Topics

Animation allows storytellers to directly depict topics and subjects beyond the physical and the real, unlike live-action which is restricted to implying non-physical ideas (such as emotions and mental state) through physical mediums. Actors, for example, must use their facial and body language to indicate the emotions of their character. Animators, however, can get more creative in how they visually depict emotions.

How do animators show emotions through animation-specific methods, and how do those visual representations benefit the story? What do these techniques add to the piece?

As film and literature franchises grow in scope and popularity, audiences often crave additional material from creators that supplements the world of the main story, frequently known as an expanded universe (EU). Both Harry Potter and Star Wars are hugely successful franchises that feature expanded universes; however, audience reception to this extra material can vary greatly.

Before its acquisition by Disney, the Star Wars EU featured literally hundreds of books, video games, and comics by various authors that explored character backstories, recounted new adventures, and even created entirely new characters and eras of Star Wars lore. Importantly, the old EU was never considered canon by Lucasfilm (although Lucas did take elements from EU material and incorporate them, sometimes directly, into his canonical movies). It was generally well-received by fans and critics, so much so that elements from the old EU are continually being reworked into Disney-era Star Wars material today, such as the character Grand Admiral Thrawn. "Harry Potter" author J.K Rowling has also continued to produce supplementary material for her books, including continuous posts to Harry Potter fan website Pottermore as well as the Fantastic Beasts films. However, Rowling is often derided for her additions to her canon, being criticized that she is simply trying to retroactively "fill in" what she forgot to include in her books instead of add to the lore (the most famous example being her revelation that Dumbledore was gay the whole time). Some even feel this is harmful to the integrity of the original books themselves.

Why is there such a difference in opinion concerning expanded universes? Is it due to the authorship of supplementary material (Star Wars' EU was penned by multiple authors and NOT by Lucas, while Rowling's only comes from her)? Does canonicity of the material matter? Is it the length of time audiences have had to process it? Is it genre? Most importantly, does having an EU truly add to or detract from the main franchise material, i.e. the most important aspect of the franchise? Other famous expanded universes include the Marvel and DC Cinematic Universes, Doctor Who, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Star Trek, etc.

In recent years, more and more people seem to be writing all sorts of nonfiction books based on popular literary movements, TV shows, and other popular media. One of the most well-known versions of this seem to be theme cookbooks, including a Downton Abbey cookbook and even a Lovecraftian horror cookbook called "the Necronomnomnom," which came out just this year. However, other kinds of books exist, including self-help books with popular characters and even a guide to starting a business using tips from Game of Thrones. Are these tie-ins a clever idea or a cynical cash grab? Can they offer any insights that a standard book couldn't? Are there any examples that stand out as particularly interesting or useful?

As the number of digital news sources rise, the number of print media consumers falls. Many believe that the death of print is inevitable since the generations that are accustom to print will eventually die out. Do you think younger generations will keep print alive? Is it really worth saving?

Todd Philips's Joker film is the most talked about film of the fall. When the film premiered, some critics lauded it as a masterpiece while others expressed dissatisfaction and outrage over the content within the film. With Joker passing $900 million dollars at the box office, it is apt to discuss the factors that contributed to the film's success. With this in mind, did the controversy and outrage circulating around the film provide easy/free marketing for the film and bring attention from mainstream media outlets that otherwise would have spent less time covering and discussing the film?

The number of female protagonists in video games has sharply increased in recent years. From Lara Croft to D. Va and Widowmaker in Overwatch or Ellie in Last of Us, there’s no denying the move to cast women characters in the lead in many of today’s gaming franchises. The question I have is whether this is in fact a shift in the direction towards gender equality and a real desire to branch out the target client base to include female consumers. The evidence to the contrary lies in the character design of these string, intelligent, independent women and girls who nevertheless remain depicted in what constitute for CIS male players as erotically charged and sexually arousing body types and outfits. Further proof of this underlying trend can be seen in the fact that all of these “empowering” characters are extremely popular in rape based hentai games and videos. Is the gaming industry (designers and consumers) still in the end just a cesspit of misogynistic desires despite the work of women challenging gamer culture through a history of conflicts as #gamergate?

The Marvel and DC cinematic universes have created superheroes that benefitted from the US military industrial complex then turned their backs on it. Captain America became a hero from the Army’s super soldier serum in The First Avenger then rejected surveillance overreach by government agencies in The Winter Soldier. Iron Man inherited a vast fortune from Stark Industry’s weapons development then restructured the company to clean energy development at the end of the first movie. Batman’s endless array of tech toys originated as US military prototypes of Wayne tech repurposed for war on Gotham’s crime. Nonetheless, super heroic courage, genius intellect, and god like powers are always depicted preserving the status quo (late stage capitalism with grossly corrupt governments protecting global income inequality as the earth burns) and actively combatting those who strive to fix such problems. For example, Thanos aims to eradicate overpopulation and Killmonger plots to undermine white global dominance by destroying US and NATO military superiority. What can we make of this ambiguity in superhero comics and movies?

The most beloved (and not necessarily great) television/cartoon shows tend to have unforgettable, epic opening songs that have undeniably helped them attained cult statuses. But, more recently, due to strict runtime or creative choices, shows have distanced themselves from such practice, choosing instead very short intro music, for instance, Breaking Bad (20secs) as opposed to the more traditional 1-1:30min long intro.

Analyze how a great opening song can contribute to the popularity of a TV/cartoon show even if it is not of great quality or does not hold up in time. Are theme songs more than just accompaniment? With the market slowly being dominated by streaming, will the practice and culture of the opening songs still be relevant (especially when you can skip the intro)?

Analyze the reason why directors use cameos. What impact does it have on the audience? Why is it gaining popularity?

From Kareem Abdul Jabbar to Stan Lee to Stephen King, highlight examples that will look at why the crossover from reality to media is so popular. Big Bang Theory regularly played with this trope with great effectiveness. Why do we love it?

I'm really interested in the barriers that algorithms may put up on social media in terms of finding like-minded communities, particularly around social justice and activism. Does the use of the algorithm and other tools like shadow-banning limit who is allowed to speak out and be seen within social media, and what impact might that have in our society? Who runs into these hurdles more than others, and why?

Analyse Æon Flux (1991-95) to gain an understanding of how Peter Chung has experimented with visual narrative to tell a story without relying on dialogue.

Compare and contrast the varying successes of a TV franchise using Law and Order, CSI and Criminal Minds. Why have some succeeded, such as CSI Miami and others failed, such as Criminal Minds: Beyond Borders. Take a look at how the actors have succeeded in other shows such as Shemar Moore in SWAT. Not only has the franchise done well but the actors have moved on to other shows with enduring popularity over decades.

Analyze popular themes in Canadian Literature from LM Montgomery to Alice Munro to Margaret Atwood. Some have noted themes of survival, self-deprecation and social gospel. Also take a look at Northrop Frye's literary criticism to form a lens to analyze Canadian literature.

Rosalia has undoubtedly become one of 2019's biggest rising stars in the music industry. However, what is even more interesting is her ability to modernise the traditional Spanish music styles of Flamenco and bring them to a contemporary audience. It is important not only for the continuation of this culture but for representation of Spanish culture internationally.

The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim was released in 2011 and almost 8 years on still has a thriving community of players and content creators. Why is it that a fairly linear, story-based RPG has so much replay potential? Analyse the reasons why people keep picking up this game!

Shakespeare's Romeo & Juliet has been blamed for many teen suicides. More recently, the Netflix show, 13 Reasons Why, has faced the same accusations. Is there a casual relationship between the depiction of teen suicides in movies and television and actual suicides in teens? And if so, would the causal connection merit censorship for utilitarian purposes?

Have you ever read a headline while reading the news, whether it's considered a serious platform or not, where you truly question why someone would write a whole article dedicated to something so trivial? How is it possible today to see two articles side by side about two drastically different subjects like "Baby Found Amongst Rubble in Syria" right next to "Will Selena Gomez Ever Wear a Bra Again"? I understand that the world can't always focus on the negative aspects of life all the time but shouldn't we start to question how nitpicking an famous individual is a better news alternative?

This purpose of this article is to determine whether or not the recently published rehearsal script for Harry Potter and the Cursed Child should be considered as a new addition to the Harry Potter canon. In other words, this article would focus on the mixed reception from fans, J.K Rowling's involvement in the project (or lack thereof) and argue for or against the play as part of the overall Harry Potter story timeline.

The name YouTube perfectly described the platform of my youth. People making and posting content of themselves meant to be shared online. And not necessarily with the hope of going viral. What has it become now? Small YouTubers are overshadowed by corporations and businesses. Individuals who become successful now all sell merch and maybe even have exclusive content unlocked for a price with "join" button or with their Patreon. Youtube's algorithms give me dumb suggestions I don't want to watch because of all the clickbait out there. How has this happened? Is this a problem? Is it inevitable evolution of the medium?

Modern progressive activists often act as if the causes they support are radically new. However, most of them go back decades, and some have been around for centuries in one form or another. One well-known example of this is the drive to expose the genocide of Native Americans. In modern times, this takes the form of protests over the use of Native American lands, or why we celebrate certain public holidays. However, references to the dispossession and abuse of Native Americans have appeared in the literature at least since the 1800's (including a reference in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein). Another example is the term "intersectionality" itself, which was invented in the 1980's but didn't achieve widespread usage until the past few years. Just how far back do the various progressive concepts and causes go–and, by extension, if they've been with us for so long how come change hasn't come faster?