Explore Lin's rise to direct ST: Beyond. Look at how he began as a director and examine what he will bring to the ST franchise. Address the topic of Justin Lin and Star Trek Beyond applied to the rest of the series and how that will effect them. Mention how Lin's background in the Fast and Furious franchise will either be beneficial or harmful to what J.J. Abrams has done
Consider the decline in visiting the cinema and how this (negatively) impacts our appreciation of the visual and sound quality, as purposely designed by the director for the theater. One significant cause would be the rise in subscriptions to platforms like Nettflix and more generally laptop streaming (which includes illegal viewing). What do we lose and gain from this change in spectating?
A useful parallel can be drawn from will email get rid of regular mail. The technology was predicted to bring about the eventual demise of the post office. But, people in the post office have said that email has facilitated more post office deliveries as people buy online among other reasons. It may be that movies are sort of like the hardcover of a book release and then you go to soft cover and then online. I think cinemas will launch their fares and there will be crossovers to crossovers, similar to the movie Fargo in the 90s launching a TV show. – Munjeera8 years ago
I still go to cinema for the movies I have had high expectations for, or for those with large-scale action scenes that could only be fully enjoyed on a big theater screen. Probably this is largely due to the fact that I don't have Internet or cable at home, and all I had was a small TV to play my VHSs and DVDs. Therefore, cinemas still have their charm to me as they offer things that are inaccessible at home.
However, I think most people who used to visit cinemas frequently did so for the experience, instead of for the movies themselves. In other words, cinemas used to be fun. – Chiharu8 years ago
In all honesty, I think a huge factor in the loss of moviegoers is the excessive monetary expense of attending the cinema. A typical ticket costs approximately $11-13, and that's not for 3-D, IMAX, which is excessively popular. Tickets for such films are between $18-21. As a true devotee to the old films of classic Hollywood, all of the action, explosions, car chases, etc., are not appealing to me, personally. Another issue is the constant recycling that takes place, whether it be yet another addition to a franchise, or another re-adaptation. I do agree that the ability to watch new shows and movies on netflix, as well as amazon, hinders upon the cinematic enterprise. It is a shame, though, because seeing a film in the cinema, is an experience. How many times has someone mentioned a movie, and we are so quick to say, "I saw that in the theater." Interesting topic for conversation... – danielle5778 years ago
Going to the movies is still very much a part of my life. I plan years in advance for highly anticipated films. I attend the movies between 1-3 times a month. Netflix, and other video platforms, are reserved for older films and/or films I didn't catch or deem worthy to spend more money on at the theater. However, I enjoy the moviegoing experience. I like being submerged in the darkness with surround sound and a bucket of popcorn as large as me. Other moviegoers don't bother me because I tune so deeply into the movie. I believe what we lose from not going to the movies is the magic of cinema, the complete suspension of reality, the experience that's created by massive screens and surround sound. Also, unless the industry changes to catch up to the Netflix platforms, if we continue down a road of less moviegoing we'll lose the quality of movies because the lack of profits won't support it. What we gain is more power over our dollar and the ability to pause and play as much as we like. – CharmieJay8 years ago
There are definitely a lot of films whose plot takes place in the future, but because of the fact that the films are created in present time, we don't often see a future that has become truly equal for males and females. One could use an example of Star Trek Into Darkness, or Jurassic World–most of the "powerful" roles still belong to men, and, even if a woman does save the day, she still doesn't get as much credit as she deserves, or, she needs some kind of male assistance. I figure, with the way things are now, shouldn't the future be a much better place in terms of equality? Is it so terrible to portray the future with female soldiers, guards, heroes–women who have their own destiny, their own purpose, and are surrounded by other women? Everything from camera angle, to clothes sometimes dismisses the authenticity of the futuristic female lead who's trying to do what she needs to do. Also, does there always have to be a love interest, or a man helping out? Sure, there are films like V For Vendetta that feature a strong female lead, but, if we really get down to it, Natalie Portman's character was still taught by a man.
If anything, the writer might want to look into the past or present, as well. Maybe explore characters like Captain Phasma and/or Wonder Woman and their strengths. The writer might also want to discuss gender-bending roles and how they may contribute to the topic (think Ghostbusters). The writer might want to include that video games, like Halo, are already making totally equal men and women.
So, either way, do these films accurately gauge future feminism? Or, because these films are still made now, the same societal biases come through? Feel free to analyze and explore!
Mad Max: Fury Road is a great example of female-dominant characters in a science fiction setting, and there was a lot of public outcry from the "Men's Rights Activists" about it, saying the titular character wasn't important enough to the story. – Tarben8 years ago
There has always been an issue with female representation in film. Females are rarely the lead in films and if they are they usually have a male counter-part. The representation is important. The first barrier was getting more women in the show and then giving them lines. Now we have to move on from them being love-obsessed puppies hoping from boyfriend to boyfriend. Progress is slow. I don't think there are many movies that show equality at all. I think the next best step is to have more feminist and women WRITE and DIRECT movies. Men can portray women, but not as justly as another woman. They have not had the same experiences. – emaliej8 years ago
On the note of how these women are typically written, especially in sci-fi, is dominantly masculine. There is nothing wring with masculine women; however, these women are rarely written as feminine at all. This might have a lot to so with how men feel they can portray women. These are women of the future, so perhaps part of the article could reflect on how they could be portrayed as a different kind of women if women wrote them. What do these women look like now being written largely by men, and how they could look if more women were part of creating these women. – C N Williamson8 years ago
Explore the role that Canada has in American Media, pulling from film, television, comics, and any other medium that you choose. How is the Nation viewed internationally? If you so choose, how is the nation viewed by other international media outlets (BBC, anime, etc.)? Some examples to pull from include John Oliver, South Park, xkcd, and That 70s Show.
Great topic. It might help to have a section devoted Canadian-made TV shows, such as SCTV and Chilly Beach, that respond to (and ultimately ridicule) these stereotypical depictions by over-blowing them even further than the American shows for comic effect. – ProtoCanon8 years ago
Due South would also be relevant to Proto's point. – Munjeera8 years ago
What does it mean to consume media rather than to simply view it? Are remakes and sequels that are made 10 years after the original a newly emerging form of art, or are they simply a cheap means to make money? Is there such a thing as artistic integrity?
Hmm, this is a neat idea given how relevant it is nowadays. For me, I see this a lot with the many video game remasters over the past few years. Movies do this a lot as well, and I think it would be interesting to discuss how some movies that were iconic during their time (ex. 80's, 90's) lose their originality and novelty in a modern era. You can also discuss how nostalgia plays a role in defining what made an original movie superior to a remake. As far as money goes, you can also play the nostalgia card here to explore how producers try to cash in on people's memories of the past by bringing back the classics (via reboots, remakes, sequels, etc.). – Filippo8 years ago
How much of this sped-up aspect of entertainment is a Future Shock-esque reflection of technology, advances of which now making themselves almost instantly obsolete? Will what we consume consume us? – Tigey8 years ago
There is such a thing as artistic integrity; it's rare in hollywood. Maybe mention something which could hold the title of having artistic integrity with something that doesn't, like Jurassic World for example. – luminousgloom8 years ago
Not sure what films you have in mind but the 10 year gap shows how much they are clutching at straws. In a world where it's increasingly hard for the studios to make money so the films become safer; utilising familiar characters/place/story. The industry more than ever demands us to consume. Rather than take a critical view we are bombarded with advertising and hints how to keep enjoying the franchise and giving them money (i.e branded merch) even after you've left the cinema. A good comparison may be how The Hobbit was sqeezed for all it's worth into 3 films. In European cinema the trilogy is rare and completely different. It tends to be centred on the directors personal experiences/childhood (Bill Douglas trilogy, Apu trilogy etc) or may be even more tenuously linked through theme like the Three Colours trilogy, not relying on recognisable characters for garaunteeing custom. It is much more interesting deployed as an artistic device, not consumerist strategy. – JamieMadden8 years ago
Interesting...and you make numerous valid points. One thing that baffled me was that Danny Boyle was working on Trainspotting 2, 20 years after it's original release? Yet, once I looked into it, this was his plan from the very first movie--so, an interesting, planned act of creative ingenuity. In his case, this decision was made many years ago and some madness behind that divine brain decided to wait for 20 years to follow-up that insane, disturbing, yet strangely addictive film (pun unintended!). – danielle5778 years ago
Speaking of films made only for making money, product placement is disturbing. – Tigey8 years ago
Are personal and/or national prosperity bad for the various forms of art? Do hard times make for better art than good times? In the film Big Fish, Tim Burton's portrayal of the town of Spectre suggests that painlessness numbs creativity. Is this true or not? Am I alone in hating the synth-pop soundtracks and big hair of so many '80's movies?
I think to some extend suffering does breed art. I recommend mentioning how most great works of art are indeed about some kind of struggle or sorrow that is either overcome or not. Your last sentence seems completely irrelevant. – luminousgloom8 years ago
The 80's was a decade of huge economic growth and really bad music and movies. As great an artist as Bob Dylan was artistically MIA in the 80's. Using the word struggle is interesting. Hitler was an artist (a failed postcard painter) and his Mein Kampf (My Struggle) was shaped by Germany's post-treaty of Versailles depression. Hard times may not be good or bad, artistically or otherwise, just fertile. – Tigey8 years ago
Art is an expression and often can illuminate problems in a new light and create discussion on them. Without much uncertainty/injustice it is true that art tends to become a hobby and more introspective, if you're current world isn't trembling enough to pay attention to. Take the censorship of eastern european cinema in the latter half of the 20th century. Some brilliant directors (an endless list from Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic etc.) risked their life subverting the censors because they considered it imperative to make a film for the public which exposed/criticized the regime. To varying degrees they used elaborate allegory's or had to leave more literal criticisms out for the audience to deduce (ie. a character disappearing by means of secret police). And the effect of their hard work to even get these films made (most were scrapped or banned) is rewarded in their universal quality and the censorship provoked richer films. – JamieMadden8 years ago
I love Horror Films. The suspense that horror films create makes me jump off my seat every time and I love it. This weekend, I just recently watched The Conjuring 2, and I noticed a crucial theme: the destruction of "family." While the suspense in a horror films is created through unusual monsters, demons or serial killers, what made me jump was how the film metaphorically represented the struggles of living up to a specific type of family structure. Throughout the film, I started to see the differences between the Warren Family and the Hodgson family. Before they meet each other to discuss the supernatural occurrences, the way the montage sequence emphasizes on the difference between the families reinforces that the white picket fence family is in itself the better structure. Ultimately, the Warren family is a represented as the angelic figure that needs to save the Hodgson's from their own "demonic" failures ( ex: darker lighting used in scenes where the Hodgson family is shot) . But the question is, why is it that the single mother who is trying to hold her family together need to be saved constantly in films?
Interesting topic. I noticed that the Warrens helped to create friendly mood for the family suffering from possession in both movies, so it could be said that the Warrens "heal" the family both spiritually and mentally. – idleric8 years ago
Look at how the genre has evolved over the years. Talk about some of the icons in the horror movie franchise and how they have evolved along with the genre. Also you might look at the directors of the horror genre and how they have helped the evolution of the horror genre.
This is a solid topic, one which can be thoroughly examined. Given that the genre initially leaned more towards psychological horror and since morphed (sadly) into physical horror (like the splatter-fest movies of Eli Roth), there is a lot that can be observed. It could also be interesting to note how filmmakers are starting to lean a bit more towards psychological horror again with films like "The Babadook" and "It Follows". – August Merz8 years ago
Early directors and critics panned The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, but later reactions were more positive. Was this revisionism anomalous, or a general change in perspective affecting the horror genre? What were the specific critiques of the first horror film(s) and how did they help shape ensuing horror films? – Tigey8 years ago
