extravagant behavior.  Shin Ha Kyun in this role masterfully  balances on the border of light and shadow, sober calculation and madness. In the meantime, we are wondering who he is - a "fallen angel" or a bright angel who fell from a height and broke his wings. We look into the faces of all the heroes, trying to determine which of them is the monster. And gradually we are imbued with the mesmerizing  beauty of this world and its inhabitants. 

At first, Han Joo Won was perceived as an outsider. "Young master" in an expensive suit, completely alien among the ordinary people of Manyang. And it's not just about social status. Han Joo Won chose this role for himself - an independent observer who looks from above at the ugliness of this world and does not touch the dirt. However, the further he progresses in his research, the more personal it becomes, and the mask of equanimity slips from his face. This is how a classic detective story turns into a psychological journey - to feelings and memories walled up in the basements of the soul, into a journey to someone else and to oneself. Because these two processes always go together - to find yourself, you need to see the other and be seen. Find your own reflection in the other person's eyes. 

The drama Beyond Evil is a real maze of reflections. Each significant event, the history of each hero has its own reflection. Some of them are false, some of them are true, but all these fragments, put together, allow you to see the truth. There is such a method of image restoration - from several dull and even distorted reflections, you can recreate a real image.  We recognize heroes by the way they are reflected in each other. And each new meeting, each new dialogue is another step towards finding a real face. This approach makes the image of each character multidimensional and deep.

The drama really captures all aspects of the relationship. Family relationships – healthy or toxic. Relations with oneself, relationships with the world, social relationships - the law and its implementation. Morality as the ability to contact. Breaking up relationships like disappearing. The attitude towards the deceased loved ones and the ways of dealing with loss, with death. Relationships are alive, supportive and healing. Relationships are codependent, burdensome and suffocating. Personality always lives in a relationship. Fencing off from the world, a person cuts off a part of himself and, ultimately, can completely die as a person. This is how a person turns into a monster.

“Everyone in the city is like one family,” says Han Joo Won of the residents of Manyang. And he is absolutely right. All heroes are connected to each other by a whole network of threads. But somewhere these are the supporting threads of life, and somewhere they are suffocating fetters. The family image is central to the drama. Everything begins with it - everything ends with it. For each of the heroes, this word means something different - a project, a burden, a duty, a dream of absolute happiness. But for everyone, it carries a lot of weight. Thus, a small town turns out to be a global metaphor for a community, a social family, in which our humanity is born, but sometimes dies. The density of connections and meanings in the drama is so great that not only each character, but the whole world of the drama is felt as something living, animated. The city of Manyang is not just a place of action, but an independent character. The whole city, as an integral living system, exists according to its own laws. The Beyond Evil story is the story of Manyang's illness and healing.

What's also great about the Beyond Evil is that there is no moralizing in it. Despite the great semantic load, the author does not reduce everything to one idea, does not teach, but shows reality in its complexity, even paradoxicality. Each character is a part of a big picture, an element of the inner life of an integral system. But also everyone is a separate unique person, with their own choice and responsibility for this choice. The story of the Beyond Evil is the story of Manyang, but it’s just as much the story of two people meeting. It is no coincidence that all the main scenes are "doubled". If you look at the titles of the episodes, you can see that the pairing is "sewn" into the very structure of the script. As if the whole story is a long dialogue between two, a series of questions and answers. Each character in the drama is interesting. Each has its own story, its own drama, its own unique personality. But the main axis of the whole story is the meeting and dialogue of the two main characters.

Lee Dong Sik and Han Joo Won, so different, but equally extraordinary, strong in spirit, but practically buried under the rubble of their own psychological trauma. Throughout the drama, they continually drift apart and collide, let go and catch each other, meeting again each time on a deeper level. They go a long way from mutual irritation, exploitation, projecting their fears and expectations onto each other, to true mutual understanding. Throughout the entire drama, the characters stare at each other - with suspicion, with rage, with interest, admiration, tenderness. But invariably - with intense attention, as if looking for something very important in each other's eyes. And in the end they find and return to each other the opportunity to be themselves - whole, feeling, alive. In my opinion, Beyond Evil, like no other drama, showed us an example of perfect human contact. At that difficultly attainable level, when you see and accept another as he is, in his true essence. The bromance of the main characters of the Beyond Evil is so beautiful that it overshadowed all the drama love lines for me. In fact, this is a "love story" - like the love of one soul for another soul. Someone sees them as a mentor and student. Someone sees them as father and son or even as a couple in love. In my opinion, we were specially shown these relations at such a level of generalization that each viewer is free to interpret them in his own way. For me, they are the embodiment of the idea of an existential meeting, beyond any categories.

The Beyond Evil is a theatrical chamber drama. But this simplicity of the means has a deep meaning. The real challenge for an artist is to show everyday reality as something magical, wonderful, and sometimes monstrous. And the Beyond Evil succeeded to create a heroic epic in the scenery of a small provincial town, where a butcher's shop, the basement of an old house or a reed field feel like a mystical place. Where dramatic battles and wonderful metamorphoses take place in the dialogues between the characters. Magic is created in the Beyond Evil, not taking away from reality, but immersing it in it. This is the fantasy world that really exists - in the space of the human psyche, in relationships between people.

This is a huge burden on the actors. They don't just need to play their characters, the actors pretty much create the world and atmosphere of the drama. And they also need to show the development and even the rebirth of their characters. Many characters in the drama wear masks. But in the end all the masks will be removed, ripped off or washed away by the rain. And under someone's mask we will find a monstrous grin, and under someone's - a beautiful face. Shin Ha Kyun and Yeo Jin Goo play characters whose faces change throughout the drama. In each new episode, they experience new trials, different emotions, but their eyes express not only situational emotions, but also profound personality changes. In some scenes, they need to act so subtly that it is like walking on a tightrope. A slightly different expression - and the impression would be wrong. But the actors are perfect in every shot.

The talent of all the participants has created an amazing artistic world. It's like the famous Doctor Who machine - more inside than outside. And you can dive into this depth over and over again, finding new nuances and meanings.

[pascalsky]

Pedro Pascal is flying high on The Mandalorian, but defining success by his earthly bonds

The Wonder Woman 1984 and The Mandalorian star is one of EW's Entertainers of the Year.

Human connection. It’s vital. Especially in a year like 2020. Especially for Pedro Pascal. So it’s ironic that the 45-year-old’s highest-profile success to date is working with an adorable animatronic puppet, inside a chrome helmet he famously can’t take off. "It is why I wanted to do this show. Selfishly, I knew [the Child, a.k.a. Baby Yoda] was likely to make people fall in love with the show," says Pascal of tackling the title role on The Mandalorian, the Emmy-nominated hit Star Wars series, which returned for its second season on Disney+ in October.

The Chilean-American actor has an eye for choosing projects where he’ll stand out, from popular network procedurals including The Good Wife, The Mentalist, and Law & Order to his breakout roles as the charming — and horny — Oberyn Martell on Game of Thrones and, soon after, DEA agent Javier Peña on Net­flix’s Narcos. But it’s the stoic bounty hunter safeguarding a frog-egg-eating 50-year-old toddler that’s made him a house­hold name. The new season of The Mandalorian followed Pascal’s galaxy-traveling warrior as he searched for the home of the Child, generating countless memes in the process.

Playing the Mandalorian has been one of the hardest and most unique experiences of Pascal's career to date. At this point, it's no secret that he wasn't physically under the helmet as much as he would've liked in season 1 and recorded his dialogue in post-production to match what his doubles, stunt actors Brendan Wayne and Lateef Crowder, did on set in the armor. Giving a largely vocal performance was a challenge for a physical actor like Pascal, who is almost unrecognizable when you compare his turns on The Good Wife and Game of Thrones, for example, because of how he carries himself. Yet, being on set way more in The Mandalorian season 2 didn't make his job any easier because he still had to figure how to make Mando compelling while also being as economical as possible in his physical movements and vocal performance.

"I'm not even sure if I would be able to do it if it weren't for the amount of direct experience that I've had with being on stage to understand how to posture yourself, how to physically frame yourself into something and to tell a story with a gesture, with a stance, or with very, very specific vocal intonation," says Pascal, who believes his collaborative relationship with creator Jon Favreau and executive producer Dave Filoni, a.k.a. his "Mandalorian papas," also helped him inhabit the role in season 2.

Speaking of collaboration: Working with comedian Amy Sedaris, who plays gruff Tatooine mechanic Peli Motto, was one of the highlights of The Mandalorian’s sophomore season. “I followed Amy Sedaris around like a puppy. [I was] like, ‘Hey again. I’m not leaving your side until you wrap,’ and she’s like, ‘Cool,’” Pascal says. “I love the Child — it really is adorable — and it is so fascinating to see it work, but somebody who makes you spit-laugh right into your helmet will always be my favorite thing."

Pascal longed for those kinds of interactions during quarantine, which proved difficult for the actor who was living alone in Los Angeles. But he lights up, is even giddy at times, when the conversation turns to bonding with the Community cast right before a charity table read back in May (he filled in for Walton Goggins), or FaceTiming his friends to celebrate Joe Biden and Kamala Harris' election victory on Nov. 7. "Ahhhh! Ahhhh!" Pascal exclaims, reenacting the joyous calls with buddies like Oscar Isaac that Saturday morning. "It was screaming and jumping and dancing and crying…. I very arrogantly took screenshots of everything and [shared them], like, 'I am a part of this!'”

"I'd be less nervous playing tennis in front of the Obamas than I was seeing a reunion of these people that I think are brilliant and have this incredible chemistry with each other and stepping in and having really, really, bad technology in this new space that I had moved into. I really resented having to actually participate acting-wise because there were instances where it was way too much fun to watch."

- PEDRO PASCAL ON SHOOTING THE COMMUNITY TABLE READ.

His appreciation for those around him has only grown during the pandemic. Before flying to Budapest to film The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent with Nicholas Cage, Pascal leaned on his bubble for support. Community's Gillian Jacobs, for example, hosted him for an outdoor socially distanced pizza night every Saturday in the early weeks of lockdown. (He suspects that's why he was recruited for the sitcom's table read when Goggins couldn't participate.) "The friends that got me through it are absolutely everything to me and very beautifully marked in my head. I've got old friends and new friends that literally did nothing short of parent me through the experience," says Pascal, who has "survivor's remorse" for being in Europe right now. "I feel guilty not being [in the States] with my friends through [this tumultuous time] but also grateful that, individually, I was able to gain a little bit of separation from the stress of it."

Those tight bonds helped redefine, or at least clarify, what success means to him. "I want to make sure that my relationships are right, and I want to make sure I'm nurturing meaning in a sustaining way, and that won't necessarily be related to getting good jobs and making lots of money," he says. But he'll take them — as he did for both of his 2020 projects, about which he's thrilled. And how could he not be, starring in two of the year's most feverishly anticipated properties?

Besides The Mandalorian, Pascal appears in Patty Jenkins' superhero epic Wonder Woman 1984, which has endured a Homeric journey to its release (read: several pandemic-related delays). Thankfully, the odyssey is almost over because Warner Bros. recently confirmed that it will open in both theaters and on HBO Max on Dec. 25. Pascal is stoked audiences will finally see his turn as the villainous Maxwell Lord because playing the greedy dream-seller pushed him out of his post-Game of Thrones action role comfort zone.

"With Wonder Woman, [Gal Gadot and Kristen Wiig] are doing the action, baby, and I'm doing the schm-acting!" he says, hilariously elongating that final syllable. "I am hamming it up!" (Indeed, Pascal reveals Cage inspired his performance in one particular scene.)

But Pascal felt he was up to the challenge because everything he needed was right there in the screenplay, which Jenkins co-wrote with Geoff Johns and David Callaham. "I didn't have to take something and figure out how to put more flesh onto it. I had to achieve getting into the skin of what was being presented to me," he says, contrasting the experience with playing a DEA agent for three seasons on Narcos. "For me, Colombia was almost the central character, and then I was allowed to make him depressive and to tonally interpret what the character was. And in this case [on Wonder Woman 1984], there was just so much for me to meet rather than to invent."

He continues: "That was an incredible delight and challenge because Patty Jenkins is a director who loves actors and when she sees she can ask for more, she does. And there isn't anyone better, in my experience, to give more to."

In 2021, he rejoins the good guys as an aging superhero and father in Robert Rodriguez's kid-friendly Netflix drama We Can Be Heroes. The inherent optimism of the Netflix film's title also complements Pascal's hope for the new year. Says Pascal, ”If [fear] can take a little bit of a backseat and not be the main character in everybody’s life, that would be great.”

SOURCE

[feminetflix]

De atracos y ab*rtos - Of heists and ab*rtions or How women are being robbed.

⚠️ this contains major spoilers for LA CASA DE PAPEL / MONEY HEIST season 1, specifically episode 3!

Personally, I have experienced the series la casa de papel (original title) or money heist as progressive, realistic and not afraid to deal with certain topics like domestic violence which I will be commenting on in posts yet to be published, female trans representation and occasionally peppered with numerous feminist parentheses (see characters like Nairobi and dialogues around/involving her opinion).

However, there are certain aspects I did not enjoy to watch / do not support. That is normal and every show has its flaws, those resulting all the more dangerous however, as money heist is not just any show. The series is thanks to its popularity by now a relevant aspect of people’s opinion-forming and plays into the perception of many people all around the world, coming from different cultures and having experienced all kinds of upbringing. The target audience is not specified, yet crime drama (the genre) is estimated to target both females and males aged 15-40 years old. Means, also targeting minors and adolescents. Again, all cultures / religions / races / classes etc etc included.

I am fully aware that this kind of range was not expected and therefore not taken into account by producers, talking about the first two seasons that were solely meant for a Spanish audience, not an international one. (The series was initially intended as a limited series to be told in two parts. It had its original run of 15 episodes on Spanish network Antena 3 from 2 May 2017 through 23 November 2017. Netflix acquired global streaming rights in late 2017). The analysed / discussed scene is indeed part of this maybe not so carefully crafted content. Cough.

Let’s get right into it.

Characters interacting: Mónica Gaztambide (Esther Acebo), one of the hostages who was also Arturo Román's secretary and introduced as his mistress and “Denver” (Jaime Lorente), one of the robbers participating in the heist [Denver is an alias, all robbers being referred to with city names]

Context: Mónica has an affair with Arturo Román (Enrique Arce) -hostage and former Director of the Royal Mint of Spain- which leads to an unwanted pregnancy. Numerous factors influence her (for now) final decision: she doesn’t want the child. Shortly after, the robbery unfolds and she’s taken hostage among other people. She then requests an ab*rtion pill, which at some point arrives in the mint alongside other medical supplies. The scene analysed: one of the robbers (Denver) is supposed to hand her mentioned ab*rtion pill. Before that he holds an emotional speech on the subject, morally risen forefinger, accusations and tears included.

Here the dialogue without comments:

————Now my opinion / the actual post:

“You need money, right?” One might think that the amount of money seen in this frame (20.000,-€ approx. $21.701,50 according to Denver) is an exaggerated, way too generous gesture. Let me tell you, it is not.

According to a 2017 report from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the average cost of raising a child from birth [to] age 17 is $233,610. If that made your heart skip a beat, take a deep breath before you read on. Incorporating inflation costs, it will be more like $284,570. Since that’s based on 2015 numbers, we can expect the cost will be even higher, babies born since then.

[…] This average includes everything from housing, food and transportation to healthcare, education and childcare to clothing, personal care items and entertainment.

Let me now remind you that Mónica is a secretary, so she likely earns (barely) enough money to be financially independent herself (taking into account that she lives near or maybe even in Madrid, her workplace, the Royal Mint situated there, so housing alone is hella expensive) and can’t really expect reliable support coming from the potential child’s father, Arturo Román, either, who initially denied support himself, their relationship a secret to the family and wife he already has. Phew.

Btw: A University of California at San Francisco study found that women who were turned away from ab*rtion clinics […] were three times more likely to be below the poverty level two years later than women who were able to obtain ab*rtions. 76% of the "turnaways" ended up on unemployment benefits, compared with 44% of the women who had ab*rtions.

“Enough to get the kid diapers until he graduates.” The problem or let’s say points raised above are now also being ridiculed or not taken seriously to say the least.

She takes the money, sticking to her decision however. “So, what’s the problem?” Or “Then, what is it?” A million additional things, Denver, believe it or not a potential child is a big deal. That and none of your business.

Also, see the reaction? How he stares at her in disbelief (and possibly even disgust, see the risen corner of his lips?). How he looks at her as if she were heartless, selfish, a monster – the picture often painted in this debate when it comes to women who decide to terminate a pregnancy. How he doesn’t respect her “no, thanks” and continues. Continues influencing her, later on even starts to mansplain his way into her stone cold heart. Okay, then let me continue as well.

“That he’ll f*ck up your life? […] Your son. Better to have your life f*cked up by your son than any of these sons of b*tches. Or me.” Call it ‘f*ck up’ or not – that is entirely her perception, her decision and I’d dare to say…she knows best.

First, because regardless of the fact that she is a woman and you are not – well it is indeed her life and, uhm, excuse me Denver, you’re no sibling, no friend, no acquaintance, quite the contrary, you have known her for what? Three minutes and already jump to conclusions?

Take the privilege of explaining her how a child would f*ck or not f*ck up her life?!!

Secondly, what makes him assume the gender of this cluster of cells, this potential future life, this basis for a potential life that may later on develop into a life (it is not a walking talking baby boy already, my friend!).

Personhood begins after a fetus becomes “viable” (able to survive outside the womb) or after birth, not at conception.

Does it provide a smooth transition for that awfully funny and figurative “son” – “sons of b*tches” (org. Hijo – hijos de p*ta) line or is it literal propaganda?

Why does he say “your son”, although he cannot possibly know? I’ll tell you. In order to distract the audience from the fact that he is referring to a pea-sized basis for a potential life by painting the picture of an already existing male human being. Mónica, do you really want to murder your son? Mónica, does that cute little doe eyed baby boy really f*ck up your life? Yeah, propaganda at its best.

Also, another example for ridiculing the point “a child would destroy my life” by comparing an unwanted pregnancy to a literal robbery at gun point. Great one.

“This f*cks your life up. A kid doesn’t.” Do you see that raised gun, that is quite literally an extension of a raised index finger? Wow, the drama. On a different note, did you notice the symbolism? A weapon stands for death, murder and guess what is also often equated with murder.

“How do you know what f*cks up my life? What do you know?” Finally. Exactly. He doesn’t know her, like at all. He doesn’t know her situation and no, he’s also not the pregnant one or anyone who would have to worry about that.

What do you answer to that, hmm? Let’s make this whole dispute even more emotional and dramatic. That ‘a cute little son isn’t as bad as a robbery’ didn’t convince her?

Let’s try with an extraordinary f*cked up and tragic life story, nobody asked for. Its goal? Showing the oblivious, naive, little secretary what real ‘f*ck up’ means, despite the evident lack of any sort of knowledge when it comes to her life (story). Again, conclusion-jumping and wallowing in prejudice at its best.

Have a look at his expression while ‘lecturing’ her. How disrespectful, how belittling. ‘Oh please, what do you know about life?’. On a wider scale: ‘How could we possibly trust women to rationally and with a clear conscience decide such things for themselves – concerning life and death, if they have not the slightest idea, living in their bubble of security and stability and no real problems’ etc. This is everything but taking women and their reasoning abilities, their judgement seriously.

“My mother was going to ab*rt me.” Now the audience doesn’t only have the mental image of a potential cute little son, it is furthermore provided with the image of a living, breathing human being standing right in front of them. Just look at him and his pleading puppy dog eyes. No actual child actor could have done it better.

Thank god she did not go through with the ab*rtion, right? Oh thank god she was not allowed to.

Taking advantage of this frame to remind you of the fact that we are still talking about a POTENTIAL future life, not an existing one that is nevertheless put above the mother’s already existing life in this impudent, low and unfair debate.

“But first…she inhaled the heroin she had to sell to be able to pay for the ab*rtion. Then she was caught by the police. Between jail, drugs and the police, I was born. What do you know?”

1)Adding even more emotions, subtle accusations and drama to that oh so rational dispute? Check. Making his situation seem two thousand times worse than hers (which he, again, has no clue about)? Check. Subconsciously painting the picture of reckless, irresponsible drug addicts/ “lowlifes” or generally female members of “society’s margins” usually being the ones to abort and make it seem like the state’s or whoever’s responsibility to prevent them from deciding for themselves? Check.

2) Then he even tears her valid ‘what do you know (about my life)’ out of the initial context of being confronted with endless assumptions and prejudice and blows it way out of proportion in order to demonstrate the insignificance of … everything concerning her? Her background, her life, her reasons. Everything.

And FINALLY *drum rolls* the wild theories and hypotheses and presumptions she was dying to hear because since he, I repeat for the twelfth time, has no actual clue about her life, let’s make up one.

“Because it seems that you don’t have a very exciting job. And maybe outside of work your life is not that great either. Or what is it that you do? ‘Kilates’? And Friday night drinks, right? What a f*cking drag. Another plan ruined by the kid[…]” That and the entire following paragraph. Wow. All accusations thrown at women who decide to abort in one.

Because OF COURSE a middle aged, down to earth, intelligent, responsible woman like Mónica Gaztambide has no other reason for terminating a pregnancy than not being able to drink alcoholic beverages or party anymore. Because OF COURSE it is valid to assume a woman or any person for that matter one has known for half an hour and interacted with for literal five minutes has a boring enough life that would not be affected in any way by a pregnancy, birth and ultimately being forced to raise an unwanted child. Because OF COURSE Denver would know how much a pregnancy can affect somebody, especially one that is forced upon a person. Quite frankly he has no idea and no right. The audacity.

“Do [your friends who are also mothers] seem f*cked up? / Do their lives look f*cked up? No, right?” Because you know best. Not only regarding her life but on top of that also that of her friends. Because those pregnancies or motherhood in general did under no circumstances end a career or prevent them from pursuing one in the first place or cause the end of a relationship or force them to stay in a toxic or even abusive relationship or change their financial situation completely or rob them of their fragile financial independence and/or free time altogether or cause any (mental) health complications or … you get the point. Oh, and because their situations are completely identical to Mónica’s situation, that is additionally not half as dramatic as your life story. Of course, Denver.

Seeing the ‘rational’ argument doesn’t really work, let’s add yet another dramatic, emotional rhetorical question. As a precaution.

“Do you know how much a child can love you?”

How could she, being the heartless, cruel, selfish, irresponsible, ridiculous and impulsive murderess you’re ‘exposing’ her as?

⚠️ Another spoiler warning for seasons 3 and 4 and still 1.

Would Cincinnati - that’s her sons actual name, not alias – really love her like he does now?

Friendly reminder: his biological father (Arturo Román) let her know - right from the start - that he wouldn’t take on any responsibility whatsoever, regardless of his later statements about doing so. Why those statements don’t matter? Despite his awareness of her state, despite knowing she was pregnant he shortly after urges her on to steal the cellphone she is caught with right after the analysed scene, ready to risk her life and the potential life of his unborn child. Literally, because as soon as she is caught with it, Berlín orders Denver to execute her.

So to those of you who will now say “but- but Cincinnati is okay and has an amazing life and does love her” etc etc, first think certain things through. If Denver wouldn’t have spared her, if she didn’t just happen to get together with him and if the heist didn’t just happen to work out like that, what then?

Cincinnati would have a different name. What else? Well for one, he wouldn’t have a father (that is now Denver) like at all, resulting in possible daddy issues / issues in general. How I know Arturo, the biological father, wouldn’t be there for them, wouldn’t fulfill all his empty promises?

Did he canonically care about his son? Was he devastated that he was not given the possibility to see him or did he instead focus on that random book of his and his speeches about heroism and honour and so on? If he wouldn’t have called his wife by his mistress’s name and through that expose himself, if his family wouldn’t have left him all alone, don’t you think he would stick to them? Just to paint a picture of who the father is and how he behaves and what we can assume from that behaviour. So the probability was high she would’ve been left alone with I quote “all the love” and of course all the responsibility. It’s a thing, Denver.

Secondly, if she didn’t just happen to turn into a millionaire thanks to the heist working out, would she really be able to provide a life for Cincinnati? Would she really be able to remain financially independent? Would her life at her son’s side really be all peace and harmony if she wouldn’t just so happen to be able to live from heist money?

So many coincidences, so many risks and no security. Can we really blame her? Do we have the right?

With these questions I will end this seemingly endless post and leave you to think about it, reflect certain things and – if you want to – share your opinion(s) with me. Please don’t hesitate to do so, as long as those contain rational arguments and most importantly respect. Thank you for reading!

(Also: sorry for the extensive censoring, I had to, otherwise it wouldn’t appear in the tags.)

[kylerenpenning]

Audience Studies (3P18) Blog #1

Week 2

Our first-week material involved a lot of a general analysis of audiences for us to gain a better understanding of just how much control social media platforms and other online social networking sites have on the way our brains process different things. We developed a definition for what exactly an audience is which we described as a group of people who are hearing or are paying attention to someone proving verbal information. What I found interesting about this content was that it made me realize the large extent to which many people’s happiness, beliefs, morals, and friends are formed from a digital platform. We discussed how things were not always this way and that audiences before were commonly found at live events because social networking had yet to exist. As time has gone on people have developed ways to build an opportunity for an audience to participate in places that may have never seemed possible before until we were met with the introduction of social networking and media. When considering my own experiences as being part of an audience throughout my life, I agree that the number of opportunities to take part in an audience has increased over the years. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, I found myself using many new social networking platforms that were established before the pandemic but were not used nearly as much. 

With the pandemic forcing everyone into their homes for almost a full two months the benefits of having digital audiences are obvious. Multiple times a week I use platforms like Zoom, Microsoft Teams, and Lifesize to join lectures and seminars which is a prime example of a way that I take part in the audience every day now. Compared to life before the pandemic when most of my audience experiences happened in person such as going out to moose on Wednesday every week and having a couple of drinks with my peers and enjoy a night out. I notice switching to a digital technique to host lectures increases the sizes of the audiences substantially because when the lectures took place in person, people are much more likely to be lazy and not show up to class. With lectures now being online, it makes participating in the audience much easier because there is no need for travel. You can see the total number of viewers in each class and there are consistently over 100 people from all over the world joining the cyberspace environment which I would estimate to be a huge increase in participation levels.

To compare my personal experiences with digital audiences during the COVID-19 pandemic to the material we discussed in class, I think of how in chapter 1, Sullivan spoke about how audiences are for the most part working-class people who have no title or place in society yet and are working to do so. (Sullivan, P. 13) I interpret this as students attending digital lectures are working towards their degrees to get the job they have a passion for because they do not have a label yet in society and once we get a career we get a sense of purpose in life because we mean something to a greater society. The benefits I gained from having to get up out of bed to go to class was that I would gain a sense of routine in my life and I got to meet many new people who I now consider my friends. So, although audience sizes have increased in quantity because it is easier for people to attend lectures when they do not have to go anywhere, however, the quality of the audience experience deteriorates. There are certain components you need to achieve satisfaction with your experience as an audience member and doing strictly digital audiences like we have been doing this year has not provided the physical interaction needed to get the full experience. 

One of the final main points from the first week is the power of media and ability it must oppose destructive information into people's minds and shape their views on the world in a particular way. The mass, agent, and outcome are key terms that are an extremely important part of the process that is essentially capable of inducing detrimental norms in society that place some to advantage and others at a disadvantage. Using the same example as before about online lectures taking place at Brock this year, I will indicate which parties would be considered the mass, agent, and outcome. The agent is the audience member who is considered free to choose whatever content they want to consume online which is the students at Brock who are selecting the courses they want to study because it suits their interests. The mass is where we see the content being provided by professors at lectures and seminars and since students have no pre-existing knowledge of most of the topics we discuss in school it is their first time consuming such information, students must trust in the information hoping that it will benefit them in their future life. I think about this all the time when I go to class and why I am happy to be considered as an audience member of the Media Communications program. The outcome is the overall effect that the mass provided on media platforms have on its audience members. When I reflect on my audience experience, I firmly believe the outcome of me being a member of the media communications audience has been beneficial for me and has given me the skills to navigate through social media platforms with an awareness to the issues it contains which I would have never gotten if I didn’t trust the process and the information they were providing me to be correct.

Having the skill to be aware of the power of social media and the conflicts that can arise if you participate in audiences on their platforms I think will be extremely beneficial in the future because it is inevitable that new technologies and ways to interact on digital platforms rather than in person will begin to accelerate rapidly.

Week 3

This week’s content focuses on stories, primarily we were concerned with who the storyteller is because it influences the audience who is listening. If the storyteller or leader is well respected by the audience it is more likely that the information he is providing will stick with the audience and it will be carried on throughout the audience as they spread the information to their peers. There is a danger behind this however because if there is falsified information being provided and the audience receiving has trust in the storyteller that they are being given valid information it may cause false information to be spread. An example from my life when I trusted the information I was being given from a speaker is when I participate in sports betting, on sports that I am unfamiliar with. As an audience member with little knowledge of the sport of football, I ask my friends who are big fans to give me some advice on who they think is the better team in hopes that I will obtain new knowledge that will give me an edge in my bets. However, sometimes I mistake the person I ask for information as someone who has good knowledge of the game of football and I take their advice without hesitation because I discredit my ability to make an intelligent decision on my own. This causes me to place money on a team that I may not have picked had I not been told information from a third party and I end up losing the bet and my money. 

We can see this process happen on a much larger scale of audiences like in politics where people who are labeled “leaders” have a job to lead an entire country, one of the biggest and challenging audiences to handle. Governments have access to media platforms that hold substantial amounts of power because they can simply send out messages that will circulate through various media platforms. Government parties utilize this chain reaction to create social norms in society and try and push people to think a certain way because they know the information they put on social media spreads like wildfire! Week 3’s reading by William Brown supports the claim we examined in class as the study conducted concluded that “the rise of celebrity culture in the late 20th century has given media personae a privileged position of social influence that can shape, reinforce, and inculcate values and beliefs and promote specific social practices within diverse audiences across socioeconomic, geographic, and national boundaries” (J. B, Williams. P, 259).

Where do I even start?! The number of experiences I have had where the stars and celebrities I see on the digital networking sites I use like verified Instagram and Twitter accounts, popular Netflix actors. The most influential social media influencers in my life are on Twitch and YouTube because these two platforms allow me and the millions of others who watch to build a relationship with the star. This creates a feeling for the audience member that can seem like there is an actual relationship between the audience member and the celebrity. Twitch is a prime example of how a celebrity can have a direct influence on their audience because the influencer is live streaming and directly interacting with their fans. This creates a connection that a video was taken days/weeks in the past and edited cannot do for an audience like on YouTube which often the biggest stars are people who make ‘vlogs’ covering the activities they do in their daily lives but there is no live interaction with the individual the audience is viewing. This still has a large impact on the audience members because it gives them an idea of what the perfect life ‘should’ look like based on what they are watching a privileged celebrity vlog. The large influence that vloggers and streamers have validates Williams claims that the rise of celebrity culture in the late 20th century has given social media influencers a privileged position of social influence that can shape, reinforce, and skew values and beliefs on diverse audiences in any given society.

We also covered the Dependency Theory which explained some other factors which would affect peoples’ need for social media to hear about the stories they see every day, provide them with entertainment, and connecting them with their friends without location/distance being a factor. Dependency theory explains that all societies vary in structural stability so poor and underdeveloped countries will be less dependant on technology because there is less available to it and they have to learn to live and entertain themselves in other ways. Developed countries with plenty of wealth will have more ways to access technology that provides us with the entertainment and feeling of comfort that our phones give us every day of our lives. As a person who grew up extremely lucky growing up in Oakville, Ontario I always had the privilege to get my hands on the newest technology. When I graduated elementary school is when I got my first phone which looking back on it seems absurd but within the very first week of having the new phone I had signed up for Instagram, Facebook, and Snapchat. The cognitive effects that the exposure to these apps at such a young age must have had on me is scary to think about. Dependency theory explains that there are several behavioral and cognitive effects social media has on a person including an increased likelihood of depression and anxiety. I can see in some people I have been around where they always seem worried about something that someone is saying or doing online. Eventually, it makes them get so anxious just not knowing certain things and a lot of the time can create the feeling that things are being said or done behind your back online where what’s being said can easily be deleted. 

Week 3 also looked at Mass media and further breaks down how persuasion through the media occurs which creates subgroups of people in society who share common beliefs, lifestyles, humor, etc. In the lecture, we learned that there are two components to mass media which are the opinion leader who consumes large quantities of mass media, and then there are people who do not consume as much media. However, since they do not consume enough media in their own time, they come into contact with the opinion leaders they get persuaded by them. 

 Week 4

The evolution of public opinion was a major topic of discussion during this week as we learned that it was not always easy like it currently is to freely express yourself because there are so many platforms you can do so on. With the introduction, people are constantly allowed to express their opinion, verbally reject opposing opinions, and interact with one another to share opinions until we form what is known as social norms. Over time, audiences start to catch on to certain ideologies that are widely accepted by society, and people’s opinions can switch because of the pressure they face going against what society has deemed the dominant ideology. Multiple situations come to mind when I think about my audience's experiences and how the dominant ideology changed the way either myself or someone else was acting. 

Going out to the bars on the weekend last year at school is an audience experience where I have seen this process happen multiple times. The vast majority (over 90%) of people who are at the bars are from Brock University and I like to think of me as being a member of an audience because everyone there usually had the same goal in mind, to have a fun night out with friends and have a few drinks. Referring to the idea of public opinion, there was a public opinion in terms of how people should act and what ‘normal behavior’ looked like at the bar. Drinking, dancing, singing along to the songs being played were all things that the majority of people were doing as someone who doesn’t enjoy dancing too much I can say you feel like an outsider when your not performing the activities that you see in most of the people who go to your school are doing. This proves that a public opinion is formed when there is an ideology that is more preferred by the public. My small-scale example at the bar can be amplified to see the same pattern happening in any given society as when people see on social media platforms that certain opinions are respected in society while others are silenced. This creates a barrier and can make it very difficult for people who do not follow the norms to express their opinions and be active members of society. At the same time, it benefits the majority of people because they agree with what society has chosen to be the dominant ideologies.

Another topic of focus this week was how did we get to how things are the way they are in terms of creating a public opinion. The evolution of popular opinion is the key factor that formed ‘public opinion’ because logically the popular opinion is what is preferred by the majority of the public and is likely to have some sort of role in society. Plato the Athenian philosopher believed the power should be placed in the people to make their own decision, but he was skeptical that the ordinary person would not be able to make a rational decision. By mapping out the contrast between the two types of thinking, we were able to grasp the idea of why Plato believed that ordinary people’s opinions are sometimes disregarded by society. The contrast between Doxa and episteme helps us grasp the concept of how the public has the power to express their knowledge. Doxa is explained to be the popular belief in a society that does not have the warrants needed to validate their claims being made so that they could be mediated and turned into laws or social norms in society. Episteme is the knowledge that is validated by scientific principles and is cemented in society due to the unchanging nature of the world. In the real world, we see these two concepts surface all the time. For example, people who show up to protest in large groups would be considered Doxa knowledge because it is an opinion being expressed by the general public and for the most part comes from a suppressed group looking to create change that will benefit their lives. We often see protestors gathering outside government institutions because government officials are the ones with episteme knowledge who can take the ideologies they hear from the general public and create an official change in society. 

Week 5

          Week 5’s material analyzes audiences as active users of media and examines people’s use of media to give them the gratification they need to be satisfied with oneself, as well as what motivates the users to pay attention to live blogs/vlogs. It was addressed that people follow live blogs to fill their need for entertainment, to learn new information, hear other opinions, and express freely express their own opinion. The factors I just listed are considered the agents that motivate users to actively participate in these sorts of activities like streaming platforms that provide entertainment. With the restrictions in place currently to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic most people have been stuck in their homes and unable to do the things they would normally do to keep entertained like hanging out with friends, going out on weekends and socializing with new people, or attending concerts and other festivals that occur annually. The streaming industry has come out and said their platforms have benefitted greatly from this pandemic because the more people are stuck in their homes bored, the more people end up using streaming platforms to occupy their time. In my life, I have used streaming websites like Twitch and Mixer for years before the pandemic was happening and I have noticed a big difference in viewership numbers since the pandemic began. The games I watch mostly are Fortnite and Call of Duty and before the pandemic, there were roughly 50-70 thousand people watching streamers who are playing these games. Since quarantine started viewership numbers have increased to well over 100 thousand people concurrently watching Fortnite and Call of Duty streamers which validates the claim that the streaming industry has benefitted tremendously from the global pandemic. 

              Operationalizing audiences was also a major focus during the lecture which essentially explains why society has to invade people's privacy to figure out what their interests are so that they can keep producing commodities that they know will be successful in the market for the future. Quantifying an audience and analyzing the data is super necessary for theories to be created because there needs to be hard evidence to make a theory about people’s online interests and to find patterns about what people engage with. In the lecture we talked about how “quantitative data from the systems that track people’s online activities can help streamline audience diversity, can be exchanged for money, and have an air of objectivity.” (Good, Jennifer. 19 Oct 2020). Right now, there is an ongoing controversy in the United States involving the social media site TikTok because it is a Chinese owned website. America's government wants to ban TikTok in the United States, removing it from the millions of users in the country who use the app every day which would also mean the entire community that had been developed on a virtual platform would be removed in an instant. Why would they do this you may ask? Well, it is warranted in my opinion, the reason being that China has supposedly been able to freely access confidential information on all the American users who have an account on the app. This means financial information, personal information like date of birth, even access to a location in some cases are invaded by Chinese ownership of TikTok. America’s government is scared of what China is using the data for and so they want it banned completely in the States. 

 Quantitative data also allows producers to see data so that they can have more control over what is being produced as well as how much needs to be produced which helps prevent a case of overproduction. Small companies often fail because they overproduce and spend too much money on production to the point where they cannot end up making a profit. If producers can see how many people are engaging in a product or business, they will produce the correct product needed to support customers. 

Have you ever walked into a fast-food place and seen the screens that prompt a survey on their service while you were ordering at the restaurant? Or seen a survey on Twitter from Wendy’s or McDonald’s about what people would like to see on their menu? This is the kind of data that digital technology has allowed companies to collect to change their style of business to attract the greatest number of customers. Thus, quantitative data is important for companies to be aware of because it allows them to be one step ahead of their audience members and provide them with the commodities that will make them the most profit. Sometimes problems can arise from this because they may start to lose sight of what is in the best interest of their loyal audience. I’ve seen many companies or brands that started beloved by their audiences change because of their obsession over making maximum profit and they start producing commodities that are cheaper in quality for the customers but benefits the company because their profits will increase. 

Nike is a good example of this when the information came out that they use slave workers to mass-produce their products because it means saving a lot more money on good quality work that meets basic human rights and needs. Because of Nike’s incredible ability to brand itself, it had the whole world thinking that if you buy their products it makes you superior to someone without Nike. The reality is it is extremely disappointing what media platforms have been able to do for Nike by covering up the sickening backstory of their products with commercials of people’s favorite athletes and celebrities wearing their brand which makes ordinary people fall in love with the company. 

[insideanairport]

A New Film-school for Moving People

❍❍❍

The Interview with "Academy of Moving People and Images" artistic-director Erol Mintaş and curator Elham Rahmati took place in an unplanned café somewhere in Helsinki. The new school is free of charge and open to all “mobile people”. The next deadline for application is on the 28th of February.  By Hami Bahadori 31.01.2019 ---

Hami Bahadori: Before we start, how do you feel about the opening of the Academy at the Museum of Impossible Forms? I was a bit surprised to see that many people came on a random Friday to Kontula, while the metro was shut down?

Erol Mintaş: It was great, even though the metro was closed. [laugh]

Elham Rahmati: I think a lot of people are excited about the project and we already received a lot of support.

Hami: Great, let’s start. I am in love with the name of the academy, do you want to tell me where the name has come from?

Erol: There is, of course, a story behind it. When we were doing our test-workshop for the film academy, the name was “Mobile Film School”. And the word mobile referred to our life situation of being mobile. Then we found out there was a school with the same exact name somewhere in the U.S.

Elham: Conceptually, that school was completely different. They were going from city to city. So, the school itself was mobile and had nothing to do with mobile people.

Hami: [laughs]

Erol: We already knew what we want. The school is for film and moving image, and it is for all the people who have been experiencing movement in their lives. So, the name naturally came together. You know, the name is a very difficult issue. As a filmmaker, I know, because when I make films, finding the titles is very difficult. It was the same with the finding the right name for the film academy

Hami: I love that the word “people” is before the word “images”. Was it also important that the idea of movement also applies to the school?

Elham: Yeah, that’s basically the main point. It serves people who in one way or another have experience mobility. Mobility, not in a sense of traveling a lot, but the experience of relocating home. It can be for many reasons such as study, work, migration, seeking asylum, etc.

Erol: Also, we don’t want to again frame people with the same mainstream words that carry a certain weight with them, whether positive or negative. We have to reinvent the vocabulary and also question the existing vocabulary that is used.

Elham: Yes, and that’s the reason we stress on using the term “mobile people” is that it conveys what we want to get across. For example, words such as refugee and asylum-seeker have been used and misused in so many problematic ways that are stigmatizing people. Once we say “mobile people” it puts everyone together.

Hami: Can anyone come and participate, or do people have to have some relationship with mobility.

Elham: Anyone who comes from a mobile background is welcome to apply. Be they migrants, asylum seekers, student, etc. If someone is a Finnish citizen but their parents come from a mobile background they’re still eligible to apply.

Erol: There are also these words that try to push people in a corner, frame them and keep them there. I don’t believe in having any kind of border between people. We don’t want to be in a position of power although we realize sometimes it is inevitable, our academy can only admit a few people and that selection process already puts us in that position. The whole idea of the Academy is that we provide a common ground, to share knowledge, tools and networks. We are also learning along with everyone else who’ll be participating.

Elham: It is not just about lecturing participants. The lecturers are also there to learn from the participants --we prefer to call it participants rather than students.

Hami: So, the School is going to be based in Finland? And participants have to be physically present.

Elham: In keeping the idea of moving people and images, the academy is also going to be in a moving state within different institutions and platforms in Finland. Another important aim of the academy is to provide different networks. After finishing the 1st year, the participants are going to be familiar with so many institutions, and you will be connected to the arts and cultural scene and a receive a certain degree of visibility and networks which you can take advantage of in your career. It is a beautiful thing that so many institutions and actors within the cultural scene of Finland have come together to support this project. It is very encouraging and tells us a lot about the will that exists for change when it comes to diversity and representation.

Hami: Let’s go way back. To some degree, I am familiar with both of you and your art-works. I think, there is something fascinating there, something between history and geography and also the differences in culture. So, now I want to ask about history. How did the idea of the school come to you in the first place?

Erol: When I lived in Istanbul, my filmmaker friends and I were interested in issues such as “How to make the film industry more diverse?” We started to work on this issue, tried to create films, spaces and also platforms. Simultaneously, I kept making my own films and telling my stories. But as you know, in Istanbul, the situation is very different compared to here [Finland]. When I came here, these stories and issues stayed with me. I met a lot of people who had a mobile background in multiple cities around the world. In Paris, Berlin, Stockholm, LA and other places. People were talking about how difficult it is to get into the film industries, especially when you are new in a place.

Later I was in the jury of the Istanbul Film Festival. I watched a lot of films in one week. And almost all the films were “talking about” immigration. Actually, not just film festivals, but Biennials, galleries, and other places.

Hami: What do you mean “talking about”? “more voices” or the same people representing others and mediating?

Erol: Same people from certain geographies keep telling stories about vulnerable people and mediating them. At that time, I started to feel very weird, I wasn’t able to really explain myself. It’s very personal. It was two years after this experience that I said to myself, why not I share my network and give whatever I have to others, so they can tell their own stories.

Hami: It’s very interesting because these issues also exist in the art world. We see a shift in perspective, on “who is representing who”. Not only in topics related to migration, but also on more universal phenomenon such as climate change. In 2017 Venice Biennale, we saw paintings by the Inuit artist Kananginak Pootoogook which was a surprising move by the curators. Instead of curating an artist from NYC or Berlin to talk about climate change they picked an indigenous artist to talk about his personal experiences on colonialization and its relation to climate change.

Elham: Hmm. But very slowly. There have been so many outrage from our communities on this issue. “stop misrepresenting us, stop speaking for us”. More people are realizing that there is something very problematic. They either speak for us or bring in people from our communities who they can manipulate into telling stories that fit their political agenda. By they, I mean different Western foundations, production companies, etc. who profit from projecting and selling a certain image from a non-western world that is miserable and helpless and needs to be liberated or intervened in.

Our aim is to have everyone tell their stories in the way they like. Of course, we have our own red lines ––As long as your films are not sexist, xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic or contain any other form of hate speech or patronizing attitude towards a certain minority.

Erol: This doesn’t mean that they can’t talk about things they like. If people feel they want to talk about some issues, they can do it as long as it’s their choice. But, also, we have to question what are the choices and where are they coming from? We should think about how much of our choices are really our own.

Elham: We encourage everyone to tell their stories in a way that is not affected by the market. There is a big difference between stories that actually come from immigrants and their life experiences versus the stories with certain formulas that for example Hollywood tries to sell, immigrant success stories, grateful refugee stories, etc. We should be able to imagine and dream of a film industry that is open to more honest and less market-driven representations of mobile people.

Erol: We are not expecting our participant to only make immigrant or refugee stories, they can tell us a love story or a science fiction one. They don’t have to share their personal stories if they don’t want to.

Hami: When it comes to film, the other problem here is the role of the education, which most of the times boils down to ethics. In another word, while school is trying to make “successful artists”. It’s telling students what not to do if they decided to go somewhere exotic. Particularly, in documentary and ethnography film-making, which still has a reminiscence of the detached, sovereign and unchallenged gaze of the observer.

Erol: Every media has its entertainment part that deals with capital, selling, celebrity stuff, famousness, etc. It also has another part which enables people to express their ideas and philosophy or to change something by sharing and communicating. This is what we call the “artistic” part of any kind of media which lets you communicate what you deem as valuable to the audience.

Elham: We have to mention something important here about the academy and one of the things that makes it unique among other things. A free film-school with an English working language doesn’t exist in Finland. As far as I know, there is no such a platform in Europe either. Film academies charge students very high amounts of money which very few people can afford. This is one of the reasons that film industries are often elitist and very difficult to enter.

Erol: A free film school is so unusual that some people think that there is a fee for this academy as well, I want to clarify that AMPI is completely free of charge.

Elham: It’s interesting, We are getting messages from people in other countries across Europe asking if they can apply.

Hami: …But they have to be here physically. right?

Elham: Yes, and the priority is for people who are already in Finland. But if you don’t live in Finland but are committed to moving here for the sake of this academy then you can certainly apply and we will take your application into consideration.

Erol: The participants have to be present at least, 80% of the time. And for us, the most important thing is the result, which is the films. We wish our participants to make strong films at the end of the year.

Elham: We also hope that AMPI can create a strong community, generating collaborations between artists and lecturers, or lecturers among each other.

Erol: We have a lot of the key players in the Finnish film industry and the art-scene working with us, whether as collaborators or in the board of advisors. Organizations such as YLE, The Finnish Film Foundation (SES), Aalto University (ViCCA, Critical Cinema Lab), Goethe Institut Finnland, G.A.P, HIAP, Design Museum Helsinki, Museum of Impossible Forms, Third Space, Taidekoulu MAA, Caisa and Publics.

Elham: About the participants, we encourage everyone from different levels of professional backgrounds to apply, even though a lot of people might say for example that I already have a BA or another sort of training in film. You can always get to learn more from our team of lecturers and also participants.

Hami: When is the deadline to apply?

Elham: 28th of February 2019 and the classes start in April 2019.

Hami: Thank you very much

Image source: http://academyofmovingpeopleandimages.com/

[elbertwise]

What is Your Instant Online Dating Turn-off.

Finding out who's dating Jeremy Camp is comparatively straightforward, however preserving observe of his flings, hookups, and breakups is harder. Finding out who is dating 24KGoldn is relatively simple, but keeping observe of all his flings, hookups, and breakups is tougher. NBC News Better is obsessed with finding simpler, healthier and smarter methods to dwell. Jeremy Camp, like most celebrities, prefers to maintain his personal and love life private, so keep checking again as we add new dating information and rumors to this page. Andre Braugher, like most celebrities, prefers to maintain his personal and love life private, so verify again incessantly as we will proceed to replace this web page with new dating news and rumors. They play on emotional triggers to get you to offer money, gifts or private details. Dating and romance scammers can even pose a danger to your personal safety as they are sometimes part of international criminal networks. Due to our smartphones, we can uncover compatible people through friendship and dating apps and enhance our communication channels, in addition to extending our social networks. C as well as non-radioactive carbon. Some refugees have additionally turn out to be homeless after relations with hosts broke down or as a result of housing was not nicely vetted.

How many relationships did Jeremy Lin have in the past? Jeremy Lin will not be dating anybody as of 2022. Jeremy נערות ליווי בחיפה is a 33-yr-old man. Kate Taylor Moore is Malcolm Gladwell’s girlfriend as of 2022. In the 12 months 2022, they began dating. His girlfriends: Previous to Kate Taylor Moore, he had quite a few relationships. Eion Bailey’s wives: He had at the least two relationships prior to his marriage to Weyni Mengesha. Eion is forty five years previous, whereas Weyni Mengesha is N/A. India is 46 years previous, while Chris Tucker is 50 years old. Paige is 29 years outdated, whereas Maurice Harkless is 28 years old. He was born in England, United Kingdom, on September 3, 1963. Malcolm T. Gladwell is his birth title, and he is presently fifty eight years old. If you are one youthful girl dating an older man or older man in search of youthful lady looking for potential actual matches effectively, Dating An Old Man is the precise place.

Jeremy Lin was born in Torrance, California on August 23, 1988. Jeremy Shu-How Lin is his delivery identify, and he is 33 years outdated. When he was 12 years old, he frequently took flying lessons from his father. Jeremy Shu-How, Ph.D. Lin is an expert basketball player in the National Basketball Association for the Brooklyn Nets (NBA). On August 23, 1988, the American basketball participant was born in Torrance, California. On June 8, 1976, the American television actor was born in Santa Ynez Valley, California. Eion Bailey was born on June 8, 1976, in Santa Ynez Valley, California. Eion Bailey was previously married to Sarah Wells (2008-2009). We’re currently trying up details about previous dates and hookups. Liz Katz is not married. Jonathan Morris is just not married. Jonathan Morris has had at the very least one previous relationship. Is James Roday concerned in a relationship? What is James Roday’s Relationship Status? What is India Arie’s present relationship standing?

Chris Tucker is India Arie’s boyfriend as of 2022. They started dating round 2007. He is a Virgo and she is a Libra. Dianne Doan Wiki: Her Age, Height, Parents, Ethnicity, Dating Affair, and Boyfriend! Is Jack White Dating Anyone In the meanwhile? Is India Arie Dating Anyone For the time being? We’ll look at who Taina Licciardo-Toivola is dating right now, who he’s dated prior to now, Taina Licciardo-girlfriend, Toivola’s, and his dating historical past. We’ll have a look at who Ryan Ketzner is dating right now, who he’s dated previously, Ryan Ketzner’s girlfriend, and his dating historical past. We’ll take a look at who Jeremy Lin is dating proper now, who he’s dated in the past, Jeremy Lin’s girlfriend, and his dating historical past ahead. We’ll take a look at who Madison Pettis is dating proper now, who she’s dated prior to now, Madison Pettis’ boyfriend, and her dating historical past forward. We’ll take a look at who Jeremy Camp is dating right now, who he’s dated previously, Jeremy Camp’s wife, and his dating history ahead. We’ll look at who Allen Payne is dating right now, who he’s dated previously, Allen Payne’s girlfriend, and his dating historical past forward. Prior to now, Malcolm had at the least a few relationships.

[sigmastolen]

dsc 2.03 “point of light”

Hm.

spoilers.

i love amanda but i officially Do Not Like this new chapter of spock’s backstory.  like.  the spock we know is, though outwardly unemotional, such a caring and compassionate individual; i reblogged a post last week about how an “emotionally compromised” spock is full not of anger but love, grief, and regret, but see also (off the top of my head) “The Devil in the Dark” for more evidence of spock’s empathy and compassion.  maybe it truly is the red angel that “changed him” or maybe sometime this season spock and michael will reconcile and he’ll be able to become the spock we know but for now, well, i Don’t Buy It and i’m not convinced it’s good writing and frankly i also don’t need whatever woobified spock will inevitably emerge from the fandom consciousness 

relatedly, amanda’s “i didn’t love him enough” speech was Exhausting, not because of the actor or the character but because that idea is so damn tired and i just... don’t need to see another iteration of the Mommy Issues story play out, thx

holy shit may is a mirror spore? holy shit i Do Not Trust her but i am definitely invested in this storyline.  what does she want with stamets? what was she grooming tilly for? to become killy? to extract culber from the network?

can we please develop that dark matter suction technology to remove a fungal infection bc our current treatment course of ointments &c. is Not Very Effective

klingon storyline off to a rocky start; also, i am bothered by the contradiction of their hair growing so fucking fast and also alexander rozhenko reaching his late teens in ~8 years, but the voq/l’rell child is still a tiny preemie?  idk, whatever, we’re never gonna see it again.

frankly i’m not super invested in the politics of klingon unification right now, beyond the basic desire to get the empire into a more familiar configuration to enable the rest of prime!canon, but okay, show

the l’rell/tyler relationship actually is pretty compelling, too bad they compressed the whole potential journey into tyler’s “i saw the child and magically felt feelings!” bullshit (my Childless By Choice feelings are very ugh, breeders today, sorry not sorry) and then separated the characters, likely for the long term

i’m Very Into l’rell taking “mother” as her ~fiercer title~, it’s very daenerys targaryen, and it makes sense in a culture that sees women as powerful authority figures in a family but that does not allow them equal participation in politics.

not very interested in section 31 either tbh, but i am still glad to see michelle yeoh.  i enjoyed the way she smiled at the baby and then pretended she didn’t.

“i’ve heard rumors about black badges” uh no actually, isn’t one of the key points of the section 31 mythos that literally nobody outside of section 31 knows about section 31????

anyway.  tentatively excited for the love of my life, number one, to appear next episode!  significantly less excited for the kelpien illness storyline, which looks like it’s going to be an emotionally manipulative waste of screentime!  yay!

[helloworlddemo1122-yahoopar-blog]

2018 Tribeca Film Festival Puts Focus on Women in Time’s Up Era

In the wake of the Time’s Up movement, which aims to eliminate the imbalance of power in the workforce and bring gender parity behind the camera, the Tribeca Film Festival becomes the first major film festival to pro-actively attempt to balance its representation; an effort championed by festival co-founder and CEO Jane Rosenthal and EVP of Tribeca Enterprises Paula Weinstein. Of the feature films presented this year, nearly half are directed by women -- 46 percent of the 96 titles -- the highest percentage in the festival’s history. Among them are Oscar-nominated Amy Ziering (The Bleeding Edge), Guardians of the Galaxy star Karen Gillan making her directorial debut (The Party's Just Beginning), festival opener Lisa D’Apolito (Love, Gilda), documentarian Madeleine Sackler with her first scripted feature (O.G.) and Susanna White (Woman Walks Ahead starring Jessica Chastain).

Of the filmmakers participating in the Tribeca Talks: Directors Series, three of the five slots belong to Lesli Linka Glatter, Laura Poitras and Nancy Meyers, with the Tribeca Talks: The Journey making its debut with a conversation with Sarah Jessica Parker, who stars in the Tribeca world premiere of Blue Night, about her career both on and off-screen.

Perhaps the most direct connection to the Time’s Up movement is the legal defense fund and the festival’s inaugural New York event: a day of conversations with women raising awareness about inequality in the workplace. “While you will see some of the leaders of the movement -- Ashley Judd and Julianne Moore -- you’re also going to have conversations about the farm workers, what's going on in legal aid, what goes on with human resources,” Rosenthal tells ET. “So, it's really a day that will hit more than just the entertainment business.”

Of course, the draw is the films and TV shows being presented -- and female-centric narratives are among the highlights ET previewed ahead of the festival, including a documentary that examines Barbie’s place in a modern era (Tiny Shoulders: Rethinking Barbie); scripted stories about a woman reigniting long-dormant passions after returning to the Orthodox Jewish community where she grew up (Disobedience with Rachel Weisz and Rachel McAdams), estranged sisters driven to extremes when their mother dies (Little Woods starring Tessa Thompson and Lily James) and a girl forced to attend gay conversion therapy (The Miseducation of Cameron Post starring Chloe Grace Moretz).

Here is ET’s selection of the must-see films and TV pilots at the 2018 Tribeca Film Festival, which runs April 18 to April 29 in New York City:

The American Meme

This intriguing new documentary takes a deeper look at what it’s like to be a viral sensation -- and the darker side to internet fame. Paris Hilton, Brittany Furlan, DJ Khaled and more are featured in the film, offering unique perspectives on their relationship with social media, fandom and the many ups and downs of celebrity. (Directed by Bert Marcus; April 27)

All About Nina

Mary Elizabeth Winstead plays an aspiring standup comedian, who ditches her abusive boyfriend (Chace Crawford) for Los Angeles. Winstead’s performance recalls her work in Smashed as her hard-drinking character navigates the pitfalls of making it big and the notion of love, thanks to an all-too-patient suitor played by Common. (Written and directed by Eva Vives; April 22)

All These Small Moments

In this heartwarming coming-of-age tale, Howie (Brendan Meyer) navigates the pangs of adolescence and his parents’ (Molly Ringwald and Brian d’Arcy James) crumbling marriage. The only thing keeping him going is the mysterious presence of Odessa (a radiant Jemima Kirke, also in Untogether with Jamie Dornan). (Written and directed by Melissa Miller Costanzo; April 24)

Bethany Hamilton: Unstoppable

After losing her left arm in a shark attack, Bethany Hamilton got back on the board and took the surfing world by storm. Soon, she was winning ESPYs and Teen Choice Awards and sharing the screen with Carrie Underwood in Soul Surfer and competing on The Amazing Race. Now, she’s tackling motherhood as she looks at what’s next in her career. (Directed by Aaron Lieber; April 20)

Disobedience

Rachel Weisz, Rachel McAdams and Alessandro Nivola star in a story about a woman (Weisz) forced to face long-dormant emotions and feelings after reuniting with childhood friends (McAdams and Nivola) from her Orthodox Jewish community from director Sebastián Lelio, who won an Oscar for A Fantastic Woman. (Co-written and directed by Sebastián Lelio; April 24)

Duck Butter

Alia Shawkat co-wrote and stars in this film about two woman who engaged in a romantic and sexual experiment: to spend the next 24 hours together, having sex every hour. But putting their relationship in a vacuum has some unexpected results. (Co-written and directed by Miguel Arteta; April 20)

Every Act of Life

Audiences get a closer look at the life and work of playwright Terrence McNally through interviews with Angela Lansbury, Audra McDonald, Chita Rivera, Edie Falco, Larry Kramer and more. McNally also opens up his early life -- particularly relationships -- and how they shaped his journey. (Directed by Jeff Kaufman; April 23)

Fabled

Part of Tribeca’s Pilot Season, which premieres independently produced TV pilots, Fabled reimagines classic fairy tales in real-life situations, telling them through the perspective of its female characters. The premiere episode, "Anodyne,” brings together Dorothy from The Wizard of Oz and Alice from Alice in Wonderland after the two are committed to a mental institution. (Directed by Jennifer Morrison; April 23)

The Gospel According to André

“The André Leon Talley,” as he was referred to by Tyra Banks on America’s Next Top Model, invites audiences into his world, offering a deeper look at his humble beginnings in the South to his rise in fashion media and his legacy as a longtime fashion journalist, breaking ground as a black man in white-dominant world. (Directed by Kate Novak; April 25)

Howard

The life and career of playwright and lyricist Howard Ashman is revisited in this intimate documentary that tells the full story of the man who “gave a mermaid her voice and a beast his soul.” Known for the hit songs he co-wrote with Alan Menken for Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast and The Little Mermaid, the film provides the full context behind those classics and his journey from childhood to his death from complications with AIDS. (Directed by Don Hahn; April 22)

Jonathan

Building off the breakout success of Baby Driver, Ansel Elgort stars in an unexpected film the mundane life of Johnathan (Elgort), who shares an apartment with John (Elgort). The sci-fi drama plays out like an extended episode of Black Mirror, but is grounded by the actor’s performance. (Co-written and directed by Bill Oliver; April 21)

Little Woods

Tessa Thompson and Lily James played estranged sisters struggling to survive in an economically-depressed North Dakota fracking boomtown forced back into each other’s lives after their mother dies. The film is another showcase for Thompson, who has a jam-packed 2018 with Annihilation, Avengers: Infinity, the return of Westworld and Creed II. (Written and directed by Nia DaCosta; April 21)

The Miseducation of Cameron Post

Following her breakout success with Appropriate Behavior, Desiree Akhavan is back with a new tale about a woman dealing with her sexuality -- this time about Cameron (Chloe Grace Moretz) who is sent to gay conversion therapy after getting caught having sex with another girl on prom night. (Co-written and directed by Desiree Akhavan; April 22)

Momentum Generation

Before the likes of Bethany Hamilton and the current generation of surfers, there was the Momentum Generation, including Kelly Slater, Rob Machado, Shane Dorian, Kalani Robb and Taylor Steele. The new documentary looks back on their rise in the ‘80s and how they made Americans legitimate stars of the surf -- and pop culture -- world. (Directed by Jeff and Michael Zimbalist; April 21)

Nice

Part of Tribeca’s Pilot Season, Nice is a new potential series about Teddy, a black sheep of her conservative Korean-American family dealing with the unexpected return of cancer. It’s created by and stars Naomi Ko, who made a brief but memorable appearance in 2014’s Dear White People. (Directed by Andrew Ahn; April 23)

Rest in Power: The Trayvon Martin Story

From executive producer Jay-Z comes a new docu-series based about the life of Trayvon Martin. Based on the book of the same name by Martin’s parents, the film examines not only Martin’s life, which was cut short at 17 when he was shot and killed in Florida, but also the rise of the #BlackLivesMatter movement that followed. The first episode premieres at Tribeca before debuting on Paramount Network. (Directed by Jenner Furst and Julia Willoughby Nason; April 20)

RX: Early Detection a Cancer Journey With Sandra Lee

The 2015 breast cancer diagnosis of Semi-Homemade Cooking host and chef Sandra Lee and her subsequent battle to survive is the subject of this harrowing documentary short from Emmy-winning producer and former Good Morning America producer Cathy Chermol Schrijver. The film premieres at Tribeca before debuting later on HBO. (Directed by Cathy Chermol Schrijver; April 26)

Songwriter

What does it take to write an Ed Sheeran chart-topper? Songwriter provides an intimate inside look into the creation of the hit album, Divide, while giving fans a rare look at archival footage of Sheeran’s childhood and glimpses of Sheeran’s romance with Cherry Seaborn. (Directed by Murray Cummings; April 23)

Stockholm

The absurd true story of a bank robbery not going quite as planned when a group of bank clerks insisted on defending the thief who had taken them hostage is the subject of Stockholm starring an eccentric Ethan Hawke and Noomi Rapace, who shines in a rare non-sci-fi role. (Written and directed by Robert Budreau; April 19)

This Is Climate Change

The four-part virtual reality series will take audiences inside impacted parts of the world through an immersive, 360-degree view. Following the Sundance Film Festival premiere of “Melting Ice,” an episode featuring Al Gore, the remaining three parts -- “Famine,” “Feast” and “Fire” -- will make their debut here. (Directed by Danfung Dennis; April 21)

Tiny Shoulders: Rethinking Barbie

Barbie has an image problem and it’s up to the makers behind the hit Mattel doll to update her place and presence in a modern era that reflects women’s progress and more diverse perspectives on body image and beauty. The film, featuring interviews with Gloria Steinem, Roxane Gay and more, premieres at Tribeca before streaming on Hulu. (Directed by Andrea Nevins; April 25)

We the Animals

Based on the lyrical, coming-of-age novel of the same name by Justin Torres, We the Animals tells the story of three brothers living with their troubled parents in an economically-depressed part of upstate New York. The magical realism blends together elements of Beasts of a Southern Wild with the same kind of grounded reality of Moonlight. (Directed by Jeremiah Zagar; April 22)

Woman Walks Ahead

Jessica Chastain portrays activist and artist Catherine Weldon, who retreats to North Dakota after the death of her mother to paint a portrait of Sioux chief Sitting Bull, in this cinematic real-life tale about a woman defying the odds in the Old West. The film screens at Tribeca before premiering on DirecTV Cinema May 31 and debuting in theaters June 29.(Directed by Susanna White; April 25)

Zoe

Filmmaker Drake Doremus offers up another romantic tale in a sci-fi world, following Equals with Kristen Stewart and Nicholas Hoult. This time, Zoe explores the notions of love between humans and androids -- known her as “synthetics” -- and what it means to be “real.” Ewan McGregor and Lea Seydoux lead an ensemble cast of outstanding performances, which also includes Theo James and Christina Aguilera. (Directed by Drake Doremus; April 21)

 -- Additional reporting by Rande Iaboni

 RELATED CONTENT:

Tribeca Film Festival: Robert De Niro Says He Would Join 'Big Little Lies' as Meryl Streep's Husband

Tribeca Film Festival: Anna Wintour on Film

Tribeca Film Festival: How Kristen Stewart and Nicholas Hoult Lost Themselves Shooting That Sexy 'Equals' Scene

Tribeca Film Festival: How James Franco Uses His Famous Friends to Make Hollywood Movies His Way

[cmbynreviews]

"Call Me by Your Name" director Luca Guadagnino on Armie Hammer, sequels, and screen intimacy

The new film Call Me by Your Name is about a life-changing affair between young Elio (Timothée Chalamet) and grad student Oliver (Armie Hammer), but what went on behind the scenes was just as significant. As Hammer told us recently, director Luca Guadagnino fostered an environment on set that both protected his actors and challenged them to be as honest as possible in their work. The result is an acclaimed film where the stars do the best work of their lives, but it also continues in the intense relationship between the stars and Guadagnino. The director has described it as “a very profound familial bond with the people I’m doing the movies with, where you literally and constantly fall in love with all of them,” and in the following interview, he expands on that notion, addresses some of the think pieces about the movie, and talks more about his hope of making sequels to it.

When did you entertain the idea of casting Armie as Oliver? Since I got to meet him in The Social Network, really. I was impressed by that film and there was a great generation of actors in it: Just think that Dakota Johnson was there, Rooney Mara was there, Andrew Garfield, Jesse Eisenberg. And then there were these two brothers, who I really thought were two brothers because I couldn’t believe someone could do that digitally. I thought, “no, nobody can act that way”, when in fact it was Armie, twice. So after [Guadagnino’s 2008 Tilda Swinton film] I Am Love came out, I had the privilege of meeting him. We generally spoke about life for two or three hours and I loved him. I had a sudden and immediate attraction to him.

What was your read of him in that meeting? I like the way he speaks, I like the words he uses, his buoyancy, his enthusiasm. But I also like that with him, suddenly he has a shift of humor. He can become kind of melancholic without even controlling it. He’s not someone who is in command of his own expression in an artificial way. And for me, fragilities are important when you work with someone. Of course you want someone who can give a performance, who is acting, but even more, I want someone who is able and eager to let the camera investigate him or her deeply. As you know, I wasn’t part of this movie as a director, for a long time. Originally, I was a producer.

James Ivory was supposed to direct, with Shia LaBeouf cast as Oliver, correct? Right, in the Ivory version. We tried to make the movie with Jim and we didn’t succeed. It’s one of the great regrets of my life, as an admirer of Jim’s work. I would have been happy not only to see a new movie by James Ivory, but also to be producing it. Unfortunately, it didn’t happen because the rules of the market – or, as Renoir would say, the rules of the game – are sometimes quite cruel. Despite the fact that ageism is a significant problem when it comes to cinema, I personally believe that one of the most exciting things for me as a cinephile is to witness a new movie from a very old director. James and Shia would have been another movie, and every avenue was tried, but the only way it could see the light was if I directed it for five weeks with no money.

So I thought of my passion for Armie and I sent him the script. After a week, I heard, “He wants to talk to you.” What I didn’t know is that he was going to pass. So he picks up the phone, “Hey, how are you,” and it becomes a long conversation. He goes, “I’m scared about this role.” Why? “I don’t know. I’m scared.” I told him, “If you’re scared, it might mean that you want something.” Which could sound like a sleazy way of approaching somebody, but the truth is that fear and desire are the polarizing elements of most of our actions. I think Armie wanted to have that fear and act it out.

What did you interpret his fear as? I don’t think it was, “Oh no, I don’t want to play a gay character,” because he had already done that twice.

In J. Edgar … … and in a film with Stanley Tucci, Final Portrait. Long story short, I think the complexity of the project from his standpoint was, “Will I be able to let myself be the medium through which a lot of complex, intimate emotions can be expressed?” But he is a mine of gold, and I am the digger.

I don’t think most directors had done much digging with him. Probably there is a sense that things have to fit the mold. Maybe they thought the mold of Armie belongs to a different era of filmmaking, but I think the mold of Armie is the mold of cinema, with a capital C. I do believe in that.

He talks about making the movie as though he were still in love with it. Wait til we do the sequels.

He said it’s really changed him. I’m happy. I like transformative things. I welcome transformation in my life and I like transformation in other people’s lives. I like to be the agent of it.

So how were you transformed by making this film? I simplified my approach. I have more trust in the power of the language of cinema without [additional] style. And to understand that I am capable of loving multiple times with multiple people, but also to be faithful in every sense of the word to the love of my life. Also, I aged making this movie.

What were you like when you were 17, Elio’s age? I was a very lonely, skinny, melancholic visionaire. I was in Palermo, and I was really invested in pushing the envelope. I remember at that age, I convinced the principal of my school to be the director of the play at the end of the year. I did Ionesco, and it was crazy. It was insane!

What did you do? The title of the piece was Excessive in Extremis. And it fortified me because it was a catastrophe of sorts. There was not much of an audience, and to make something so personal, motivated by the impulse of doing something strong no matter what, and then to get the reception we got …

What was that like? Oh, the fury of the principal when she saw the thing! You know, when I went to [the Venice Film Festival] years later with The Protagonists and there was booing in the movie theater, I thought, I don’t care. I already got my boos at 17. I trained myself for that, I would say.

Why were you lonely at 17? I was not like Elio. Elio jumps on the dance floor and is divine, but I wasn’t that kid. I was sitting in the corner, looking at people dancing. It was shyness, it was maybe embarrassment, but also I think it was the great position of control.

You were shy in your personal life, but bold in your art. Very much.

Had you been with men by the time you were 17? I desired them, but I wasn’t until I was 22.

Why not? Well, I was very picky, also! And I didn’t know anything about sex and love and interaction. Maybe I was too cerebral.

Were you with girls? No, I’ve never been with girls, honestly. I regret that. This is a very analytical conversation, but now that I’m talking to you, I made a difficult and stupid choice at that age of falling in love with my best friend, who was straight. Later, I met this guy when I was 22, and the second we had intercourse, I didn’t want to be with him anymore, and I left.

Why? You were afraid? I don’t know. I felt depressed. I like sharing things, I like a community, I like to be with my friends and get to know new people, but when you’re 22 in Palermo and you get this young man and you feel the emotion for the first time of this physical encounter, it excludes everything. You’re not so sure if you can go to your friends and say, “That’s the boy I’m dating.” People could not say that easily in 1988 in Palermo. I had to leave this encounter with him and only him. I had to learn in time to bridge my personal feelings and emotional encounters with my life as part of a community.

How did you bridge that? I completely dismissed the notion of self-censorship and being a prude.

How do you foster a safe place for people to do things on camera that they’ve never done before, that they might be hesitant to do? I have been with the makeup artist and editor for 25 years, have made three movies with the same DP. It’s family. It’s a nontoxic environment. I really invite the actors’ collaboration not just as performers, but to really participate in making the film 100 percent. Also, I’m very blunt. I don’t tell lies, not when I’m making a movie. It can be a beautiful thing to be direct, because people are rarely direct.

How does that collaboration work with the actor when you’re shooting something like the scene where Elio masturbates with a peach? That is the perfect example. I was struggling with the scene since I read it in the book. I thought it was a scene that can only play in a book, because you could go into your imagination. I also thought it was a metaphor for sexual impulses and energy. I didn’t believe in the actual physical possibilities of masturbating yourself with a peach. In translating this into a movie, I was both admiring Aciman’s work and dreading Aciman’s work, and I knew that scene was kind of infamous for readers of the book. I’ll tell you, Kyle, many times I said, “We have to remove this from the script.” I didn’t want something that could be exploitative, sensationalist, or even involuntarily ridiculous. So it was a process, a long process.

What convinced you it could work? One day I tried, physically, to masturbate myself with a peach because I was asking Timothée to do it as a character, and I wanted to prove to myself that it was not doable so we would not have to do it. And actually, when I got the fruit and put my finger in the fruit and started to debone it, already that act gave me a cinephile memory, reminding me of a great moment in this version of Madame Bovary [called Abraham’s Valley] by Manoel de Oliveira, the great Portuguese filmmaker. In it, the Bovary character is young and full of lust, she wants to fuck this guy. She sees a flower, she grabs this flower, and she puts her finger into the flower. It’s an incredible scene about the sensuality in all things. So I thought, “Finally, we have a lead here that can make this scene doable.” Then I tried to put the deboned peach on me and it actually worked, it wasn’t just a metaphor! So I threw the peach away, composed myself, and went to Timothée and told him, “Timmy, I tried the peach myself, and it works. We can film the scene.” And he goes, “Of course it works! I tried it myself as well.”

What did you shoot that you didn’t include? Much. There is a scene that happens under the lime tree where Elio and Oliver are teasing one another – this is before they kiss. It was a very well-acted scene, but we felt in a way that it was too precious, that it wasn’t necessary to delay the moment where they would confess to one another. Then there was a scene after they made love. In the movie, there is still a piece of it, where they’re kissing under the moonlight, and what I shot is that the scene happens at the same time as the father and mother are in their bedroom, hearing the muffled voices coming from the garden. The mother is putting creams on, the father is reading a book, and they are looking one another in the eye and smiling. She goes to the bed, he touches his wife, he smells the creams on her, and they start to make love. I’m sorry for cutting the scene because it’s quite beautiful, and it’s beautiful to see adults having their moment of sex. That, we will definitely put in the extras of the film [on home video].

Some writers have said the film is not explicit enough. It’s really something I don’t understand. It’s as if you said there are not enough shots of Shanghai. I don’t understand why there has to be Shanghai in this movie.

There is plenty of sex and foreplay and sensuality in it, though the complaint is that we don’t see Oliver and Elio engage in actual intercourse. Did you shoot anything like that? We shot some things, but one thing is important to say: We didn’t have any limitations. I also think it may be my unconscious knowledge that many gay films pride themselves on being explicit. It’s almost like a subgenre! Listen, there is a book by William Burroughs called Queer, which I wrote a script for when I was 20. I was completely naïve, although I would love to make that film. That is a movie where you need to see the actual sex because, as per Burroughs’s descriptions, it’s about the war that is excavated inside him: The character Lee is infatuated with Allerten and it devours him. You have to show how the sex and the impossibility of the relationship is informing their behavior, and I agree that a version of that film cannot be shy about the sex. But why this?

Do you think Call Me by Your Name is shy about sex? There is sperm on the torso [of Oliver], which he wipes off! I don’t know. It is cheap voyeurism, I would say. Because I am a voyeur myself, I pride myself on a more dignified and sophisticated sense of voyeurism than a need to stare at other people’s sexes.

It’s been interesting, too, to see how people have reacted to the notion of a sequel. Sequels. I want to make five movies.

Do you already have in mind what you would do? The second, I have very much in mind. I think I want to see them grow up. How great would it be to see those actors grow older, embodying those characters?

Is the whole notion of a sequel something that sprung up from the years-later epilogue of the book? It sprung out of my love for these characters and my desire to visit them again, and in doing so, to be with the same people I did this movie with.

At what point did you start mulling over this idea? Sundance. Because I didn’t completely realize until then that they were characters who could go beyond the boundaries of the film.

I think some people would prefer that the characters not go beyond the boundary of the film, because the ending with Elio is so powerful. It would not remove the power of the final shot of this film, because that is about him being 18. What we would see in the sequel is him being 25.

The film is also about the intensity of first love. By necessity, the second film would be and feel different. Maybe in the sequel, Elio and Oliver only meet after two hours of the movie. I want to follow them, Mr. Perlman, Marzia, all these people. Maybe the movie opens with how Mafalda the maid is living in the house, all alone! I definitely would buy myself the freedom of a movie that is not bound to a textbook of rules. Once, I dreamt of making a sequel to I Am Love, which was basically about Emma, Tilda’s character, living with no money on the periphery of Rome. It would be about her daily routine, like Chantal Akerman’s Jeanne Dielman. Five hours of watching Emma go to the supermarket where she’s a cashier, going home to cook a meal, eating her meal, and then one day she bumps into the daughter, who’s a big artist. I thought about doing that. The only problem for me is that for a director, time is very limited in general. You can do a certain amount of films and no more than that.

You know, I am 46. To make a movie is long. I have to learn how to discipline my ambitions.

KYLE BUCHANAN | VULTURE | 17 Nov 2017 | (Photo: Kevin Winter/Getty Images)

[jingyichen022]

Reflection on Alien Agency

Concepts sorting:

Alien: strange, unlike one's own, distanced, outside of us. Move out of our control, defying logic, rationality.

Matter-force rather than matter form .Deleuze and Guattari. A partially created world of artifice in constant flux and transformation.

Human-centric, "human-exceptionalist"world viewnon-human: objects, things, processes, and forces. Vibracy, agency, material vitalism, matter-flows. Give them responsibility and agency. "The stuff of the world hehaves and performs beyond us. 

Theorists start not to think objects as inert objects. Not only control and analysed by human. It is a new deveploment from previous school of thoughs, not like phenomenology only focus on human's intention or like structurism ingore reality...

Philosopher and sociologist Bruno Latour: actants. 

Feminist scholar Karen Barad : "posthuman performativity" of matter.

Sociologist of science Andrew Pickering "ontological theater" and "performative ontologies".

Political scientist Jane Bennett: "vital materiality" and "the force of things"

Anthropologists: multispecies ethnographics.

So there is a collective turn on human and nonhuman relationship in academia. Why?

Encounter

Technoscience: Gilbert Hottois 1970s, scientific practices that are directly intertwined in a technological setting and that are technologically driven.

New materialism: 1990s; a theoretical turn away form the persistent dualisms in modern and humanist traditions whose influence are present in much of cultural theory.

Actor-network theory:leveling of human-thing relationship;sociology of translation;contain everyday objects

Performance:what agents(human/nonhuman)do 

Performative: construct reality

Sociotechnical agencement: Michel Callon 's expand of "statement"

Agencement:from Deleuze and Guattari; both agency and arrangement, the ordering or placement of heterogeneous things in a mesh of relations.

STS:Science and technology studies or science, technology and society studies (both abbreviated STS) are the study of how society, politics, and culture affect scientific research and technological innovation, and how these, in turn, affect society, politics and culture.

Human-centric word:actor, social relations, interaction,discovery --> actant, actor-network,translation, enrollment...                                  

Reflexive turn:from reading culture as a text -->the positioning of the anthropologist within the situation s/he was studing 

Observant participation: Loic Wacquant; corporeally engaged experience with the subject-object of knowing.

Participant observation: Malinowskian 

"gonzo"ethnography:Micheal Taussig

autoethnography: David Hayano; ethmographic processes by which anthropologists wrote accounts of their onw people and compouded this by direct involvement and intimacy, autoethnography now refers to a whole series of ethnographic genres of writing that"describe and systematically analyse personal experience in order to understand cultural experience.

Today as the development of technology and emegency of science fiction, human has noticed that they will be replaced by robotics in the future and in fact their habits and behavior are always effected by other things. Especially the emergency of compelex adaptive system.

The aim of Alien Agency is to figure out how does art making produce knowledge, rather than text or language. Previouly art is regarded as "question generating machine", artists always question everything by alienation. Meanwhile, knowledge and science are produced by extant structure and discourse, researchers always design and arrange every component and condition to produce anticipated outcomes. In order to break the stereotype the author cooperated with other scientists, stimulated cells and transformed them into the scale that humans can perceive. During the process the author come up with the question: Where does life take place? Though the observation, the organoid is lived by itself and its milieu so that the author had a conclusion that "Life is thus not a characteristic or a quality of things but rather a process","it is spread, diffused throughout the world". In addition, in order to respond to the title of the book, he argued "they exert force on us: subjective "vitality effects" that emerge from our encounter with that stuff's temporal shape. In the conclusion of the book he retrospected the question at the beginning: "How in the act of making something are humans and materials coproduced, and what does this do the world in the process"? By three artworks worked with stuff from other fields and the fact they always suffered failures, he asserted alien agents always escape our control and change us. Just like the function of art practice to assemble some conditions and to wait for wonderful reactions between each component in the network, life and non-life, artwork and audience. More open. It is worthy of being praised that admitting accidents, failures, misunderstood situation and so on are also parts that need to be valued. But three artworks are completed according to the proposal, what should pay attention to is the reaction from the audience and critics. However, the interdisciplinary practice is not easy to fulfill. So what could we get from it to construct our art or to reflect our art practice?  Let other agents become the main part of our work is a mature approach, like interactive artworks, or use the revolutionary algorithm, yet we can put single artworks in a bigger milieu, put they in the multi-agents network, not only audience&exhibition&gallery, not only interact with humans, but with non-human objects, space, sound, light, data. There are some sculptures already are wind-powered, water-powered, or being affected by data. There are other agents that are worthwhile to be figured out, on a nanoscale or very very long time scale.

[dmgrundy]

[70] Milestones (1975, dir. Robert Kramer and John Douglas)

Kramer has described this film in interview as, in essence, following around his friends—activists, actors, theatre and film people performing themselves, versions of themselves or characters. Though this is a film whose title proclaims its desire to tackle big subjects, big events*, its narrative method refuses such historical logic, or embeds it in the vicissitudes and differing scales of daily lives where it occurs as a network of relationships rather than a newspaper headline, a date, a statistic. (*And is in fact taken from a statement by Ho Chi Minh which implies the opposite--the revolutionary as the one who, like a modest marker of each mile on the road, indicates how far one has come on the journey and how far there is to go.) Over the lengthy running time, we encounter large group/s of (largely) of declassé white people involved in particular with the anti-war movement, living on communes, embedding themselves in factories, involved to a greater or lesser extent with the more militant wings of movement activism (one character has just been released from jail), all of them in various ways, and for different reasons—personal, political, both—reckoning with whether or not to keep up activism as the possibility of revolutionary change fades, as the war itself ends—and with it, the movement that built up against it. It’s hard to provide any total or totalising summary—though the scenes with Grace Paley reflecting on politics, gender roles and motherhood are highlights, and those featuring a blind, queer potter (played by co-director John Douglas) have an open and surprising tenderness to them. There are moments and movements of disenchantment and renewal, occasional sketches of a broader perspective, largely through historical montages: the glue of broader historical forces keeps coming unstuck, but, as the film nears its close things are brought together into a kind of statement of resolve, the film ending with footage from a live home birth, throughout which the mother is witnessed and helped-through collectively. It’s at once heavily allegorical and one of the most intensely ‘documentary’ moments of the film. In important 1975 ‘Cahiers du Cinema’ symposium on the film—a collective format for a collective film—featuring Serge Daney and others, several of the participants note that racialised groups are seen as focal points of exploitation and struggle, but are depicted only in pictures or identificatory rituals such as the activist released from prison who visits a hogan in a kind of restorative ‘vision quest’ (in another scene, his father, a doctor, invites him back into the class he’d tried to mark himself out from). Such groups thus rarely feature in the lives of these characters—suggesting that, of the dividing lines that appear in the film, and that fracture the communities they attempt to build, race is still the principal structure. Given this, Daney remarked in an essay for ‘Cahiers’ the following year, the films risks being apologia for ‘American conviviality’, based on the ‘ethnological masquerade’ of the ‘tribe’. (On this note, Lou Cornum has an important essay in the first issue of Pinko magazine about the use of the ‘tribe’ metaphor in a host white radical writings, from David Wojnarowicz to Leslie Feinberg, and a complex identificatory history, the way the American white (New) Left positions itself vis-à-vis the non-white might equally apply to Kramer’s film). For Daney, though, while there may be elements of such thought, reflected in the positions of the filmmakers as well as the figures in the film, ‘Milestones’ also suggests the fragility of this re-imagined community, specifically through two moments—an attempted break-in and sexual assault and the sudden death of a demobbed GI, about to join a collective house, who accepts an invitation to a break-in and is killed by a cop. In terms that suggest both what unites the individual figures to their various collectives (family, lover(s), activist group, commune, etc) and what unites the narrative strands of the film to each other, he describes the film’s structure not a ‘chronicle’, nor a ‘document’, but a ‘fabric’, one which ‘spreads, getting progressively larger, with invisible knock-on effects’. As such, the unknown is both space of political possibility, of dialectical process (and hopefully, progress) and risky territory in which the most vulnerable—or simply the unlucky—can succumb to the daily dangers against which the provisional collective(s) here envisioned can’t always protect them. Daney: ‘Human relationships don’t knit together with complete dependability; they are tied together over an empty space, on a wire without a net. To fall through the meshes of the net, to pass through a void, is to die’. And literally so. Milestone’s shelters are provisional, flimsy, and in constant negotiation, and if their dreams might seem alternately smaller or larger, more idealistic or more problematic than those we might be able to cultivate now, they resonate all the more for that: rather than a milestone to be mourned in left melancholy, nor a glowing icon of exemplary action, like Daney’s thread, they’re still unspooling, spreading, in all their complexity.

[miss-m-calling]

Yuletide 2020 letter

Requests:

The Marianne Trilogy - Sheri S. Tepper (Marianne Zahmani, Makr Avehl Zahmani)

Starred Up (Eric Love, Oliver Baumer)

킹덤 | Kingdom (Prince Lee Chang, Seo-bi)

Dear writer,

Hello and thank you for writing for me. I’m very excited to read whatever you come up with. I hope my prompts spark your creativity, and feel free to reach out through the mods if you have any questions. There are spoilers for all of my requests! Likes and DNWs are on the bottom of the letter.

Without further ado…

Requests:

The Marianne Trilogy - Sheri S. Tepper

Marianne Zahmani, Makr Avehl Zahmani

What is this canon: Low fantasy trilogy of novels from the 1980s about Marianne, a student at an American university who comes from the tiny, fictional country of Alphenlicht, wedged in between Turkey and Iran, with a native religion that vaguely resembles Zoroastrianism, a long tradition of both light and dark magic, and civil conflict with echoes of the Cold War (one part of the country seceded with Soviet help). Marianne is financially dependent on her abusive older brother Harvey but trying to assert her independence. Enter Makr Avehl, Marianne’s cousin and de facto president of Alphenlicht, who’s both a mage and a charmer. And then Marianne gets targeted by dark magic and has to become self-assertive and figure out how to save herself, even as Makr Avehl also tries to save her (and sweep her off her feet), often with more complicated results than he intended. Every book introduces a different set of magical challenges, most of which transport Marianne to a different constructed/magical realm, with disturbing parallels to the cruelties of the real world and some interesting meta commentary on gender relations. The books are long out of print, but should be available in libraries and as used copies for purchase; the books’ individual titles are: Marianne, the Magus, and the Manticore + Marianne, the Madame, and the Momentary Gods + Marianne, the Matchbox, and the Malachite Mouse.

While I have a like/get-annoyed relationship with most of Tepper’s work I’ve read, I adore this trilogy unreservedly. I love the mixture of dark fantasy, sly humor, creepiness, complex magical systems, and surreal constructed/parallel/hidden worlds described in enough detail while remaining, for lack of a better word, magical… I adore Marianne, whose lives (it makes sense in context) have made her many things: the traumatized yet defiant survivor, the semi-skillful player of the game of life and magic, the lover and wife and mover-and-shaker in her own right. Her relationship with romantic, sometimes overbearing, arrogant, yet loving and lovable Makr Avehl is so rich and wonderful -- and funny! Among the other characters, I also enjoy Aghrehond, Therat, Makr Avehl’s sister, and all the creepy and/or hilarious denizens of the magical worlds into which Marianne is thrust -- they are all welcome to appear if you want to include them. I just love all the playing with and inverting and deconstruction of tropes and cliches, the aforementioned magical/constructed/parallel worlds of whimsy and creepiness that riff on ordinary aspects of the real world while also running on their own internal logic… This canon simply begs for more worldbuilding.

Canon-specific DNWs: Harvey or Madame Delubovoska appearing in the fic (you may mention them); the fic focusing on Marianne’s pregnancy or on her and Makr Avehl’s daughter if these themes have more of a presence in the fic than they did in the events of the third novel; anything over an M rating.

On the other hand, while I have a blanket DNW for incest, Marianne and Makr Avehl are cousins in canon, know it, and become a couple anyway -- this is fine by me. Other incest is still DNW (esp. Marianne/Harvey).

Prompts:

Makr Avehl and/or Marianne visit the Cave of Light and then try to solve a problem or complete a quest (however grand, mundane, or cracky) according to its message. Or something more about life in Alphenlicht in general.

Road trips (maybe with Aghrehond as driver) -- exploring Alphenlicht and/or magical realms.

Marianne says at the end of the last book that Therat may be surprised – I’d love to see what might surprise Therat, in addition to Marianne and Makr Avehl’s firstborn sharing her name. Or give me Makr Avehl having to work closely with Therat due to some magical/mystical/political issue, given that he’s always dropping unsubtle hints about her scary eyes.

Marianne and/or Makr Avehl end up visiting fields on the board-game from book 3 which the book didn’t describe – what kind of place do they encounter? What (probably dangerous, troubling, and/or creepy) adventures do they have?

Marianne promises to meet Queen Buttercup for a meal at Frab Junction’s Marveling Galosh before she escapes the board game in the third book. Magical promises are serious things, so what happens when Marianne has to make the date and Makr Avehl comes to save her and possibly gets in his own way more than he helps?

I love how canon gently sends up Makr Avehl’s image of himself as Marianne’s protector/lover/white knight in the first and third books’ magical worlds. Actually, Makr Avehl as the Freudian chimera in book 1 and as the hapless hero in book 3 are my favorite things about this canon, beside the general worldbuilding and Marianne’s character development. So I’d love to see more variations on that theme -- Makr Avehl as Marianne’s hero, both swoony and ridiculous, gentle yet lecherous, intense and funny with it -- either in the real world or in some new (and sinister) magical realm.

As a general note, I ship Marianne/Makr Avehl, but I would prefer any shippiness to remain at the books’ level, so nothing too explicit and nothing that completely overtakes the non-shippy plot or the worldbuilding, please. 

If your fic ends up focusing mostly on Marianne or Makr Avehl, with the other one having more of a supporting role, or having the protag think a lot about the other one but they only appear for a bit, that’s fine! The books are structured in a similar way, so that could totally work.

Starred Up

Oliver Baumer, Eric Love

What is this canon: Gritty British prison drama about Eric (Jack O’Connell), a violent young offender who gets “starred up” (sent to an adult prison before he is legally an adult) and quickly gets into conflict with several other prisoners as well as guards and staff. He also gets roped into participating in a therapy group run by Oliver (Rupert Friend), a well-meaning if sometimes out-of-his-depth “posh boy” who sees Eric as something more than just an incorrigible thug. Not helping matters is the entire prison system, as well as the fact that Eric’s own father is serving a life sentence in the same prison and has very narrow views on how Eric should be behaving – and talking about his feelings is not a part of it. The free-flowing conversations in the group therapy scenes are easily the film’s highlight, for me, as is the complicated dynamic between Eric and Oliver. The movie’s available on DVD and can be streamed on a bunch of different platforms.

Yes I do ship it, I do, I do!

Ahem. Don’t get me wrong, I liked what the movie did with the father-son relationship and its influence on both men’s character development – but I really wish they hadn’t got Oliver out of the action before the story’s climax (not like that!). The final denouement with Love father and Love son was great, as was the hint at the end that Eric learned something in anger-management group and has a support network that will help him a lot. But. I would have wanted to see more of the intriguing dynamic between Eric the intelligent, semi-feral, yet not-incorrigible, young thug and Oliver the educated, dedicated, kind yet aware of his own potential for violence (what was he on about with “I need to be here”?), slightly older counselor. They had me at Oliver’s “I want him” and Eric later telling his father that Oliver’s a better man than Love Sr. Also the not-flirting and the push-pull in the scene when Oliver picks up Eric from his cell -- yowza!

For this canon, any rating is very welcome, and my dubcon DNW does not apply! If you decide to go there, my preferred flavors of dubcon for this canon are: power differential makes it a bad idea but they do it anyway; “I know you want this”; “if the answer’s no/you’re only doing this for a dare or to prove a point, then why are you enjoying this so much [as am I]?”; no no yes a.k.a. starts as dubcon (or one of them thinks they’re dubconning the other), becomes enthusiastic consent. 

Also, if this is relevant or makes you nervous about writing for me, Eric would be 18-19, and Oliver is maybe 10-12 years older -- and I like it!!! (The actors were 22 and 31 when the movie was made, FWIW.)

Prompts:

-I would love to see Oliver return to holding his group in prison, so the two of them can interact more, either in the movie’s immediate aftermath or years down the line, as it’s implied that Eric will be serving a long sentence. Give me more scenes from anger management or the ribald, honest, free-flowing conversations in group, either with the other men present (I liked Hassan and Tyrone especially, among the group members) or a one-on-one session.

-An oblique or open-but-undramatic admission/declaration that they both know there’s something there, even if they don’t know what to do with it. Or, one or both of them knows exactly what to do with it, and the push-pull that would result from that.

-Dirty talk: used for arousal, as a defense mechanism, as a form of flirtation. Eric using slurs to assert dominance, and Oliver not letting him hide behind profanity, when he can use colorful language to express emotion and/or sexual interest. There could definitely be some verbal taunting/flirting about who wants/is eager to do what or is good at doing something. There may be some sniping comments about logistics and (lack of) condoms and barebacking and what men get up to in prison. There probably wouldn’t be deep discussions about sexual identity.

-An emergency in the prison requires a lock-down, so Oliver gets temporarily stuck in Eric’s cell or another room with only Eric for company. Things get porny and/or emotional.

-Eric is eventually released (you can handwave this so it happens soon after the movie or have it happen years later) and crashes with Oliver while he adjusts to the outside world. You guessed it: things get porny and/or emotional.

-How do they get to the point where both can cross that line from friends/whatever the hell they are and become, to lovers? (There’s Eric’s personal history and general discomfort with vulnerability, plus all the ways prison sex can be or make things complicated, and if it helps, I headcanon Oliver as either gay or bi and at least somewhat closeted, at work especially.) Who initiates and “directs traffic”? How does their always-contentious dynamic shift during and after sex? Is the sex an isolated (series of) occasion(s), or a progression/escalation over multiple encounters (how would I love especially an escalating series of encounters, let me count the ways)? Eric might seem like the logical initiator and/or dominant partner as well as using the possibility of sex to manipulate and exert control, but then Oliver might (or might not!) surprise him and is definitely the one more in touch with himself as well as aware of his custodial duty toward the men in the group.

-At some point in their intimate relationship (probably not right at the start, and probably not in prison, though if you can make it happen in prison, more power to you!), Oliver decides he’s going to take his sweet time and make Eric fall absolutely apart with pleasure, while using dirty talk to both arouse and empower Eric to own his desires – by that point, Eric is in a place where he can let that happen and enjoy it, even if he still talks tough.

-Or how about this: Eric gets out, relationship happens or is in the process of being negotiated, and while physical intimacy is a whooooole neeeeeew woooorld, you know what else would be cool? Phone sex. Yep. Or even, Eric gets himself one of those secret prison burner phones (preferably hidden somewhere that’s not someone’s arse), and... phone sex after lights-out and lock-down. Maybe nothing (much) has happened physically (yet), so phone sex can be a building block to that or one facet of that deepening intimacy.

킹덤 | Kingdom (TV 2019)

Prince Lee Chang, Seo-bi

What is this canon: In a nutshell: zombie invasion of Joseon-era Korea. Longer version: Lee Chang (Ju Ji-hoon) is the emperor’s only child and heir apparent, but his mother was a concubine, and the emperor has a young, pregnant wife whose father is the emperor’s chancellor and the head of the hugely powerful and ambitious Haewon Cho clan. If the young queen gives birth to a son, Lee Chang may find himself expendable, so he attempts a palace coup to remove his father and the Cho clan from power. This goes belly-up when Lee Chang suspects something terrible is happening to his father (the old man hasn’t been seen in days, and a monster seems to be wandering the emperor’s quarters at night, dun dun dun!), while disturbing reports start arriving from the south of the country about a plague that turns people into flesh-eating monsters. Fleeing the capital, Lee Chang makes his way south and encounters several characters from social milieus with which he usually has little or no contact, including a brave, kind, no-nonsense female physician named Seo-bi (Bae Doona), who’s already experienced an early outbreak of the zombie plague first-hand. Adventures political, emotional, military, and zombie-slaying ensue. This is a Netflix-produced Korean-language show, two seasons of six hour-long episodes each.

I fell so hard for this show. So hard! The beautiful production values, the wonderful cast, how the characters develop, how the show slowly but surely unfolds one reveal after another and packs so much into two short seasons, all the period detail, the genuinely tense action scenes, the moments of humor and intense emotion, the intertwining of political intrigue and zomg! really scary zombies, how the zombie outbreak works on multiple levels both literal and metaphorical…

I love the brave, kind-hearted, but sheltered prince, whose whole life has been so privileged yet shadowed by the possibility of death if he loses his position as heir, learning what it means to actually rule and lead people, to protect them and be protected by them in turn. And I love Seo-bi the fearless, dedicated, selfless physician, who notices things and figures things out regardless of whether this annoys the people in power. I ship them, but I also love their platonic interactions, how instantly and fiercely loyal she is to him (not just because he’s the crown prince, but because she’s seen how brave and altruistic he can be) and how he immediately takes her advice and experience seriously despite her being a woman and a commoner in this super-hierarchical setting. So I’m good with either / or & for this pairing. In a / fic, I’d even be good with a totally sublimated, “they both must kinda know what’s going on between them but for reasons of both their personalities and their respective genders and social positions, nothing overt ever gets said or done” scenario. So don’t stress too much over which flavor of dynamic you write for them.

Also, I love most of the cast (not a huge fan of Chancellor Cho, but he is an effective antagonist), and would be delighted to see any of them in fic too. Especially the loyal and funny and badass Mu-yeong (he was loyal, despite the Haewon Cho clan’s blackmail, and if you want to diverge from canon so he lives, I would not mind that at all), the even more badass and wounded and snarky Yeong-sin (or whatever his real name is), Chang’s sparky, exiled uncle several times removed, and the terrifying and frankly unhinged young queen are my favorites. I even have a soft spot for that gentle but mostly-useless coward Cho Beom-pal, but really, they’re all great and I would love reading about them too, or just about the prince and the lady physician – whatever works!

Finally, before I get to prompts, I know a bit about the Joseon period, but we’re talking the bits and pieces I remember from a college class and what I’ve read on Wikipedia and picked up from this and other Korean movies and shows. I know a bit more about some of the cultural background, like the Confucian values, the social stratification and feudal system, the gender segregation among the aristocracy, the wars with Japan, but again – my knowledge is limited. So if you want to teach me stuff about Joseon, go for it! If you want to invent or handwave stuff, as long as it fits the canon’s mood and broad cultural parameters, go for it! And if you want to treat me to some worldbuilding, period detail of any kind, and/or costume porn, definitely go for it.

Canon-specific DNW: anything above M rating for sex (violence is fine, and you may write about blood and gore as well as zombies eating people, blanket DNWs for lotsa gore and cannibalism notwithstanding).

Prompts:

Zombie fighting anything! Learning to survive in a society that’s rapidly breaking down, having to transcend their habitual social roles and challenging each other. Maybe one of them teaches the other to hunt, or to make herbal medicines, or to fight with a sword, or heck, to cook or to clean dirty clothes. (FYI I wrote most of these prompts before I was quite done with S2, and the time-skip took me totally by surprise. So while my prompts ignore Chang renouncing the throne, I’d also be down for the untold adventures of the former prince and his traveling companions, as Chang learns how to be just regular folks and they pursue clues about the resurrection flower, or for your take on what happens in S3, in which case you may ignore my kidfic DNW and include Lee Chang’s little “brother” if the plot needs him. Use whatever works for you in my prompts in any way you want!)

Figuring out how the zombie infection continues to evolve and/or working together to find a cure beyond dunking the infected in water – whether that means to destroy large numbers of the undead, or to develop an antidote, or to cure and bring back those afflicted. One plot detail that really struck me: more experimenting with zombies, like Chancellor Cho started to do, might also hold the key to a cure?

Political intrigue anything! Having to fight zombies and/or factions at court with both friends and unexpected allies (not gonna lie, I would have loved to have seen the young queen unleashed on some zombies, even if that did not make her the prince and Seo-bi’s ally).

More road trip/survival/battle goodness – maybe Seo-bi offers Lee Chang some advice while they’re navigating their new situation, or she witnesses him developing his leadership muscles, and it brings them closer together than before. Or maybe a moment of humor, relaxation, or quiet affection on the road or in between zombie-slaying, especially if it catches them both a bit by surprise. Or one of them gets a non-zombifying injury (nothing too gruesome or life-threatening, please) and the other one has to care for them – extra points if Seo-bi is injured and the prince doesn’t know what to do so she has to talk him through her own treatment. Or nightmares/being triggered by something, like we saw both Chang and Seo-bi react at the sounds of zombies growling and people screaming in S2E5.

We have seen Seo-bi insist on staying loyal to the prince, and Lee Chang rely on her repeatedly to the exclusion of all his other people – give me a situation in which he has to make clear his own loyalty to her, as a part of both his becoming a better leader and as a step in advancing their relationship. Or, there comes a time when Seo-bi really pushes against the rules of what someone like she can and cannot say or do to/around a crown prince – we’ve seen Lee Chang refuse to stand on his dignity when in the normal course of events so many of his interactions with commoners would end in the commoners’ death, but I imagine even he has his limits, and that kind of clash can only drive this dynamic forward!

Canon divergence in which Seo-bi gets sent to the capital and assigned to be the personal physician to the petulant, frustrated prince we meet at the start of the show (handwave the gender segregation and impropriety). She knows her place, but she also does not suffer fools or male nonsense. Sparks fly, social conventions get tested, zombies may or may not happen, and a new mutual understanding is born.

Canon divergence from the scene in S2E2 when Seo-bi finagles her way to being allowed to see the prince and he instructs her to resurrect Ahn Hyeon – what if instead of that, they came up with another plan of escape? Or maybe Lee Chang sending Seo-bi to spy on the queen goes a different way than in canon? And really, anything that requires those two to pass secret messages while grabbing each other’s hands and staring intently into each other’s eyes is A+ with me!

One theme which emerges gradually, and I really loved, is people having to compromise their principles to survive and ensure the safety of those they feel loyal and/or obliged to: Ahn Hyeon agreeing to turn the sick villagers into zombies, dear Mu-yeong having been a spy but also protecting the prince all along, Seo-bi resurrecting Ahn Hyeon, Lee Chang instructing her to do it as well as his thousand-yard-stare after having to finish off what’s left of his father… I’d love to see more such compromises, how their consequences ripple out, and the emotional fallout.

In addition to zombies, other magical and/or supernatural events and creatures start to appear in Joseon. If you want to bring in something from Buddhist mythology or Korean folklore, please do, and any and all worldbuilding would be awesome. 

Post-canon something in which Lee Chang is king, possibly of only a part of the country (maybe a zombie-free enclave, or a part he won in a civil war against the Cho clan or a cadet branch of his family), and Seo-bi is there as his advisor, physician, and unofficial chancellor. Gimme policymaking to deal with the lingering zombie issue, assassination plots, servants/guards/ladies in waiting gossiping like it’s their real job, all the palace intrigue!

Kind of related to the previous: even as a “spare” prince, Lee Chang can’t marry a commoner. Would he ever think to offer Seo-bi to become his concubine? I don’t think she’d go for it, and he might realize it, but maybe I’m wrong! Or maybe being intensely platonic at each other is as good as it gets for them, and they’re kind of okay with that. Or they get married in secret and have to be very careful not to let slip anything by word on gesture in public, or not to let Seo-bi get pregnant. Or, y’know, one day or night on the road or in a fortified town, in between scavenging for supplies and fighting zombies, they decide to bone down just because their lives are weird enough now to forget about propriety and all that jazz for an hour.

I’d also be down for poly fic for this canon: Lee Chang/Seo-bi/Yeong-sin either during the period we see in the show (or a divergence therefrom) or during the seven-year time skip at the end of S2 (for this threesome, I want a full triangle, not a V-shaped triad, please). Or a sedoretu formed for either political or survival reasons between Lee Chang, Seo-bi, Yeong-sin, and Queen Consort Cho. Oh the drama, the class differences, the conflicting loyalties and (dis)trust, the intrigue, the barely hidden desires, all those strong personalities rubbing up against each other...

I realize that some of these prompts could work as well (better?) as a no-zombies AU, and that’s fine if you want to take it in that direction. :-)

Likes:

I love pre-canon, canon, post-canon, canon-divergent, and missing-scene stories. I love character-driven and plot-driven stories equally, and I love fics which mix humor and angst/serious business when appropriate for the canon.

I love stories about characters at work and play, group dynamics, family dynamics (including constructed families), professional partnerships, friendships, alliances, rivalries, intimate couples (new lovers/first times as well as long-term/established couples), UST-ridden couples who are not just UST-ridden but connected in other ways too, etc.

I love irony, snark, humor as well as angst arising from the characters rather than the plot crowbaring it in, linear, non-linear, and 5+1 stories, hopeful endings, happy endings, bittersweet endings, worldbuilding, spiky characters who keep their jagged edges and spikiness in adversity as well as when their lives are going well, square-peg-in-round-hole characters, characters who are their own worst enemies as well as those who can get over themselves when the occasion calls for it, characters with conflicting values which may or may not be reconciled/resolved, characters who treat each other with respect and as equals even if they hate/annoy/can’t stand/love to dislike each other.

I especially love workplace stories (this can mean anything from an actual workplace/casefic/procedural setting to anything that revolves around the canon world in which the characters live) in which the characters are competent and dedicated to the job, and while they may not be exactly friends and they may well irritate one another, they still manage to rub along to get the job done and maybe even grow to care about one another (much to their surprise and sometimes reluctance/discomfort). Or, if they can’t get along, show me why not and what’s preventing them from finding common ground.

In terms of ship dynamics, I love (where it fits the characters) banter, competitiveness or antagonism shading into attraction (this tension need not be resolved), oh-god-why-did-it-have-to-be-you-what-did-I-do-to-deserve-this, bickering yet loving couples, characters who are serious about their romantic interests, characters who think they are much better at flirtation than they actually are, characters forced to work together only to prove much more compatible than they initially assumed, fics which mix an exploration of characters’ professional and everyday lives with shipping. A dynamic I cannot resist is shipping a couple who are incompatible in some important way (they are ideological enemies, cop and criminal, spies from opposite sides, one betrayed the other or they betrayed each other), and while they love and want each other they’re also not willing to change sides or surrender/compromise their identity for the other’s benefit, and how they might (or not) make their relationship work anyway.

I don’t have any very specific likes for smut, other than smut fitting the characters – show me how their canon dynamics spill over into the bedroom (or other place of congress). I also like sexual scenarios that subvert expectations a little and surprise the characters themselves (e.g., the person who’s usually quiet or more passive taking charge, the more aggressive person goes with it possibly snarking or commenting on it as long as they can). And I like sexual scenarios that contain an element of competition, antagonism, oh-god-this-is-a-bad-idea-but-we’re-going-for-it-hammer-and-tongs, not wanting to admit feelings or show vulnerability except oops it happens anyway, whether the characters acknowledge it or not, or just people getting way more into it or being more affected by it than they thought they would. Quick and intense sex, slow and intense sex are both great; rough yet willing sex (when it fits the characters) is great; masturbation while thinking of the other half of the ship (or not wanting to think about them but oops there they are in the fantasy!) is great. First times are great, and so is established-relationship, we-know-each-other-so-well sex. When it fits the characters and their canon dynamic, you also can’t go wrong with we-both-wanted-this-for-forever-and-now-we-both-know-it-so-here-we-go-diving-in-headfirst. For het and/or slash, oral, vaginal, anal incl. pegging, manual (ifyouknowwhatImean) – it’s all good. You can go as veiled or as explicit as you like, but please avoid excessive medical jargon – I don’t find a lot of mention of “penis” or “clit” sexy.

Ship/smut DNWs:

MPREG, A/B/O, knotting D/s, formalized BDSM, painful sex, hard kinks (holding someone down playfully, hair pulling and such like, the odd spank are a-OK) scat, watersports knife/gun/blood play incest deaging/infantilization, mommy/daddy kink under-16yos in sexual situations humiliation body distortion/horror (feeding/weight kink, come inflation, vore, etc.) unrequested ships/pairings soulmates and soul marks pregnancy and children (can be mentioned if canon, just don’t make the whole fic about them) wedding setting/theme secondary characters shipping the main pair like it’s their job xeno, tentacles, bestiality noncon/dubcon

Other DNWs:

torture and abuse (this and noncon/dubcon can be mentioned, but please don’t dwell on it in loving detail or subject any of my requested characters to it) descriptions of vomit, shit, and piss (”He pissed up against a tree” and the like is fine), toilet humor lots of gore/blood (mention it, yes; lovingly describe it, no), cannibalism, serious illness or injury character bashing genderswap/genderbent characters, characters as kids/young teens issuefic, gender/sexuality/race/ethnicity/religion/ability/identity headcanons death of requested characters hopeless, unrelenting gloom/angst/horror RL holiday setting/theme, RL religions as a major theme (invented fictional holidays and rituals are fine) reference to RL current events 1st and 2nd person POV unrequested crossovers or fusions AUs which have nothing to do with canon (e.g., mod AU for Kingdom)

[claennis]

Back in December 9, 2009 in my pre-tumblr days (livejournal ya’ll), I was taking Media Theory and Criticism in university and for my final, wrote the following about the above. It’s 3,400 words long including endnotes and just manages to tentatively tickle away at postmodernist theory before descending into I-think-I-know-what-I’m-talking-about-collegiate-word-vomit. Also, why there are I’s and we’s dropped in at the end beats me (so nonacademic who let me get away with that?!). I remember I got away with an A on this but...could be written 10 million times better by somebody else frankly (see horribly cheesy, over the top dramatic conclusion).

Anywhere You Go Samsung Will Be There: Aesthetics of the Commercial Fictional Reality

From candy commercials to ones of drinks and snacks, Korea television advertisements’ are a series of visually engaging images, showcasing the hottest celebrities from the often juxtaposed film/television/music industry[i]; one shot strategically placed after another in a highly attractive and persuasive selling fashion.  No other conglomerate than the Samsung Group knows how to dominate televisual marketing in this field. Within its many branches, Samsung Electronics established the Samsung Anycall mobile phone brand, a product that has been heavily advertised by celebrity spokesmen and spokeswomen. A giant number of domestic actors and actresses as well as pop group individuals have participated but one of the most famous has been mega pop icon, Lee Hyori, who signed a contract from 2005 to 2007 to produce “music video advertisements” for the Anycall phone. Such advertisements include high quality seven to nine minute music dramas, following a format of a short film plot and often including a specific track, written to promote the model of the phone.  While Lee (and now world-renown pop star, Rain) have played a huge role in commercials of a massive scale of production, the one television advertisement that warrants more than a double take is Samsung Anycall’s 2007 “Anyband” campaign[ii].

Two years ago, Samsung Anycall produced a nine-minute commercial mini-movie that replicates science-fiction attributes: portraying a dystopian society in an ambiguous, probably futuristic, timeframe and place.  On giant television screens throughout the city, a masked figurehead (eerily reminiscent of both V for Vendetta’s state-run British Television Network’s giant headquarters screen and 1984’s Big Brother) dictates the rules (antithesis to Anycall’s catchphrase): “No talk, no play, no love.”  The government’s police and security officials monitor citizens closely as they move in singular lines.  But within this oppressive society exists a secret alliance between four individuals, four artists that Samsung brought together to create a band: internationally known Korean pop singer BoA; Xiah Junsu from boyband TVXQ/DBSK; Tablo from hip-hop group Epik High[iii]; and Jin Bora, a jazz pianist. Though isolated from each other, they operate under Samsung Anycall’s motto, “Talk, Play, Love” by communicating and recording songs through their “illegal” Anycall mobile phones. Clever and quick enough to escape from the disciplinary police on numerous accounts, Anyband is able to broadcast their theme song they recorded on their phones (named “TPL”) by infiltrating the system.  At the end, they perform on skyscrapers, using their phones once again to stream their music live on the massive screens in the city. The masses connect to their message, retaliate, and the commercial ends on a happy note: oppression is defeated.

During the airing of the commercial, Samsung Anycall released Anyband’s debut single on November 8, 2007. On November 27, 2007, Samsung held an Anycall Concert, in which the fictional band made their debut on stage, performing their fictional tracks live with an additional cover of German trio, Monrose’ “Scream” under the title, “Daydream.”  The individual artists (BoA) as well as their respective groups (Epik High and TVXQ) also gave solo performances, creating an intriguing combination of a simulated reality (a band that manifested inside the televisual world), adjacent to actual reality (artists and bands that have flourished in Korea’s music industry).

Anyband is not the first fictional band to grace the world of televisual consumption.  The Beatles-esque Monkees from American 60s television serial, The Monkees, and the cartoon creation called The Archies from The Archie Show, both have esteemed as popular contemporary groups in the States decades ago.  But the startling division that stands between the likes of The Archies and The Monkees, and Anyband is the fact that the latter came into existence through a massive commercial means on the behalf of a conglomerate as huge as General Electric.

The power of the advertising entity has created an imaginative unreal, an unreal that is so fascinating that Anyband, is now conceived as the real across viewing audiences.  In this case, we turn to post-modernist thought in concern of the simulation effect.  Along with the interchangeability between illusory and reality, another question arises in concern of the post-modernist belief that distinctions between high and low culture have vanished.  But there is also the false reality to consider.  The fictional dystopian universe is not only enhanced by the appearances of popular celebrities but it also places the seller (Samsung) in a position that is more associated with rebellion against a higher, oppressive power. Thus, we will have to turn to the Frankfurt School’s cultural theorization on hegemony’s relationship to its counterpart, dissent.  Through the combined efforts of specific aspects from both the Frankfurt School and post-modernist thought, analysis of Anyband, the “band” and the advertisement itself, may widen not merely the preconception of what constitutes a commercial but also of the cultural and social atmosphere of advertising in our post-millennium world.  

Postmodernism cannot be grounded to a single working definition for it varies from medium to medium.  But what one can do is offer a series of aligning definitions.  Jim Collins, essayist of “Television and Postmodernism” suggests a compilation of meanings that provides a sort of overarching, umbrella-like insight into the term.  From “a distinctive style” (i.e. artistic, musical,) to “a condition…that typifies an entire set of socioeconomic factors” to “a specific mode of philosophical inquiry”, post-modernism can be any of the mentioned but it is crucial to indicate that it is “an emergent form of cultural analysis shaped by all of the above” (Allen, 327).  This emergent form begins shaping itself in reaction to modernism, moving away from the “objective”, “realist representation” and turning to a more “subjective inward consciousness” and a more abstract, fragmented emphasis on human experience and society (328).  From the firm grasp on progress, post-modernism uproots that concreteness of the past, present, and future.  Within the cultural industry, a certain exhaustion takes place, in which the face of originality is now replaced by either repetition and recycling of old material or a continual quoting of what has already been stated. Amidst the wide range of postmodernist concepts and theorization, there is a specific concept called the “simulacrum”, which shall be further looked at through Mark Poster’s essay, “Baudrillard and TV Ads.”

The essay particularly studies the phenomenon of the TV commercial as a specific social event within a society where mode of information has replaced the mode of production.  Poster first lays out something crucial to television advertisements, which is their lack of clarity between illusion and reality. Television advertisement are “invented models of reality which themselves contest the distinction between the real and the fictional” (57).   In order to create that illusion of a reality, “the ad takes a signifier, a word that has no traditional relation with the object being promoted, and attaches it to that object…constitut[ing] a new linguistic and communications reality” (58).  A new system of language presents itself and redefines the meaning of not only speech but also what associates with the product being sold.  In terms of Anycall’s 2007 campaign, the words, “talk,” “play,” and “love” redefine the Anycall cell phone as a celebration of happiness and independence and as a device that aids the freedom-fighters (Anyband).  The commercial further redefines Anycall’s favorite three words into a system of opposition: “no talk, no play, no love”, inventing another level of imaginary: this time, oppression, isolation, and lack of connection.  Herein, the relations that link back to three simple words engage in the first step of constituting a commercialized reality.

As we look at the television advertisement, functioning with redefined signifiers, what Baudrillard calls “a simulation of a communication…which is more real than reality”, is established and the idea of the simulacrum comes forth (Poster, 63).  The simulated effect, which is the commercial, turns into a hyper-reality. It takes what the viewer regards as magical and desirable, and heightens its attraction so that the viewer’s perception of what is real and what is not, becomes inter-exchanged.  The fictional dimension becomes a hyperrealist dimension, an additional appendage to our already existing reality.  In the case of Anyband (the group), their role as mere promoters of a phone outlives itself and proceeds to cross the line separating the simulated (the commercial) from the physical (sales of single and live concert).  Samsung Anycall may not be aware of the coinciding effects of the simulacrum within their marketing strategy in 2007 but the utilization of a couple of famous faces and capitalizing off their success to invent a fictional group did not fail in grabbing the attention of millions of viewers.  From natives to Korean pop enthusiasts around the world, this imagined band is merely another collaboration that places different artists on the same stage and takes the music scene to another exciting level.

Another point to consider within this ideological apparatus is the postmodernist approach towards culture capital.  As essayist John Beverly states in “The Ideology of Postmodernist Music and Left Politics”, post-modernists imply that through “the traditional intellectual or aesthete in the face of the processes of transformation of culture into a commodity”, also known as “mass culture”, it leads to the “consequent collapse of the distinction between high and low culture” (sec. 2).  The separation defining high art as its elevated form and containing low art in a subterranean level ceases to exist in the cultural industry today, argues the post-modernists.  In regards to this hierarchal distinction, then there is something to be said in terms of Anycall’s commercial drama.

Within the context of the visual culture hierarchy, the televisual commercial occupy a considerable low rank. They hold no “aesthetic effects”, “little truth value”, and above all, they “fulfill no socially redeeming value” (Poster, 47).  Above the television advertisement would probably be the music video, a phenomenon that can represent low form as well as high art, then working one’s way up to the short movie, and so forth.  The hierarchal archetype then allows the viewer to differentiate between a short film or a music video and their respective attributes.  But conventions and classifications can be blurred, redefined, and even broken. Samsung expands the idea of the conventional commercial with the airing of advertisements of considerable length and high quality. The Anyband campaign is filmed as an uncanny imitation of a music video.  The nine-minute music-video-esque advertisement, in turn, imitates a short film drama.  Like a short film, the plot unfolds; the protagonists represent concrete ideals; and the antagonistic force clearly represents an opposition that needs to be defeated.  Hence, the commercial music drama manifests, complete with a narration, a paradigmatic contrast between protagonists and antagonist, a soundtrack that is not just catchy but also feeds into the Korean music scene[iv], and an underlying message.  Techniques used in music videos transfer over to the commercial so that its aesthetic effect resembles more of a music video than a commercial.  The object being sold is subtly placed in a specific role within the diegetic frame of narration so that the simulated reality is not interrupted.

Quality-wise and substance-wise, the Anyband commercial employs a higher form of symbols, images, and one can even argue, music, to sell a mobile phone.  Such an advertisement further bridges the divide but it would not be considered as exemplary proof of the collapse of cultural differentiations.  Instead, it cleverly utilizes borrowed techniques, increasing the “traffic between high and low culture” as Brian McHale states in his essay on “Science Fiction and Post Modernism” (236) to strengthen the idea of the invented reality. By transcending its categorical norms, a certain niche of the audience is convinced that this commercial is perhaps “better than a movie”[v].  What needs to be taken into consideration here is not precisely the statement itself (nor its level of ridiculousness to those who see through the illusion of Samsung’s commercial) but the experience behind the statement. A certain audience will not respond in such a way if they did not recognize the details and characteristics that often describe a different media form more than an advertisement.  

Concurrently, the differentiations that elevate Samsung Anycall’s commercial to the next level does not completely redefine its category; it is still a commercial nonetheless.  The symbols that are present, the signifiers, the words used, all come together in a presentable package to sell a product. The product itself represents a certain ideology, perhaps an ideology that also participates in the process of selling.  Therefore, we need to further explore the combined efforts of message and motive within the false reality in the televisual advertisement.  In doing so, the invented narration and ideologies present must be considered in regards to the relationship between seller and consumer and the role of music.

Rewinding back to a previous critical theory movement, the Frankfurt School, if not famous for names such as Adorno, Horkheimer, and Marcuse, approaches mass culture and societal formation with a critical theory more so than the critique of Marxist predecessors. Amongst studying numerous aspects of Western capitalist societies, “the Frankfurt School produced some of the first accounts within critical social theory of the importance of mass culture and communication in social reproduction and domination” (Kellner, par.1).  While observing and witnessing the rise of media industries, the thinkers of the Frankfurt School articulated the function of the cultural industry as an agent legitimizing the ideologies prescient in social life and integrating citizens into such ideologies through exposure to mass culture.

In 1947, Theodor W. Adorno and Max Horkheimer collaborated together to write Dialectic in Enlightenment in which a segment was called “The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception.” Adorno and Horkheimer argue, “Anyone who resists can only survive by fitting in.  Once his particular brand of deviation from the norm has been noted by the industry, he belongs to it” (p.3, par.1).  In other words, rebellion, dissent, even reason merely pseudo-exist, for the act of incorporation will occur and they will be consumed by the larger hegemonic body. Though largely on the pessimistic side, this critical theorization of the cultural industry is an important part to investigate, especially in terms of commercial conceptualization.

By setting up easily recognized opposing forces (freedom-fighters versus totalitarian-like regime), Samsung makes their job easier when transforming the cell phone into a symbolic icon.  The four rebels cannot communicate with each other but because of the Anycall cell phone, they are able to contact each other and fulfill their roles as emancipators. The motto, “Talk, Play, Love”, constantly re-emphasizes itself through its connection to the message.  Because the Anycall cell phone has the ability to connect to other mediums (airings on the giant screens), the message becomes associated with the object.  As we view this advertisement, we can deduce that the concept of the commercial is a means of promoting the cell phone as a unifying object.  It is an object that provides, not only the necessary connection, but also an escape to leisure and fun.

Thus, because of the system of relationships that establishes itself within the advertisement, the viewer sees the cell phone as a resistance to the repressive regime.  But the dominant ideology does not stay in power for long for the rebel movement, as symbolized through the phone, overthrows the current system and “No talk, no play, no love” is replaced by “Talk, Play, Love.” What we witness is Samsung’s role as a dominant force in economic and business reality, position itself as an anti-hegemonic force against the dominant ideology. Samsung Anycall plays the good guy in the story, mobilizing the resistant force.  But at the same time, Samsung Anycall, in its physical reality, is a corporate branch, a capitalist group that thrives off the success of clever marketing techniques.  The clever marketing technique at play here is what the Frankfurt School has noted about revolutionary thought: the commonly perceived image of the anti-mainstream and dissent will be absorbed by the dominant force, in this case, capitalism. By selling itself as one of us, an independent and critical body of thinkers, and not one of the evil overseers, we are persuaded into a mass following of not the anti-mainstream ideology, but one that has been swallowed up by Samsung’s corporate power.

        From the Frankfurt School’s critical analyses, the Samsung Anycall campaign occupies numerous levels of deceit.  But I would like to also explore a different path, maybe an idealistic one but one that considers something else.  Walter Benjamin, a post-Marxist, at times linked to the Frankfurt School, introduces another take on the notion of the “aura” of art in his essay, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” in which he argues the art-aura (the “presence of the original”, “the concept of authenticity”, the artwork’s “sensitive nucleus”, its “uniqueness”) does not exactly “wither in the age of mechanical reproduction” and against the idea that “the quality of its presence is always depreciated” (3).  Instead, the act of “mechanical reproduction emancipates the work of art from its parasitical dependence on ritual,” or what is known as the “location of its original use value” of merely the author (3).  As a result, the art-aura moves towards the mass audience and a wider critical attitude.

If we are to perceive the Anycall cell phone, as advertised, similarly as to Benjamin’s attitude towards means of reproduction, then the mobile phone can be a means of democratization.  Music is mobilized as an emancipator force through the mobile phone technology[vi].  Its purpose does not only serve art (the creation and publicizing of music) but also serves a greater purpose of enlightenment.  The experience of transferring message through song, first by audio, then by visual and audio, can be argued as not a loss of art-aura, for the cell phone bridges the distance from the creators/rebels to the audience/receivers.  In this case, Anycall’s commercial concept of viewing the cell phone as unification aligns with Benjamin’s approach towards mechanical reproduction and art.

By looking at this specific commercial of Samsung’s through the numerous eyeglasses of different points of theory, I hope to point out that the analyses explored are open for further speculation.  Focusing on specific aspects of both post-modernist theory and the Frankfurt school testifies that no theory can be summed up, used, or to prove something else in its entirety. Within the several niches I have mentioned, we can see the different levels a single commercial can function and persist, complicating a phenomenon that is more scorned at than tolerated.  I have also provided both sides to the argument of distrust and dismay towards the corporate, from a company that tricks and deceives to one that promotes an object in celebration of ideological benefit to the people.

In the end, it is difficult to call Samsung’s Anycall commercial music drama as a commercial because of its complexities. Given the growing complexities of advertisements in our world at this time, we will have to consider the fact of the matter: we as an audience are not passive consumers.  To sell us a product, the company needs to consider a wide variety of marketing approaches that both complicates and hides their ulterior motive of selling a product and making profit.  On the other hand, the company may not have to hide their motive for as Adorno and Horkheimer state, “The triumph of advertising in the culture industry is that consumers feel compelled to buy and use its products even though they see through them” (p.7, par.10).  The Anycall campaign may not convince everyone that the cell phone will bring unity or the concepts it preaches.  But the illusory reality created, imitates high quality forms of art and pop culture so well, the skeptics can be intrigued by the product and even believe that the product is of high quality as well.

Samsung outdid themselves on this certain commercial and at the same time, built a reputation of advertising that is immense.  While I hold no numbers in my hand to show how profitable they were from the Anyband campaign, there is the post-result of people around the world who still demand for more material from the group, Anyband.  Recently this year, Samsung Anycall has created another fictional collaborative between four girls from four different bubble-pop groups called ‘4Tomorrow’.  The truth of the matter is, strategy behind fictional bands and fictional reality works. Why else would a huge conglomerate recycle and reuse the same method again?  And thus, the legacy of this commercial drama, as a singular entity and as an entire phenomenon, lives on.

Endnotes

[i] It is interesting to note that pop artists that thrive within the Korean music industry are not confined to the music industry but they also blatantly cross boundaries into other fields such as acting and modeling.  Their popularity and success thrives on their ability to multi-task as much as possible. Xiah Junsu’s (guitarist and vocalist in Anyband) occupations on his Wikipedia page list the following: “singer, actor, model, songwriter, dancer, composer.”

[ii] The Anyband Campaign is considered to be the fourth installment of commercial music dramas.  The first three star Lee Hyori and they are called, “Anymotion”, “Anyclub”, and “Anymotion.”  This is the first time Samsung switches to another famous female figure, BoA, as their main model.

[iii] Tablo from Epik High often writes songs and lyrics that are highly critical of the mass consumerist/materialist culture as well as the ideological institutions in South Korea (education, religion, government).  One could say that he was the face of rebellion, lashing against the hegemonic forces of the 21st century.  Interesting enough, Samsung Anycall asked him to campaign in their advertisement, which makes one wonder about his “rebellious stance” against massive conglomerates (hence the utilization of past tense: “was”).

This is a personal blog article, with a lack of factual claim and citation, but the thoughts and ideas towards Tablo, his background, and his participation in Anycall should be considered: http://www.soompi.com/content/79916.

[iv] Many viewers of the advertisement constantly comment on the songs and how they highlight the artists’ skills and talent and how much they enjoy listening to them: http://www.channel-ai.com/blog/2007/11/08/anyband/

[v] The comment, “better than a movie” can be found as a personal opinion at this blog: http://spazzes.wordpress.com/2007/11/07/download-anyband-cf-talk-play-love/.  

[vi] I did not want to go into the debate of whether Anyband’s music would be considered as “quality” music, or music that transcends beyond the electronic repetition and digitized vocals that are rampant in Korean pop.  Instead, I wanted to take the term, music, and consider it on a broad, overarching sense as an art form.

[micaramel]

Artists: Calla Henkel and Max Pitegoff

Venue: The Downer, Berlin

Date: June 18 – August 1, 2020

Click here to view slideshow

Full gallery of images, press release and link available after the jump.

Images:

Images courtesy of The Downer, Berlin

Press Release:

I’ve known Calla and Max for a decade now. I’ve seen the spaces that their work endeavored to create. I have happily (occasionally begrudgingly) been a part of some of their exhibitions and projects during the course of this time. I once read from receipts pictured in a series of photographs after having installed them in front of a live audience; I performed in a play they wrote and directed about an in-fighting but enterprising band of squatters who run a ramen restaurant out of an apartment they share; I helped assemble banquettes in their theater, hung and painted backdrops, operated the video camera, mopped floors, and built architectural models. I’ve sold their work to collectors and donated my own paintings to their benefit auctions. Our lives are closely connected and likely will be for their remainder. This show has nothing to do with our shared history, so I will refrain from dredging up too much more of it after this paragraph. But unlike any other thus far, this show is charged with a particular energy for me. Calla and Max had a big influence on the circumstances that brought me to Berlin, Also, it was through their initiative that the Downer began.

In my eyes, the core of Calla and Max’s work is the idea of community and shared experience. It examines the ways in which these ideas can be deployed against authority or serve to reinforce it. For as long as I’ve known them, and longer, their work has brought people together. Using friends as models, actors, performers and collaborators, they have created and fostered communities. As the complexities and personalities of those communities bristled against one another, they have likewise served as mediators, confidants and — conversely — the objects of disparagement. They have founded and operated bars, venues and theaters, with each space comprising some ratio of these component parts. Their first was a ‘bar’ in their shared studio at Cooper Union — which was more of a sculpture that encouraged people to get together and have a beer. Then followed Times Bar in Berlin, founded in collaboration with Lindsay Lawson, New Theater and TV Bar, which just reopened after a few months of Covid-19 provoked shutdown (and which you should go visit). Calla and Max’s practice is, on one hand, institutional critique and, on the other, embodiment of the institution.

The series of photos that I installed and read from in 2013 pictures artists sorting through their receipts, presumably in preparation to submit them to the tax office. The photographs don’t picture the artists themselves, just out of focus glimpses of them in front of or behind receipts piled on kitchen and cafe tables. Each piece was given the instructive title of the artist’s first name, the city (always Berlin) and a period of time (i.e Spring 2013). In a simple gesture the gut-leadening feeling of dealing with anything related to taxes is communicated. For artists and artworkers in particular, who exist in an industry where passion for art is often exploited to extract unpaid labor, the quarterly conundrum of what is and isn’t a warranted write off is evoked. Was that book for enjoyment or research? Was that dinner business or pleasure? Should I have been paid for this or was I volunteering? Where do fun and labor coincide and how can they be properly distinguished when friendships blur into professional relationships? This anxiety isn’t really related to taxes — that question is quickly answered with, “write off as much as you can get away with” — but these photos indicate a deeper existential uneasiness about the ways in which we are evaluated. Moreover, they say something about the ways in which we evaluate our own lives and work, and the relationships that often straddle the blurry boundary between them.

My definition of a scene would be: a recognizable movement in which the participants’ activities — as artists, performers, personalities, whatever, really — draw them into the same chapter of collective imagination, compounding the significance and reach of their ideas. Scenes have driven the advancement of art for a few hundred years and have been allowed to more or less write their own histories. The overlapping scenes that Calla and Max have cultivated over the past decade provided fodder for their own artistic work, as well as giving inspiration and a platform to their myriad members. Relationships extend beyond Berlin and the physical spaces they have helmed, situating Calla and Max’s work within a growing, networked alliance of artists — many of them also involved in organizing project spaces or artist run galleries.

I’ve met lots of people through Calla and Max and I imagine a lot of people reading this feel the same way. Sometimes being introduced felt uncanny, as if the scene was manifesting its connections after it had already made them algorithmically. Other times I’ve been surprised to meet someone at New Theater or TV Bar who was so unknown to me that my first conversations with them felt revelatory, despite the fact that, superficially, our lives bore so much similarity.

The way that people get to know one another and end up influencing each other is something that has been parodied in Calla and Max’s plays. Many of them open on a group that has ended up together more or less by chance. “Farming in Europe” featured a cadre of restaurant workers — a textbook example of multifaceted, diversely motivated collaboration. A gang of dejected vacationers populated “News, Crime, Sports,” a play that was set on an unmoored and un-captained cruise ship. The ragtag band of squatters who sell ramen out of their home in “Apartment” seemed to have fallen in with one another out of sheer necessity. In these arenas, characters quibble over ideological differences and willingness to contribute to a collective cause. They ridicule each other for their shortcomings, pontificate about the meaning of life and agonize over how to solve their problems. They also kind of take care of one another. Their haphazard convergence nearly always ends in haphazard goodbyes, but they usually manage to have a revelation or two along the way.

A scene, of course, is also an element of theater. The artists that have coalesced around Calla and Max’s organizing efforts feed one scene that cannibalizes itself for inspiration in others. The characters in their plays are — like all works of fiction — mash-ups of real personalities. Some ended up playing versions of themselves. Others didn’t have to look far for someone to imitate — they were probably sitting in the first three rows. Casts of mostly untrained actors, who were performing mostly for their friends, took scripts into their own hands, whether intentionally or not, returning them to the collective through misremembered lines, unscripted giggles and embellishments that kept the balance of who’s-using-who in a kind of limbo. This cultivated antiprofessionalism has become a hallmark of Calla and Max’s projects, giving them both a liveliness and an easily accessed escape hatch. If you don’t take something too seriously no great disappointment can come from it.

I would venture that we exist in a moment that is anxiously and unrecoverably disconnected from earlier utopian artistic scenes. One of the reasons is that everything is so connected already. There are increasingly fewer insights and ideas to share offline as the internet swallows and aggregates, and we increasingly substitute our collective consumption for shared experience. Does a group of people who have seen the same meme constitute a scene — not really, right? Interestingly, Calla and Max almost never use the events at their spaces as documentary subjects. Occasionally they will exhibit used, purpose-built furniture or show photos that picture dirty tabletops or half full glasses. But it’s hard to track down images of their friends socializing or even of their plays being performed. When they do ask friends and collaborators to pose, it’s almost always in a quasi-fictional role — in costume, or at least with ample stage direction. Beyond headshots, this same feeling is conveyed in their series of photographs of friends’ apartments made-up for AirBnB. These depict idealistically polished, yet inherently blemished living spaces that are uncomfortably braced for evaluation. Real spaces fictionalized for someone else to imagine themselves in. Documenting something or someone being candidly themselves is resolutely, almost inherently, barred from Calla and Max’s vocabulary. As if to acknowledge that we live in the moment of the curated feed, where everything is staged and everybody is acting as their own director, giving stage direction to the leading character of their own auto-drama.

When not focusing on fictions, their photographs often focus on the liminal — the absent or the accumulation that starts to make itself heard from the wings. The ostensible subjects of their photos are usually only tangentially related to a larger subject, like a newspaper, an empty cocktail glass or a receipt. In a large series of photographs of apartment viewings from different cities, the subjects were the desolate interior landscapes that serve as a backdrop for hopeful projection. Shot in black and white and printed in a darkroom — decidedly the opposite method of image making employed by the real estate industry — these photos occasionally feature glimpses of other visitors to the viewings. Mostly they feature the product of an emptying out, volume exchanged for capital. In a funny way, they are almost antithetical to the AirBnB stagings — one attempts to conjure domesticity with no props, and the other attempts to hide the props to allow potential guests to conjure domesticity in someone else’s home. Neither strategy is as helpful as you would hope.

A third, more recent series of photographs that also relate to living spaces pictures vignettes of the residence of the US Ambassador to Germany, which is a private home that changes occupancy with each diplomatic appointment. The photos were lit using theater lights from New Theater, giving the scenes an amber melodrama that heightens the antiquated domestic setting, questioning the relevance of the pomp of this classic American excess. At the same time, diplomacy gestures towards a version of interpersonal interaction that yields more than just a social life. Are the machinations, backstabbing, and insider trading of the artworld all that different?

Having sought places to stage performances, serve drinks or host conversations for over a decade, it’s no surprise that Calla and Max’s work also obsesses over real estate. What good is an eager audience without a space to host them? And as art and performance have increasingly dematerialized themselves to fit onto laptop and iPhone screens, Calla and Max have doubled down on their belief in physical space as paramount in provoking thought and fostering friendships. The question of art’s influence on real estate has been scrutinized by artists for 50 years or more, but this link is calcifying as art is more and more frequently deployed in an effort to gentrify. Artists face the paradoxical sociopolitical inner-turmoil of occupying both sides: they are often economically and ideologically linked to those who face displacement and, conversely, dependent on and symbolically linked to those profiting from the displacing. A big, and seemingly growing share of art collectors are making fortunes in real estate. As an artist, striving for patronage and solidarity presents contradictions without easy resolutions. In a sense, this horrible dilemma could be seen as another, deeper motivating factor in Calla and Max’s practice — to create a space that masquerades as something more functional than it actually is. A ragtag gang of artists play-acting the operations of a legitimate business. Theirs is an institution that aims to welcome as many as possible and preside over none of them. Art should aim to do the same.

Patrick Armstrong

Link: Calla Henkel and Max Pitegoff at The Downer

from Contemporary Art Daily https://bit.ly/3fBOZk6