From the Italian horror 'Suspiria' (1977) to the psychological thriller 'The Neon Demon' (2016). Neon lighting typically implies something sinister, maybe something otherworldly. It's most frequently associated with horror genres or sub-genres and something perhaps set in the past. There's a certain nostalgia that comes to mind with the combination of dramatic synth music and a high contrast monotone, a la 'The Guest' (2014). It's gritty in 'Springbreakers' (2012) and uncomfortable in 'Enter the Void' (2009). No matter the colour, the scene or the themes one thing's for certain. Throw a high-key neon light in a film and your audience is bound to feel uneasy. Any thoughts?
I've always felt that neon is the new black. It is good reflection of modern society too, we love bright lit skylines and surrounded in art/culture. However, we like to eventually escape to darkness, look up at the sky and see the stars. Darkness is almost a comfort these days as if it is the only form of privacy. Seeing that neon is comfortable for most of us, throw it in a horror film and it would mess with the audience mentally and emotionally. If I ever get to make a horror movie, neon will be something I use. – MoonKat6 years ago
Another recent example would be Riverdale. Neon lighting seems vital to the mystery of the show. – Indigo6 years ago
Films like Freaky Friday and She's the Man glamorize the topic of body/life switching. Why do we as human beings hold such a strong fascination for trading our life experiences? Other films with the theme could be discussed, as well as the reasons the character in these films switch bodies or lives (willingly or not). Perhaps some human psychology to flesh out the thinking behind some ideas why we romanticize body/life switching.
Great topic! Empathy might be a good psychological concept to explore in an essay written on this topic. Empathy is all about being able to imagine yourself in someone else's situation, seeing things from their point of view, etc. "Human psychology" might be better termed "humanistic psychology." Empathy is a key concept in humanistic psychology. "Romanticize" (meaning something like "treat as idealized or heroic") doesn't work for me as a term here. – JamesBKelley6 years ago
I think this is such a fascinating topic. Talk about how people becomes so internalised that it is refreshing to think that there are other people that are living similarly complex lives as we are – thomasin226 years ago
The 2010 film "The Switch" might also be worth discussing. I think this topic is all about a) developing empathy for another character and b) exploring what it would be like to not be us- the body swap is usually preceded by the character's frustration with their own lives- experience how the grass is greener on this side, and then come to the conclusion that we would rather be ourselves- a sort of attempt to reassure people that even if the grass seems greener on the other side, that side also has a whole host of problems you're unaware of and ultimately you'd be most comfortable in your own situation. – Shivani6 years ago
The recent Netflix series "Counterpart" is fascinating. It is not so much about life-switching as it is about meeting, interacting and trading lives with an alternate version of oneself! – Jos6 years ago
Sorry, "Counterpart" is on Cravetv, not Netflix! – Jos6 years ago
Historically we could argue that there were film makers who genuinely controlled all aspects of their creative work, Sergei Eisenstein, Orson Welles and Stanley Kubrick come to mind. Today in an increasingly complex cinematic world and one in which investment in films is perhaps more directly controlled by mega-studios how do we make this distinction?
An interesting question. We do still have this with filmmakers such as Guillermo del Toro and Quentin Tarantino, but they are not prolific filmmakers and we do see people wanting to put their stamp on their films. I think this would be a good discussion to have. – SaraiMW6 years ago
After a little more thought, Pedro Almodovar (in his early incarnation) would be a 'classic' auteur. Can an auteur be classified on the basis of one film - that is another thing to consider e.g. Robert Rodriguez after El Mariachi, or is he an 'incidental auteur' based on the expediency-triumphs approach he took to making a film for less than $30k... – Menadue6 years ago
What do you think of Victor Frankenstein and his monster? I have always believed that the death of his mother caused him to go mad. His creation of the monster was his ill attempt at trying to resurrect a being so that the same method may be used on his mother. I have heard that he may have been mad since childhood and the death of his mother catapulted him into his obsession with creation.
I just re-read Frankenstein in my English class this semester and I must say, the connection you made between the monster and his mother is something that has shooketh my perspective on the book. I never looked at the experiment this way but it makes sense and gives Frankenstein some purpose. It is clear to me that the monster is more Victor, less his creation. – Kiranpreet Sandhu6 years ago
Mary Shelley's Frankenstein has always been a book I over examine. I made the same connection with the death of Victor's mother and his growing insanity, however I usually took an extra step further. The monster would open a door of possibilities for Victory. As you pointed out, he could use the same for his mother. I think that Victor also wanted to make something he could maintain, control and have as a companion for ever. He could replace body parts as they decay and he could keep it living for all time. His mother died and that made Victor realize that everyone, including his love, will eventually die. A manufactured monster? Could be his friend, companion even a lover for ages to come. – MoonKat6 years ago
WWE recently collaborated with HBO to make a documentary, and you don’t need to care one iota about wrestling to find the whole movie enthralling. The documentary, called Andre the Giant, examines the life of the titular wrestler. Analyzing how the documentary humanizes a man who was often portrayed as a monster could lead to an interesting article.
The Greatest Showman is a movie-musical that explores the (partially fictionalized) life of P.T. Barnum and the development of the circus. It hasn’t been widely criticized for the erroneous portrayals of certain characters and the way in which it manipulated the story.
This topic would explore the historical accuracy and inaccuracies of the movie and work to illuminate the historical elements that the movie worked to cover up through its narrative.
Nice, but you could go well beyond The Greatest Showman if you wanted. If a movie is historical, you can pretty much bet it will be riddled with inaccuracies. Thirteen Days is the movie that comes to mind, but even historical fiction has this problem (Pocahontas, anyone)? I think it would be beneficial to explore historical inaccuracies in movies, in general. Which inaccuracies are we more apt to accept? Why? Which historical events are glossed over or ignored, or changed? I see a wealth of possibilities here. – Stephanie M.6 years ago
I like this topic, expecially when it is considered in broader terms like: should art strive for historical accuracy, and how accurate must i be? One could also consider whether an artist is ever obliged to represent history inaccurately. I could see this being the case for purposes of racial or gender representation in art. – alexbolano926 years ago
I would love to read this topic. After watching the movie, I was wondering about its historical background, and how accurate it was. The movie is excellent (I'm not saying it's not), and I love the songs, and everything, but I know people wouldn't have danced to pop music back in the 1800s (was it?). – sterlinajames6 years ago
My dad actually made this comment after watching the film. He wanted to know how much of the film was actually accurate, and I believe this would be an interesting read! – snlfilm6 years ago
PT Barnum definitely came across better in the film than he did in reality. It would be interesting to look at not only what historical inaccuracies there are, but why. For example, Barnum's first "freak" was an 80 year old woman who he claimed was much older than that. When she died, he sold tickets to her autopsy. In the movie, there is a relationship between Barnum and Jenny Lind even though that never actually happened. I do love the songs in this film, but there were many historical inaccuracies that erased Barnum's racism and abilism. – banne6 years ago
I agree with alexbolano92. I think this is a good topic. And it deserves a close look at how accurate a historical movie could be and should be. – Jingyi6 years ago
Typically the nationality of bad guys in film and television storylines is Russian, and more recently North Korean (or an un-named Asian nation such as in Tomorrow When the War Began). Is this selection merely a historical choice due to past conflict?
How does this play in to real world perceptions of these nations today?
Very interesting topic that I think could turn into an excellent article. It could chronologically follow the trends of how the antagonist other is represented in media throughout history and examine how they reflect the contemporary zeitgeist; Russia during the Cold War, terrorism post-9/11, North Korea more recently, etc. Going for a broader and more nuanced perspective, you could also compare this to non-Western examples. One film that comes to mind is Ip-Man 2, which has a pretty blatantly antagonistic depiction of British imperialism, reflecting Hong Kong's complicated (post-)colonial history and present. I'm sure there are other great examples as well if you dig into it. – blautoothdmand6 years ago
I am accepting this in the spirit of it rather than the letter and assuming the discussion is in relation to Western representations of villains.
I think there is a strong connection to the perception of the villains in film/TV and those in the culture that produced them, which is normal. What would be interesting to look at is when particular nations are represented as villains at different times and what incited change. – SaraiMW6 years ago
There's definitely a culture of finding and portraying the villains where you want them to be- similarly to how gender-diverse people are often the villains in TV and movies, in an effort to subtly portray them as deviants and demonise them (literally, in the case of characters like Him from PPG)- for decades people have portrayed Nazis, Russians, and more recently people in the Middle East as a sort of uniform evil without much need (or desire) to dig deeper into it. If you refer to the beginning of Black Panther you also see an example of a slightly vague fictional Boko Haram or similar African Muslim extremist group taken down by T'Challa in a style reminiscent of shooter game missions with the objective of 'take down these villains, save the hostages, shoot first ask questions later'. In the rise of neo-nazism there is sometimes objection to these uniform representations of their predecessors as evil- and certainly there are muslims I know who were bothered by the way black muslims were represented as faceless villains. I feel this topic is most interesting in regards to how and why people fight against stereotypes and perceptions, rather than simply cultural shifts. – GRandall6 years ago
John Wayne was seen as the epitome of the American Hero during the age of the Western film. He was beloved by many, even with his strong conservative politics and often brash language. However, in the 60s, America's view shifted. They no longer looked to Westerns for inspiration and John Wayne, while still beloved, faded to the background (as symbolically seen in "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance". I would like to see an analysis of John Wayne's connection to American culture further, and his impact on American culture long after America turned away from him.
Something interesting one could pursue while contemplating this topic is James Baldwin's discussion of John Wayne in his unfinished book- now a film- "I am Not Your Negro." In it he discusses heroes, in particular figures like John Wayne; a perspective like this I think could be an interesting frame of reference for a topic like this. In particular, I find this quote of Baldwin's to be very powerful: “A Black man who sees the world in the way John Wayne sees it would not be an eccentric patriot, but a raving maniac…The truth is that this country does not know what to do with its Black population.” – ees6 years ago
This is an interesting topic, especially because westerns seem to be having a comeback after a long dry spell. Between the Magnificent 7 reboot, Hostless, Godless, and Westworld, westerns are back in fashion. Are these new westerns evidence that audiences wish to rekindle themes of John Wayne movies? – Ben Lashar6 years ago
