With and an R rating, a director can get away with practically anything. Intense blood and sexual nudity can be seen in many film that are R rated. So In that case: Why does the NC-17 rating still exist? Some will say it is for movies that go to far with their sex and violence, but that is not really true. The reason the NC-17 raring exists is because basically, the film studio does not want the audience to see the film. This can be seen when films with a gay/lesbian sex scene will get an NC-17, but a movie with a man and women having descriptive sex still only gets an R rating. The film This Movie is Not Yet Rated demonstrates this problem.
This is really interesting. One could easily put this in the context of the current media monopoly in which six corporations own 90% of the media output in the US, with similar or worse rates in other nations. The control of what is deemed publicly acceptable and what is consumed is in the hands of a few. – Austin9 years ago
This topic brings up a very good point on how the NC-17 rating is more frequently used towards homosexual content than heterosexual content (Brokeback Mountain being one example). An potential article here could reflect upon the conservatism of the ratings board against certain people and beliefs, not necessarily whether a film has an age-appropriate rating. – dsoumilas9 years ago
When critics and audiences criticize a female character they usually say "She's just a love interest." But what does that mean in the broad scheme of things? Is it possible to be a love interest and a fully realized character?
Perhaps it is the difference between "getting the girl," or someone who is "just there" to meet the needs of the protagonist. To me, a fully realized character is one that has many layers and feels like a real person (such as Peggy in Mad Men). A love interest would be someone that we may know about, but we do not truly know a lot about-- enough to make them real in our minds. – Nicole Wethington9 years ago
I think a good example of this can be found in Jo from Supernatural. Dean has plenty of love interests who never develop into REAL characters (such as that woman he had a kid with [see! I don't even know her name and she has been in multiple episodes]) but Jo is odd... on the borderline. I've never met someone who thought of her as a favourite character although she is in quite a few plot oriented episodes. We don't learn much about her so is that the problem with her popularity or is her backstory and personality just overshadowed by her and Dean's "potential" (which never gets actualized but adds a lot of romantic suspense). – Slaidey9 years ago
Brandon Sanderson discusses this in his lectures on character creations. He mentions that the problem a lot of new writers have is designing categories for people to fit into. In order to be a fully realized character, one has to create a character before placing them into a mold. If they are just designed to be the love interest, it can feel forced. – missmichelle9 years ago
Of all the Marvel solo films, Thor is often considered to be the weakest of the bunch. So much so that title character is often upstaged in his own movie. Thor 3, which will be entitled Thor: Ragnorok, is expected in November of 2017. What can the filmmakers improve upon to make Thor a strong contender?
Part of the reason Thor's films are considered weak is because he is a god, and he is more impervious than most of the other Avengers. It's the same problem when writing Superman: how to you write a character that is seminally invincible? The bigger reason the films are weaker is because how Loki has overshadowed Thor in popularity. Thor is simply not as fun when Loki is not on screen, and that is mainly because Loki is more witty and compelling. Loki practically chews the scenery. – Aaron Hatch9 years ago
Whoever takes this up should remember to use statistics when saying things like Thor is the weakest of the bunch? Weakest hero? That's relative. Weakest written? Some argue that honor (or dishonor) goes to the Hulk. So, we need proof with these things. Otherwise, interesting topic. – SpectreWriter9 years ago
I think something that could make Thor movies stronger contenders is some backstory, whether it be for Thor, the Warriors Three, Lady Sif, Loki, Jane, etc. We don't know a lot about any of the characters' pasts, so letting us know just what's been happening in the hundreds of years Thor and company have been alive could make them all more interesting. – VelvetRose9 years ago
I don't really know Jane too well and she seems like she's a very interesting person! It would be cool to learn more about her childhood, why she does what she does. I think you can learn a lot about someone with glimpses of their childhood. They did this for Loki and Thor, so maybe something for Jane? – itschlofosho9 years ago
What does Marvel's refusal to make a female-lead driven superhero movie (eg. Black Widow) say about the film industry, and also our society?
Actually, Marvel has had a female-driven superhero movie planned at the very least since their announcement of all the Phase 3 movies last year, one of which was Captain Marvel. Captain Marvel is a popular, feminist comic book character by the name of Carol Danvers who has recently been reimagined with a more feminist take. Fans of the character, also called the Carol Corps, were very excited when they heard that she would be getting her own movie. Captain Marvel is slated for November 2nd, 2018 between the two part Avengers: Infinity War, seemingly implying that she will have an important part in the climax of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Marvel has also released a show on ABC centering around Agent Peggy Carter, a popular secondary character from Captain America: The First Avenger. She was so popular that Marvel created an 8-episode long season centered around the character in 1946 fighting sexism and evil (sometimes separately, sometimes not). It's a very feminist show and is returning for a second season, presumably in 2016. – VelvetRose9 years ago
I agree with the previous note. Marvel has even acknowledged women in other cultures, such as the Muslim teenager, Ms. Marvel! Pretty insightful concept, especially with all the criticism going on with Muslims and terrorism. It defeats the stereotypes that associate Muslims with evil. Source: http://www.wired.com/2014/01/ms-marvel-muslim-superheroine/ – reemismail9 years ago
My concern about this topic is that it sounds very similar to one currently pending approval. If this one is picked up, please research not only our articles but the web in general. The topic of female superheroes (and the lack thereof) has been covered a lot. Not saying there aren't new angles (always) but be careful of re-treading. – Monique9 years ago
I would recommend looking at Marvel Entertainment CEO Ike Perlmutter's reported comments in a supposedly leaked e-mail exchange with Sony executive Michael Lynton. He said that female-led superhero films just don't work, citing flops like Elektra, Catwoman and Supergirl as what he believed to be evidence of this. (Ignoring the fact that male-led superhero films like Daredevil and Green Lantern have flopped, too.) You could talk about how film and television are disproving Perlmutter's notion. Agent Carter was very well-received, and ratings were strong enough for Marvel to renew it for a second season. Last year's Lucy, which starred the Black Widow herself, Scarlett Johansson, grossed nearly $460 million at the box office, off of a $40 million budget. Wanted, The Hunger Games, Kill Bill - there are plenty of large-scale movies that feature women in the lead roles that have all performed well at the box office. – BradShankar9 years ago
Are there any film festivals that are mainstream or independent which should gain more coverage?
Interesting topic. Sounds like it will require some research. – Joseph Manduke IV9 years ago
The Province Town film festival in PT Mass. They have been a major player in launching John Waters and a lot of LBGT+ filmmakers/films! There is also the Boston Underground Film Festival, The Montreal Documentary film festival or Hot Docs film festival in Toronto, The Animation film festival (the largest animation film festival in the world) in Ottawa can all be interesting as well! Also the London Feminist Film Festival. Let me know if you would like any more suggestions on festivals! – CassDM9 years ago
There is a relatively new LBGT+ film festival in LA, that might be something to look into.
Perhaps you can discuss Sundance and the idea that it is "the" film festival? Perhaps compare it to other film festivals? – Nicole Wethington9 years ago
I'd really recommend the London Short Film Festival - it has a wide range of events, screenings and talks, many of them are very affordable (or even free!) and it seems to be grounded in a lot more reality and purpose for the average independent filmmaker than the BFI's London Film Festival. – Phil5 years ago
There sure are. But, what would anyone want to achieve by answering this question? – T. Palomino2 years ago
Product placement is perhaps a necessary evil for films. It is not a new concept – it actually began in novels, including those by Arthur Conan Doyle and Jules Verne – but there are some films that do it well, some that don't and some that do it tongue-in-cheek (Nescafe in Night Watch (2004) for example.) A look at some movies from each catergory would be interesting.
When a product for a company is in the background of a film, its product placement, because it is not essential to the plot. When a character practically stops the film to tell some about a product, it just becomes another ad trying to sell you something. For product placement, it is better to show, don't tell. – Aaron Hatch9 years ago
In television, product placement isn't necessarily bad, because it can make the characters more relatable to the audience. For example, if a character eats Cheerios for breakfast, someone in the audience might be like, "Oh, I eat Cheerios too!" and feel a connection. As long as the product has a purpose or adds to the character, then I think including the product can be good. – YsabelGo9 years ago
In Jurassic World, the product placement was overwhelming, but it fit with the idea that the park had become a tourist attraction that needs funding by corporate sponsors. If product placement is done correctly, it can be beneficial; otherwise, it has the potential to be a distraction. – S.A. Takacs9 years ago
Man of Steel was a movie that was particularly guilty of this. As the Honest Trailer for the film whimsically pointed out, there were was blatant product placement for Nikon, Budweiser, iHop, Nokia, U-Haul, 7/11 and Sears. I suppose an argument could be made that this helps portray Smallville as this "all-American" town. – BradShankar9 years ago
I was reading this article here: (link) and got stuck on the first paragraph.
Origin stories (mainly superhero films) have a very natural structure that go something like: Hero has noble heart, but is overlooked and downtrodden by some kind of embodied big bad (For Wolverine it was his dad, for Spiderman it was life and school bullies.) Hero undergoes change – could be anything, a freak accident/a spiderbite/a traumatic event that unlooses latent powers and suddenly hero's world is changed enough to be freed from the embodied big bad.
It's a structure we can all relate to. But we have had a great many origin stories through remakes, flashback scenes, then prequels, then more remakes (Fantastic Four!). Have we had enough of them yet?
The article said something about heroes are 'best defined by the origin story that made them who they are.'
I think that's an untrue statement – partly because I believe what makes heroes who they are is how they use their powers and the adventures they have afterwards/how they are tested. I would like to move beyond the prequel story.
This topic suggestion could lead to interesting points on the overall structure of film's take on so-called "origin stories" for superheroes that have undeniably become so prevalent from Batman to Spiderman, throughout decades even. Since the heroes in question are already well-established in the public eye, another question could also lead to who is truly benefiting from endless origin stories: the audience or the film industry exploiting them for a quick easy buck? – dsoumilas9 years ago
This could be about two separate things: origin stories and their reuse in main-stream cinema. While the first option could lead to some good comparisons (mainly with the structure of video games) the second begs more questions from a business and industry perspective. They aren't rehashing these origin stories because they want to, particularly. They're most likely doing it to start a new series and, of course, for the cash out. Honestly, the second option could be a very very appealing piece, especially with DC making a come back on the theater-front. – Travis Cohen9 years ago
I have a note on the side of origin stories but not whether they are necessary to character development. In the last month Magic the Gathering released a set called Magic:Origins. They remade five planeswalkers with flip sides of their before and after state, and the pre-release packs had challenges for players to strive for which reflected the struggles of their chosen planewalker colour. This could be a great thing to explore and explain in an "overuse of origin stories" article because the popularity has it spreading recently into other genres of things aside from comics and books! Origins was a neat twist, but now that you mention it, it seems to be part of a growing trend right now. – Slaidey9 years ago
Everyone loves Black Widow in the cinematic universe, not just because she is sexy and bad ass, but also because her character in more normal when compared to the other members to the Avengers. So could she handle a whole movie, sourly dedicated to her. On one hand, It would be interesting to see where the Marvel Cinematic Universe would take a spy/superhero film. On the other hand, it is not interlay necessary considering we already know so much about her already.
I think it might be a stretch for her to have her own movie, but I could see her playing an integral role in say a Hulk film. This would kind of make sense seeing as a romance was "teased" in Age of Ultron between Widow and Banner. Widow would definitely not be the conventional love interest and to an extent she could even be the main character of the film. The film could even continue with Disney/fairy tale links and use themes from Beauty and the Beast. – Jamie9 years ago
Another topic to explore for a movie featuring Black Widow would be financial support for a female lead in a superhero film. Who would produce and back this project? This article could look at females who are in the minority when it comes to lead roles, directors and writers in mainstream media; especially in action hero themes. I though would support Black Widow in her own movie as a fan. – Venus Echos9 years ago
In the MCU, we actually know very little about Natasha, except what she tells us in movies where she is undercover or otherwise covering for herself (the exception is the fragmented scenes we see in Age of Ultron, and the events Loki mentions in the first Avengers film). By the end of Captain America 2, however, Natasha willfully disseminates every part of her history she's ever had to keep secret in order to save the world. For a character whose trade is secrets, that is a huge emotional development, and ripe for a continuation in her own movie. In any case, it seems nonsensical to me that she would be denied a film on account of familiarity, when Spider-Man will have no less than three separate origin movies by the end of the decade. Black Widow has had solo runs of comics for decades now, including the excellent spy thriller Name of the Rose by Marjorie Liu, and can surely take on a movie of her own. – bouzingo9 years ago
Natasha's rogues gallery is a touch on the light side. That's not to say she couldn't borrow them from somebody else obviously, just that it probably doesn't help her odds of getting a film. – Winter9 years ago
"Everyone loves Black Widow... because her character [is] more normal when compared to the other members of the Avengers." I think that's part of the reason she's only in movies like the Avengers and Captain America: the Winter Soldier. We love her because we love saying she's more badass than the other heroes. We love her because of her interactions with the other members and how she's a good friend to Cap and her awesome friendship with Hawkeye. We love her because she helps others. If Marvel were to create a movie focusing solely on Black Widow, let's say after the events of Winter Soldier when she has to create all new covers, it would be about Natasha picking herself back up after the emotional turmoil of revealing herself to the world. Yes, it would be interesting, but it couldn't lead a whole movie. If Marvel were to do a prequel or "What Happened in Budapest" deal, then we could see Natasha and Clint in a spy thriller that would be epic and awesome, but it would be before they are the way they are and the characters would be different. I don't think Marvel wants to risk it because fans love Natasha the way she is. Part of what makes her so interesting is also her mystery. We don't actually know that much about her past and that's fine with me. It resonates with the fact that she's a spy and such a cool character. I would definitely watch a Black Widow movie, but not all fans would. Kevin Feige himself stated that he thought Widow was better suited to helping the Avengers than going solo. It's not that the character couldn't carry her own film, it's more that the reasons many fans love her wouldn't be in those films. – VelvetRose9 years ago
