Topics

There are musical films like "Walk the Line" that tell the story of legendary real-life musicians, and then there are those like "Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story," that, while perhaps equally legendary, bring to life new, fictionalized musical talents. In the case of one of the more well-known fictional bands of all-time, Spinal Tap from "This Is Spinal Tap," the band ended up becoming something of a reality. After making their film debut, Spinal Tap actually went on to record a few albums and even embarked on concert tours. Is the experience of Spinal Tap something of an anomaly? Has Hollywood missed out on opportunities to capitalize on a potentially successful musical acts from film that could have been something more than just fictional? If so, what bands/artists from film might have made it in the musical industry?

Even prestige television shows require something of an episodic format, and the plot must progress as a series of mini-climaxes and narratives for each episode. One of the advantages of television is the fact that the repetitive nature of the episodic structure lets us see the character in a gradient of contexts. Some recent films and "cinematic universe" projects seem to be following the television model, and place characters through iterative encounters to reveal more and more about them. The Marvel films are the most obvious example, but even series like John Wick are taking this approach. As big "intellectual properties" and sequels grow increasingly important to the success of films, is film starting to treat its characters more like television's and less like the traditional film protagonist?

Analyze the connection between the game Horizon Zero Dawn and what it takes form Indigenous Cultures to create its world. Does it portray tribes in a respectful light? Do you consider any parts of the game or the game its self as appropriative or appropriation of these cultures?

The Mercer Effect is known as players and DMs having extremely high expectations for what to expect from a D&D game. Do you think the Mercer Effect has become prevalent in the last 12 months, increasing with Critical Role's popularity? Or do you think that it has grown with the knowledge of more D&D shows and an expectation that all DMs should be up to this level. Or – does it not exist at all?

Over the past year I have watched more action movies than I had ever cared to and I couldn't help but notice that each one is exactly the same. Sure, the plot might be altered just slightly but they follow an identical formula in an identical pattern: brief exposition – initial complication – bland nothingness – punching – running – car chase – running – punching – final monologue – more punching – and everything's fine. If we can sit through this repetitiveness over and over again then are we not complacent with repetitiveness in our lives?

Since the early 2000s, the superhero genre has saturated our screens with no intention of slowing down. And I wonder why this is. Why are Marvel and DC superhero movies the front runners in the current cycle of action cinema? What might be the cultural conditions which boosted the popularity of this genre? Is it simply a matter of evolved special effects adding a more realistic spectacle to the narrative, or does our love of superheroes expose a wider cultural anxiety about the need for national protection (an after-effect of 9/11, perhaps)?

The release of Todd Phillips's Joker film is imminent. With Joaquin Phoenix in the title role, the film received honors and praise at the Venice Film Festival. Though the film has been generating controversy for its content, the film is projected to have an opening week of about $80 million dollars when it debuts on October 4th. This is a massive projected gross for a R rated film. Will the critical and potential commercial success of stand alone (and more mature) films like Joker influence the direction of Warner Bros. and D.C.'s future films?

Analyzing how fan-fiction has evolved as something sort of niche and obscure on the internet, written by a usually younger audience to explore the different ideas they wanted to see from shows and movies they loved. Now it has become a wildly viral thing where some people explore those same ideas but with real people including YouTubers, band members and Hollywood celebrities. An interesting approach might be how the ones based on true people might affect those celebrities or internet personalities.

Analysis of how using a blogging platform can free the mind and creativity, as well as potentially even releasing writer's block. Open to any other thoughts on where to take this.

Just how influential is dragonball on the shonen anime of today? Hunter x hunter, Fairy Tale, and Black Clover are just a few anime with components that mirror the Dragonball series. Having large casts of characters with superpowers, and different "levels" a character can progress through. Think of all the elements that make up a shonen anime, do you agree that newer shonen anime take from DB? Where would you rank the Dragonball series in terms of influence on the shonen/action genre in anime?

This has long been a question, that usually doesn't get answered because most people don't really care. Why do a lot of anime characters not look Japanese? Is it because of diversity on screen? It would be interesting for someone to dive in to this topic. Hopefully, appropriately without any negativity or hate. I have my own theories, but I am curious to hear what other fans think.

What has led to the rise of entrepreneurial filmers in the 21st century and taking the risk by themselves to develop their own company when there are so many out there. What has benefited to the rise of individuals doing so now and not before?

Analyse the popular opinion that Harry Potter has increased youth literary interest. Has Rowling inspired young readers to go on to new and different content outside her stable, or has her pervasive Wizarding Universe sought to monopolise marketshare?

Analyse the complementary color play that defines a particular aesthetic in the science-fiction sequel. Consider how variable settings implement a refreshing palette that supplements the tone, atmosphere, and dystopian elements of the film (i.e. the unsaturated orange contrasting the metropolitan neon, etc.).

Lord of the Flies is a classic book which I am sure most of us were forced to read in school at some point in our lives. Rather then discuss the possible meanings of the book, I want us to discuss why it is such a common book to be a mandatory read in classrooms, even today. My thought is that the government wants kids to take away from the book the message that society=good and necessary and that if we were to live without a government, without laws and structure, we would all revert back to animals and begin killing each other essentially. Let me know what your thoughts are!

Does reading classical literature (written predominantly by white male writers) still have a place among young people today? A lot of high school students lose their interest in reading when they are instructed to read books that don't seem to fit in the society that we live in today. It may not even be that they hate reading all together, but that they hate reading books they find boring. For example, when the Hunger Games came out, every kid had their hands on a Hunger Games novel, even people that said they detest reading. The Hunger Games is much more action packed and fast moving compared to many older books, and it still deals with really important themes and issues that you can find in classic books as well. Not only that, but a lot of classics are casually racist or sexist. Is it right to keep teaching books that preach hateful ideas, just because they are "classics?" Will changing the curriculum to books that relate to high school students more, encourage more young people to read? Does learning English Literature lose its meaning if the classics are not taught? What is more beneficial in the long run?

People admiring celebrities isn't a new notion. History is filled with accounts of people idolizing certain individuals, whether for their physical looks, social status, special abilities, etc. This idolization can and has propped celebrities up on pedestals, creating this idea that celebrities are above others. Hollywood and other entertainment industries are the most prominent examples of this, and the internet has only further perpetuated this.

Celebrity worship has been seen with Jennifer Lawrence, Will Smith, Leonardo Di Caprio, and more recently, Keanu Reeves. Despite upholding celebrities to a high status, people often project certain qualities on these people and then tear them down as soon as their images of said celebrities are broken.

Why do you think people display such attitudes towards celebrities? With the internet being used as an outlet for toxic behavior, how do you think this could change, if at all?

For decades, Salman Rushdie's novel; 'The Satanic Verses' which was published in 1988, had aroused controversy in the Islamic world moving the community to rebel against the author by arousing conflict, leading protests and even sending death threats towards the author. So, what sparked such a backlash? It's just a novel, right?

Well, the Islamic community reacted to the apparent blasphemous nature of Rushdie's novel which employs the use of magical realism with contemporary events from the early years of Prophet Mohammed (PBUH). The novel follows the storyline of how the Qur'an was revealed at first by the angel Jibreel (Gabriel in the novel). However, the controversy sprung from Rushdie imposing a false personality and characteristic upon such valued and respectable beings from the Islamic world. This immediately caught the attention of millions of Muslims around the world, even capturing the eyes of politicians, so much so that the Iranian leader Ayatollah Khomeini in 1989, ordered the killing of Rushdie for creating such a blasphemous text. In Rushdie's defence, literary critics have argued that the text analyses the boundaries between fact and fiction. Rushdie himself argued that books, texts, religion, communities, beliefs and ideas can all be questioned if it means people are understanding the idea and theory better by building tolerance.

Throughout time, artists and authors have brought about new ideas worth exploring, which increases the contentious nature of some of these novels. Even as recent as 2003, Dan Brown's 'The Da Vinci Code' had earned disapproval by Christians and Catholic leaders for its blasphemous material leading to the book being banned in countries such as India and Lebanon. Moving on to 2005, Justin Richardson and Peter Parnell's 'And Tango Makes Three' had been one of the most challenged/banned books for seven years. The book makes many assumptions about homosexuality generating controversial questions about what makes a family. In more recent years, E.L. James's 'Fifty Shades of Grey' was seen as 'poorly written' and 'semi-pornographic' , thus, leading it to become banned in 17 libraries in Florida in 2012.

Looking into some of these texts, should it be allowed for literary texts or even other artistic forms to create controversy by disrespecting a belief, in order to question, challenge, debate and understand this belief better globally?

From politics to feminism, the writing in absurd comedies and rom-coms depicts interesting topics as background noise or as what causes the conflict in the plot, like Corporate greed in Two Weeks Notice.

After the release of his latest film, In Fabric, Peter Strickland could be considered one of the most distinctive voices in British cinema today. Is there another filmmaker whose work is similar to his? Are there any signature traits which permeate his films to-date?