The television show, The 100, had come under controversy and intense scrutiny over social issues during its third season. Issues such as the treatment over LGBTQ characters and rape culture. However, the 100 has tackled social issues in earlier seasons and those issues were not scrutinized nearly as harshly.
Some of the earlier social issues tackled by the show were mental illness (Jasper has had two accounts of PTSD) and the roles of women. Some of these portrayals are well done and generate positive discussions. Other times the show delves into tropes and goes against its self-proclaimed progressive stance.
The show would not be under such critical eyes if the show runners had not promoted it as a progressive show.Therefore, the show must be looked at through a progressive lens. It would be interesting to see an article tackle how The 100 portrays various social issues and how these portrayals are perceived by viewers. It should also note the importance of these portrayals and the discussions they generate. The show is targeted at teenagers and young adults and it is interesting to see how this show has generated discussions online. Explain why these discussions matter. The response to certain aspects of the show have been negative, but the discussions afterwards have led to positive insights. The show has only aired 3 seasons but it has tackled various social issues that can be explored in further detail.
I hope that in future seasons they don't box Clark into strictly female relationships just because it's an easy way to show lesbian relationships without introducing a new character. They did a fine job with the common-place reactions of everyone in the show to the gay guard's relationship so they should be equally fluid representing Clark as bisexual. – Slaidey8 years ago
Explain what the Prime Directive is and its history in ST. Examine how ST: TNG emphasized the guiding principle with Picard's pontification on the subject using specific examples where the PD was central to the plot. Conclude with a discussion on how and why the PD has fallen to the wayside first under Rick Berman and now with J.J. Abrams and Justin Lin.
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
Due South, Power Play, Flashpoint and The Listener are all TV series made in Canada. Why is there a dearth of diversity in Canadian productions? Given the popularity of Degrassi: The Next Generation and Little Mosque on the Prairie could Canadian TV benefit from exploring the uniqueness of the Canadian experience? What recommendations could be made to help Canadian TV?
There's also Murdoch Mysteries to look into. – JennyCardinal8 years ago
(Corner Gas?) There is so much filmed in Canada, particularly in Vancouver. A lot of Sci-Fi. Fringe, The 4400, The 100, Stargate SG-1. Granted, Vancouver is losing some of the hold it had on Sci-Fi television (that's politics of film, not this article). My point is, are you looking for Canadian-produced and created work, or just work that was filmed in Canada, because there is a huge divide between those two? – chandlerwp8 years ago
100% Canadian productions Chandler is what I would like to see examined. If a movie is just filmed here then I don't think there is much creative control. You are correct that there is a huge divide between the two in terms of how much the producers would have a say in who and what and how these TV shows are made for sure. – Munjeera8 years ago
Analyze Ned's role as Nancy's "special friend" and his relationship with Nancy. Was he included in the series only to be her escort and muscle or do they have a real relationship?
This is such a cool topic! I think it would be good to consider Bess and George as well. I think looking at how the three of them affect Nancy and how they are portrayed in comparison to Nancy would be important to add! That way we can see what they represent, and how they bring out those qualities in her – LilyaRider8 years ago
Never thought about it. I only read a handful of Nancy Drews as a kid, and of course I thought Ned was cool because, "Nancy is older and has a boyfriend; that's a cool, grown-up thing to do." As a grown woman now, I'd argue that Ned is there primarily to show amateur sleuth Nancy does "normal" things like having a boyfriend. Carolyn Keene uses Ned to try to make Nancy more human, but from what I remember, he was basically her arm candy. – Stephanie M.8 years ago
I know this is a hot topic but I feel like I can't gauge it will enough from my limited perspective. How many games are out there that portray women as something other than a hooker? How about as the lead and most vital character? When they are in the game what do they wear and can this representation be changed based on the comfort level of the user? I am all about wearing whatever you please. People should be free to wear what they like. However, I am curious to learn more about representation and if the options even exist. It seems that most often women are mostly naked, wielding a sword or gun, and are B-stars in video games. Is this accurate or is this mostly based off of media representation.
It's totally accurate. The writer of this might also want to mention that in some games, the male character actually gets points/achievements for having sex with the female character! – Jaye Freeland8 years ago
Off of the media point, I'm sure there is a difference in the frequency of female protags (and their portrayal) based on whether the game is Indie or AAA. Are you hoping to look more at games with a heavy story element as opposed to sandbox/open world games? Dishonored 2 is bringing a female protag to the title, which looks interesting. But there is also the Assassin's Creed debacle, which can't really be ignored here. And what is the difference between portrayal of female characters in general, and when the female characters are the protagonist? But maybe that is splitting hairs and veering off of an incredibly interesting topic. Best of luck to the writer! A few notable games: Portal, Tomb Raider, The Last of Us. – chandlerwp8 years ago
The fact that Naught Dog had to fight to put Ellie on the front cover of The Last Of Us is a testament to how the gaming community is perceived to be male dominated. The idea that a female can be a protagonist, and not overtly sexualized like early Lara Croft, and the game can be a success is still pretty foreign to developers. This would be a very interesting topic for someone to write about, but it would require a lot of research. Like chandlerwp mentioned, Indie versus AAA games have a pretty interesting disparity when it comes to portrayals of woman. That idea alone should be included in the article. I feel that this article would do well if the author could find reputable statistics. – Lexzie8 years ago
I think another thing to consider is female protagonists who are and aren't overtly sexualized yet still have good characterization. For instance, take Laura Croft and the tomb raider series or Lightning from Final Fantasy XIII. Both are lead female protagonists with decent characterization and stubborn personalities that make them popular characters. Yet their physical appearances greatly differ. For instance, I personally find that while both of them are hardcore, gun-wielding, femme fatals, Lightning's outfit is actually in good taste. Perhaps you could compare the difference in popularity between female leads who fall within the stereotype or break out of it. There are a couple great examples of this (just naming another one off the top of my head is the game Remember Me where female protagonist Nilin is dressed well, has decent characterization, yet the game wasn't a hit out of the ball park). Another thing you can consider is the rise of female gamers and how the target audience is beginning to change for AAA games. – Mela8 years ago
Many games (RPGs especially) don't set a gender for the protagonist. Elder Scrolls: Skryim, Mass Effect, and Dragon Age all have player-made main characters. Dragon Age (and Mass Effect, to a lesser degree) has a number of very well-done female NPCs as well. – Tarben8 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
Did Walter White use Jesse Pinkman as a proxy conscience? If so, in which instances, and what were the effects on Walt and Jesse?
To be more specific, throughout BB, Jesse learns of Walt's heinous acts - through witness, discovery, or Walt's admission - and this "education" seems to take a toll on Jesse, but never Walt. Is there a "type" of sin that hurts Jesse most deeply? Is there a group of people for whom Jesse suffers most deeply? How is Jesse's spiritual and physical suffering manifested? Finally, can someone who murdered Gale Boetticher and Todd Alquist be a character of conscience? – Tigey8 years ago
Juxtaposing Dorian Gray and Breaking Bad is quite genius! Wow, I never really considered that pairing, and I am still having a bit of difficulty doing so, while thoroughly enjoying the task. This is a rare topic because it is the first one I've come across on this site that I feel I need to contemplate a bit before formulating an answer. Ironically, I recently taught a literature class that focused on the series Breaking Bad, and some pieces of literature were juxtaposed with the series, as well as multiple comparisons of numerous aesthetic mediums. You tackle numerous questions, and yes, Jesse always seems to find out about Walt's misdeeds in the worst possible ways. Isn't it odd how such an intelligent, definitive genius, lies so poorly, and has no means of "covering his tracks." Makes one wonder if he didn't care if he got caught doing these "heinous acts,"--I'm not referring to the cooking; he did not want to get caught and was obsessed with making the finest product with the highest monetary profit--or if he overestimated his intelligence and underestimated the aptitude of those around him? Walt's ego, by the close of the series, reaches a monumental level of pure self consumption. He really thinks he's Ozymandias?!
– danielle5778 years ago
Thank you, danielle577, for the compliment. – Tigey8 years ago
Danielle, I think Walt didn't get people, in a sense. It seems he may have seen people as problems to solve, therefore if he wasn't aware of a problem, he was blindsided. Regarding his bad lies, I think that was a subtle "eff you," a way of saying, "You're not even worth a good lie." That's Walt's main problem: He's Walt and we're not. – 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
Movie adaptations of books is nothing new, but in this upcoming wave of entertainment we're seeing behemoth projects being applied to development. Patrick Rothfuss's "Kingkiller Chronicles" isn't the first, but may be one of the largest undertakings of the new trend of multi-platform/cross-platform development.
In a statement from Lionsgate, who just won the rights to development: The deal sets up the simultaneous development of movies, television series and video games with the goal to adapt the many stories across the mediums at the same time.
Is this beneficial as it enables fans and audiences to explore the story in ways that film alone could not? Is it a cash grab? What are the benefits and drawbacks of this new trend of development?
Everyone has heard the cliche review of just about any movie based off of a novel: "The book was so much better.." At what point can a film be judged in its own right, and at what point do the inspirations, sometimes inherently limiting what the audience deems as acceptable, deserve consideration? Many films often are portrayed in a negative light because of variations from the original inspiration, often noticed by the biased viewer, but does that actually make the standalone film poor in its own nature?
I like this topic immediately. Future notes can definitely include examples (Harry Potter, LOTR as successful adaptation stories vs Eragon, Great Gatsby). I've also found this CBS link to help extrapolate samples: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/book-movie-adaptations-gone-girl-hunger-games-harry-potter-twilight-great-gatsby/ The article might take shape like: defining the separate entities of literature and cinema, validating ways in which the two overlap, and then defending the creative liberties and separations of various forms of entertainment as distinctly different and independently operating. – Piper CJ8 years ago
A good case study could be the 2012 adaptation of Anna Karenina, which utterly fails as an effective adaptation of the novel, but triumphs as a work of cinematic art in its own right. – ProtoCanon8 years ago
I love this topic as well. I think it's important to bring up that oftentimes, the differences between forms of media are ignored by the consumers. Something that is interesting to read might not be interesting to view; different forms of media have different modes of representation. – ainjelwings8 years ago
Ender's Game is another great example of the movie being a success in its own medium, but suffering because fans prefer the book. So much depth has to be cut because of the limited scope of a feature film, and the novel has a lot of internal monologue and exploration, but I feel the movie is still worth watching. – Tarben8 years ago
Its getting common- I guess all Harry Potter movies-though they were wonderful, but for book readers was a complete no no. I would say LOTR was way better and even the dragon Eragon- was also a complete no no – hitesharora8 years ago
There is a lot of critique of LOTR among the most die-hard fans of the books. One of the topics that could be touched upon in the article is, with an epic like LOTR, would a TV series be a more suitable medium? – Helga1018 years ago
Discuss what was going on behind the signs in older Disney movies, and analyze both the time period some of the movies were released in, and how the happenings of those times affected certain characters in the film. For example, discuss the portrayal of the 'Indians' in Peter Pan, or Aladdin, and his white American-sounding self in an Arabic community. Then, consider how Disney is changing its views on culture and race, and including new characters of different races and culture such as Tiana in The Princess and the Frog
I think it's less a matter of what was going on "behind the sighs" (did you mean "scenes"?) than it has to do with the ignorance of the times. I don't think anything in particular was happening in 1953 to influence the derogatory manner in which Peter Pan depicts native people; they simply didn't know better. They didn't understand what so-called "Indians" really were and knew nothing of their culture, which led to such horrible depictions. With regards to Aladdin (and the same is true of Pocahontas and Mulan), that's simply a matter of whitewashing, caused by white North American producers, screenwriters, and animators having trouble relating to a character who does not fit into their own cultural mould - and consequently believing that their audience (presumably comprised of other white North Americans) feels the same way. The Princess and the Frog was Disney's way of acknowledging the mistakes of their past and trying to make amends. Whether that was a genuine attempt at reparations or a mere token gesture remains to be seen. It has been nearly seven years since it came out, and we've yet to see another Disney film with the same representation of POC since. – ProtoCanon8 years ago
Not that those crows in Dumbo were built on racial stereotypes... – Tigey8 years ago
I think racial stereotypes also came from what Disney believed *kids* thought Indians were, or black people were, or whatever. If you were a kid growing up in the '40s and '50s, you might believe the crows in Dumbo talked the way real black people did, for instance. That, of course, brings up a whole other issue of what we've taught kids throughout the generations and how we can do better. If The Princess and the Frog is Disney's way of atoning for mistakes, it's a good start, even a great one. Personally though, I think they have more work to do, not only in representing people of color but representing all people groups. – Stephanie M.8 years ago
There has been a long history of remaking television, typically UK television, and remaking/adapting it for new audiences. UK television series like Broadchuch and House of Cards (1990) have been remade for American audiences as Gracepoint (2014) and House of Cards (2013). In what ways does the remake fail or succeed? Is the remake necessary for producing quality television?
Depending on what generation you grew up in, the word "nerd" (or "dork") is either a slander or a quirky compliment. Somewhere between Baby Boomers and Millennials we became lost in translation as to exactly what "nerdom" means and how you obtain it. When did the term "Nerd" become cool? And if someone refers to themselves as a nerd how can you be sure they're not lying about the stack of comics and manga under their bed?
Q: Does a 'nerd' have to have comics and where glasses? Or could they just be truly devoted to acquiring an education and good grades? Perhaps you could explore varying degrees of "nerdom"through your writing or perhaps you could explore multiple definitions. – melpetrinack8 years ago
In the GenX day we used nerd as an insult and most of us went through a nerdy phase. But now it is kind of a compliment and I have noticed that the teenagers of today don't seem to be going through the ugly duckling phase. Lucky!! Also even if someone does look nerdy it is more like geek chic. – Munjeera8 years ago
Most nerd culture has become mainstream these days, and I think in general people don't tend to be made fun of anymore for things like watching anime or Game of Thrones or playing Pokemon or Dungeons and Dragons. As a group, the millennial generation seems to have realized that some of these things that have been labelled as "nerdy" are actually lot of fun for the average person. – darapoizner8 years ago
In addition to darapoizner's point that a lot of things that were considered 'nerdy' are really fun, I think the word 'nerd' has come to be viewed as less of an insult, and more as a recognition of knowledge. Nerds get really involved in the things they like, so they end up amassing tons of information about that specific interest. Now when someone refers to someone else, or increasingly commonly themself, as a nerd, it's a way of telling you that they're an expert, but it sounds less self-aggrandizing than straight out calling themselves an expert. – chrischan8 years ago
Endride, a new anime, was released on April 2nd 2016. I've read a lot of comments that the show is supposed to be a yaoi anime, but frankly I don't understand where they're coming from with that idea. When it comes to romances, animes are usually super obvious, especially with the protagonists and at best it feels more a borderline romance, and I doubt there is any romance in this series. Why do you think people believe that the two of the main characters are going to hook up?
I believe the rise in the "fujoshi-and the fudanshi"-oriented series has set an expectation for some viewers. – chrishepburn8 years ago