EA is one of the biggest, if the biggest video game company in the world. The company has an exclusive 10 year deal with Disney to make AAA Star Wars video games. Their run has been marred with controversy and critical disappointment. The 1st Battlefront game was launched with a limited amount of content, which drew negative attention from many critics and fans. Battlefront 2 was mired with an enormous loot box/micro transaction controversy, which contributed to disappointing sales (compared to EA's expectations). EA also cancelled and closed Visceral Studios and its Single Player Action and Adventure Star Wars Game, an idea many fans were excited about. There is now a rumor that another Star Wars project has been cancelled. Why can't EA make Star Wars, one of the most profitable brands in the world, reach the massive heights that many expected in terms of sales, game output, and critical reception?
The Internet is rife with communities encompassing various topics and mediums, ranging from niche comic-book properties to history buffs. Animation has spawned different communities within the realms of anime, western animation, online independent animation, etc. The most known, or vocal at least, seem to be on Newgrounds and YouTube, in which the latter consists of YouTubers reviewing cartoons. What are the aspects of these communities who dedicate themselves to discussing cartoons? What types of people are involved, and how do they view and treat the subject matter they name themselves after?
With the release of Spiderman, I keep hearing comments on how brilliant the narrative is. Do you think the back story of a narrative video game has to be compelling to play it? How much does it affect your enjoyment?
I think this is an interesting topic and one that has arisen a number of times here, but has never been fully discussed. The concept of narrative in gaming is very different due to its modular narrative, and we see that games with great reviews, awards and fan bases often have strong narratives. Yet we also have a myriad of popular, "blockbuster" games that don't even bother. So I agree how much narrative is needed? – SaraiMW6 years ago
Love the topic. I suggest looking at God of War 2018 as well. It's just begging to be compared to spider man PS4. Both are PS4 Exclusives, with iconic heroes, and deep/detailed backstories. Some would say both subvert our expectations of their established canon, ala a Kratos trying to raise a son/be a good father, and Spider Man not at the beginning of his career, Norman Osbourne Mayor, Mary Jane as a journalist. God of War has one of the most compelling stories from a game this year. – Sean Gadus6 years ago
The Last Of Us has also been praised, both for cinematic storytelling and the crafting of a brilliant narrative and strong character development. – ValleyChristion6 years ago
Fore me it depends on the genre. Any RPG, whether it be turn-based, open world, or tactical, needs to have a great narrative and story. There are elements of RPGs that I love, such as level grinding, character customization, and level progression, but story is what makes want to finish the game. Platformers, shooters, and other types of games can have a lackluster story and still be playable. Spiderman is that type of game for me. Most will play because they are fans of the Marvel Universe and would play the only thing available to do was swing with spidy webs and kick bad guy butt. – Richard Krauss6 years ago
I think it all depends on the individual. Many gamers prefer well-done mechanics and couldn't care less about the narrative, while many other games, usually more casual, tend to prefer a good story. I'm more of a casual gamer myself, but I do know that there's definitely a divide between storytelling and gameplay preferences in the gaming community. With the success of games such as The Last of Us, the Uncharted games, Detroit: Become Human, The Witcher series, God of War 2018, etc. it's become more prevalent to wider audiences that games are a medium capable of storytelling. (I'm aware that there are many games before these that have had good stories, I'm just referring to more recent games that presented this to the mainstream). Proponents argue that the games show that video games can be art (which I think they are by default, regardless of a strong narrative or not) However, there's also been some pushback and complaints that video game studios are focusing too much on being "interactive movies" with their emphasis on photorealistic graphics and story-driven projects. I see valid points on both sides, and personally, I just enjoy a game that's fun to play. I think it comes down to the team creating the game and how they want to approach their production. Some games set out to tell a good story, others care more about gameplay, and many others have achieved both, though all that's subjective of course. Personally, it depends on what I know about the game in terms of its genre and what I expect from it. I enjoy The Witcher 3 and Uncharted 4, which have great graphics and engaging characters, and also like a game such as Shovel Knight, a pixelated game which itself has a simple story but also has beautiful art direction and good mechanics. And of course, Nintendo games such as Mario Kart and Super Mario Party never fail to bore me. – ImperatorSage6 years ago
I'd highly recommend that the person who tackles this topic look into Narratology within the field of Game Studies or Digital Media Studies. There's lots of good stuff out there to support arguments made! – Pamela Maria6 years ago
Analyze the ways in which sexual expression has evolved with the Playboy publications. How has the content of the magazines shaped the critique of sexuality, for example, raising youth to believe nudity as something to be ashamed of. Give your take on how Playboy has helped influence the revolution in sex and sexuality. Use established authors, artists and models of the magazine to highlight Playboy as a tool towards progression to debunk the scrutiny of nudity.
This is an interesting topic. Considering the number of years Playboy has been around, a good essay can be written on this publication. – Joseph Cernik6 years ago
Revision: With the new A&E series The Secrets of Playboy. There appears to be two sides of the experience. There's the brand that changed the game, and the man and his affiliates who damaged the reputations of women in-house. An analysis of the television series as a whole is necessary. The original concept of this submission is now tone-deaf. – CardinalRayPrints3 years ago
There are already a bunch of studies and analyses on that matter. Besides, the scope of your proposal looks too ambitious for this platform. – T. Palomino2 years ago
Is the verve or is it the persona? How much of an influence does the performer's name have on the crowd? Would Johnny Cash, Eddie Money, Tom Cruise, River Phoenix, Chris Rock, Paris Hilton be any less fascinating in physical presence alone? Explore the notoriety or the appeal of the name behind the spectacle. Does being a Barrymore, Sheen, Fonda, Howard, or Coppola make something out of nothing? Does Hollywood provide the grit or does the audience induce the alchemy?
Some names are catchy, others are not. Does that make a difference in success. A good idea for an article. – Joseph Cernik6 years ago
Take a deep dive into the hive mind of galleries influence, art exchange, reproductions, and the notion that art… has value outside of the original artists intent.
to anyone who chooses to investigate this topic, the work of Theodore Adorno would be extremely helpful! – ees6 years ago
Artists- artists those are capable to freeze time and space through their engagement and creative involment with their expression and composition; perhaps strives less for hefty commercial revenue generation than satisfaction of their expression (s) real communication and appreciation. – SB Bhardwaj6 years ago
With the release of Aquaman, viewers are torn on its impact on DC's popularity and current direction. Examining some of the reactions, as well as what DC needs to do to close the ever-growing gap with Marvel (In terms of popularity and revenue) may be interesting.
The new original content that is available on DC's streaming service are Titans and S3 of Young Justice. Both are matured interpretations of DC's "younger" teams and both have Dick Grayson as the primary character. What is the appeal of making shows about younger heroes. How do they differ from prior interpretations (Teen Titans, Teen Titans Go!, S1&2 Young Justice, etc.)
I think this topic definitely has to delve into the history of superhero comics, particularly with teenaged sidekicks. As far as I understand, for so long, superhero sidekicks were often young teens who weren't developed much beyond aiding the main heroes. Heroes such as the Teen Titans and Young Justice allowed comic-book readers, who were mostly young children and teens, to see themselves represented and allow them to relate more to them. The sidekicks weren't just sidekicks anymore, they were their own heroes, but like youth, were still learning about the world and themselves. Many still faced regular teenage challenges while navigating dangerous lives. From a more cynical and business perspective? Money. Having younger heroes allows networks to target younger demographics, and thus catch more views and sell more toys for kids. This is especially present with action cartoons, many of which have of course been in the superhero genre. TTG, as hated as it is by many, is CN's most profitable ongoing IP due to this, though its views do seem to be waning as of late. (Though this may be a part of the general decline in cable TV ratings) – ImperatorSage6 years ago
Much has been debated over what fuels producers, screenwriters, directors, and actors in their quest to deliver the finest storytelling. Yet, one need only to look back a few decades to notice how audience appetite was satisfied with outer space dilemmas or even common, mundane concerns. Clint Eastwood, Michael Douglas, Arnold Schwarzenegger are names that come to mind when retreating back to determine what drove legions of viewers to the silver screen or the television screen. Eastwood and Douglas both acted as the cop on the beat (Dirty Harry and Streets of San Francisco) and eventually starred in roles on the complete opposite side of the law (Escape from Alcatraz and Wall Street), respectively. Schwarzenegger initially capitalized on villainy (Terminator, Conan the Barbarian) and then showed a softer side in Kindergarten Cop as well as other comedic jaunts. Explore the impulse for this effective formula of screenplay, whether at home, abroad, or any distant time or place. On what basis does the actor make the decision to reverse his posture throughout his career or, as is most often the case, venture onto the director chair or embark on political agendas (Ronald Reagan, Shirley Temple)?
There is something here that could be good. Focusing on what brings about change regarding, say, a few actors- how they try to adapt or try to remain consistent to their images. – Joseph Cernik6 years ago
What are we saying when we claim the book we are reading is a "guilty pleasure"? Why do we assume we should feel ashamed for our choice of literature? Are we presuming that all literature can be qualitatively measured? Why should we, even with a tongue-in-cheek intent, associate reading with guilt of any kind? It can be argued that when applied to food there can be at least metrics for what define "good" and "bad" (even if it amounts to the same thing: unnecessary and self-inflicted shame). Who are we assuming judges us for books that we think we should not be reading?
Actually a really interesting topic that spans literature and psychology. It would be interesting to also look at the division of categories - women vs men, different age groups, cultural divisions (for instance reading 'The Satanic Verses' in India is a very different 'guilty pleasure' to reading a Mills & Boons in America), even looking at the period changes as different popular culture texts have been adopted into mainstream society. – SaraiMW7 years ago
From my experience, a lot of 'guilty pleasures' are books that are marketed towards women, and because of this they're seen as inherently inferior to works that are aimed at a mixed audience. While, generally, these books are no less worthwhile than their counterparts, because of the stigma surrounding them people attempt to justify their enjoyment of them as a 'guilty pleasure' to avoid having to get into a lengthy discussion of why they should be allowed to enjoy them without ridicule. – jessicalea7 years ago
Very interesting idea! You could use works on the production fo taste such as Bourdieu's "Distinction" and consider the role of age, gender, race, sexuality, and other axes in defining what's a "legitimate" pleasure and what's a "guilty" pleasure. Maybe also consider the role of shame in the idea of guilty pleasure – rmostafa6 years ago
"Guilty Pleasure" as reading something that doesn't fit what we might usually read. Reading a romantic novel if it is rare for someone to do. It might it open up a new world to explore regarding how we develop different perspectives. In this regarding, guilty pleasure serves a purpose, not just something we read because we needed to read something. – Joseph Cernik6 years ago
I guess it's similar to when you like something but all your friends don't like it, so you either watch or read it secretly, like you're almost ashamed of liking it and don't want your friends to know you have a differing opinion. Or when you're expected to not like something, like an adult liking Barbie movies for example, or a man liking otome games. Not saying they can't, anyone can like anything. – TaylorKirb6 years ago
I personally am not exactly a believer in the idea of a "guilty pleasure." If something gives one a sense of pleasure, no ill feelings coming from it, then why feel guilty? I do suppose it comes mostly from how most popular circles perceived a piece of media that garners that term. If others in a majority are bound to call something bad or not the usual level of quality, it can make one feel somewhat lesser for being in the camp that sees merit. But they're the ones who should be the most vocal about it as well. – berryplusbears6 years ago
I personally never understood the notion of "guilty pleasures." If you enjoy a piece of media, then you shouldn't feel guilty about it. If I don't like a piece of work then I won't enjoy it, that's it. Like berryplusbears mentioned, I think it's from various media communities and how they may perceive other works that may not fit their specific criteria for what makes something good but still enjoy it. If you ask me, that's just expanding your tastes, but I guess it also helps some people justify liking certain things for themselves. – ImperatorSage6 years ago
Characters facing conflicts make for an interesting story, and we know characters may experience different types of conflicts with other characters or even the world they exist in. How, then, do ideologies fit into this? Many people have a set of beliefs to follow, but what happens when one of their beliefs contradict another belief they have? Just an example of many, but consider Simba from The Lion King and how he has to choose between leaving home to achieve freedom or return home to fulfill his role as heir to the throne (obviously there are more examples of other characters facing competing ideologies, this is just the first that came to mind). How do ideologies add interest to the story and how do competing ideologies perhaps enhance the story altogether?
Interesting topic idea. I think ideologies often make for interesting character conflicts, because they're intangible yet can be constraining. – WesternPaladin6 years ago
What is more important when writing: The Creative Process? or The perfection of structure, language usage, and grammar?
I think it would be interesting to approach this topic by examining the creative process in its entirety, i.e. the importance of creativity versus perfection when coming up with the idea in the first place, creativity versus perfection when writing a first draft and creativity versus perfection when editing. – PhoebeLupton6 years ago
I tend to agree with Phoebe's comments. In my case when I write the first draft it's very much in the 'stream of consciousness' vein, just letting it all flow out and getting the ideas down on paper (or screen) before they vanish. If we edit as we go then we tend to over-edit and be too self-critical. My advice is write with your 'right brain', then edit with your 'left brain'. Oh, and a good cup of coffee helps too :) – Amyus6 years ago
I agree with the comments above; the creative process and the perfection of structure complement each other and each act is more useful than the other at different stages of the writing process. However, I think that there's another interesting question implied by this topic: which draft features the writer's most sincere and authentic voice: the intuitive, free-flowing, and spontaneous first draft, or the meticulously crafted final draft? – Vertov.Isou6 years ago
Nice topic, but perhaps a bit too broad? I'd narrow in on a subtopic that deals with both creation and perfecting, such as how and when to make your inner editor be quiet. – Stephanie M.6 years ago
Forget perfection, you'll never write. I've seen colleagues over the years waiting to do their magnus opus and they still haven't written. Writing leads to better writing and better writing to even better writing. – Joseph Cernik6 years ago
This is a good question, I agree with Joseph Cernik that if you're aiming for perfection than you'll never write. You'd scare yourself off before you even pick the pen up. With saying that it is still important to always edit and re-edit your work. And Remember keep on writing! – Kylie276 years ago
intriguing, but i think im going to have to say create. polish is polish. – Glimmerkill6 years ago
I was reading Stephen King's 'On Writing' the other day, and cannot but feel that if the thing doesn't exist, it cannot be perfect. Much like Vertov.Isou's comment, the drafting process often contains the authors real and true intensions, their most sincere and authentic voice.
In this way, the creative process is so much more important than the perfection of the writing. – Hodge5 years ago
Analyze how the songs which were specifically chosen from the '80s depicted every single internal conflict that the protagonist went through, and also pick up instances how each song was consistently featuring itself like the voice of the audience.
This could also be expanded to analyze other production elements, such as lighting, costuming and props. Or someone with in depth music knowledge could go deeper into unlocking more symbolic connections. – Kevin6 years ago
Analyse the depiction of family units in horror films. Discuss the idea that horror films throughout the decades have highlighted moral panics in order to save the sanctity of the traditional family unit. For example, in The Exorcist (1973) a single parent family is attacked, insinuating that the possesion of Regan may not have happened if both parent were present. With this in mind are we subconciously being conditioned to continue the current or prefered sociological trends that surrounf the family unit.
Good observation. What would or should the ideal horror film do instead? – Kevin6 years ago
You could argue the same thing in the original film adaptation of Carrie (1976). – RetroDarling6 years ago
Analyze how changes in technology (rhythm machines, streaming services) and people's changing taste in music have led to the loss of influence rock music (Punk, New Wave, Heavy Metal, Grunge, etc.) had on mainstream pop culture. Also compare the number of new bands signed to major record labels to the number of acts of other genres (Hip-hop, country, folk, etc.) from the early 2000s to the present.
Briefly outline and analyze Netflix original series that have garnered both positive and negative attention from the online LGBT community. Discuss why some series disappointed gay and queer fans, like Voltron: Legendary Defenders and Kiss Me First, and others delighted them, like She-Ra: Princesses of Power, Sens8, and Black Mirror. Potentially discuss whether other streaming services have "hopped on the bandwagon" with gay-friendly shows or have yet to catch up.
Analysis of how the film Legally Blonde stereotypes the leading protagonist Elle Woods as a "dumb blonde". Perhaps look in to how the film attempts to distract from this stereotype yet continues to represent Elle as this character.
I think you might be missing the point/need to exit the very early 2000s mindset of what a woman should be. After movies like House Bunny (and other 2000s Rom coms) and the Marilyn Monroe figure became integrated into pop culture and eventually led to the hyper gendered misogyny and female stereotypes that still hurt us today. Legally blonde and mean girls and she’s out of my league are all riffing on that, Elle just happened to be one of the first women in recent media to prove that smart and pretty and sexy are all one thing, and her accomplishments were her own. (I count her final bf as eye candy). In the musical the song “so so so much better exemplified this) plus her friendship with her exe’s new girl and the salon owner provide examples of female friendship that are not based on clique mentality or appearance – chloedubisch4 years ago
Aquaman has been incredibly successful since its release. While many analysts and critics were skeptical of its chances at success, the film has done incredible business, being the repeat number one at the box office for 3-4 weeks. The film is now DC's most successful film overseas and has the potential to be a billion dollar films (sits at around 800 million currently). What qualities or circumstances have helped make Aquaman so successful, compared to the lackluster Justice League (which was both critically and commercially disappointing for many fans and critics).
It is probably one of those instances when people are more interested in an origin tale than an ensemble of superheroes with no background. – AthenDawn6 years ago
Aquaman as a sole hero versus a group of them (Justice League) might matter regarding success. This may be related to the the way a story develops on the screen--it may be easier and more enjoyable to follow one rather than too many heroes. – Joseph Cernik6 years ago
This is just my own observation of the two films.
Prior to Aquaman, I would always say that I would choose to watch Justice League over Batman v Superman. BvS was a film that took itself too seriously and lost its comic-book quality. And also, (unless you watch the extended edition) character motivations are questionable. Justice League had a very problematic plot and its special effects were absolutely awful-- but it was able to have fun. That scene when Flash tries running behind a newly revived Superman? EPIC. But it was also a film that could not decide between being serious or comedic and shifts in tone were jarring to say the least. This could also be because of the sudden shift in directors, Snyder to Whedon.
Aquaman seems to have a good balance-- the only faults that I saw it have was that it was too long and the inclusion of the Black Manta plotline was not necessary since the more obvious concern was Oceanmaster v Aquaman. Also the special effects are beautiful.
Wonder Woman still reigns as the best DCEU movie for me, but I would probably place Aquaman as second or third. – FabiAlejandra6 years ago
I think the star power and marketing had a huge effect. Jason Mamoa has the looks, and even better, he's charismatic, so people will want to watch him. The movie was also marketed as being more silly and not taking itself as seriously as the other DCEU movies. I haven't seen it so I don't know how valid that is within the movie's context. I'm personally a little surprised by Aquaman's success just due to him being a joke in pop culture and most people disregarding him as an actual, or at least useful, superhero. However, considering the success of modern blockbusters, especially with the MCU and DCEU (financially anyway), I'm not surprised general audiences gravitate towards a movie that features a CGI fest of people riding sharks and fighting a war underwater. It's a perfect film for popcorn spectacle and escapism. China apparently also had a lot to do with the movie's box office success. – ImperatorSage6 years ago
Orange is the New Black tells stories of corruption, privilege and discrimination in the American criminal justice system. In its most recent season American Horror story tells the story of women rising together and the death of traditional female roles. What is the value or purpose of seeing contemporary issues played back to us in our entertainment? What does this do for us?
Love this! There's lots of other shows you can tap into for examples of this, too, and you can pretty much make a case for most shows having an underlying political or social message. I would encourage you to consider maybe honing in on one specific topic. Focusing on one topic, like the criminal justice system or traditional female roles, would allow for more room to explain the issue and why its being mirrored in entertainment media. I think it's interesting because we often think of television as "escapist" media, when it often comments upon timely social issues. – Eden6 years ago
a media is a reflection of the society its in. its fine to add realistic elements to shows and all forms of art have the right to spread a message and have themes. and for orange is the new black, i mean, the show is about prison, especially its system, in america.....i think its very much natural for them to talk about the justice system and everyone that is affected by it. – jayjayhutch6 years ago
Although it is important for art to represent its contemporary political climate, however, too much of it might be the end call for a piece of art. – AthenDawn6 years ago
An interesting topic. How we may develop attitudes and opinions about problems in real life can be helped along by how they are presented in a fictional way. – Joseph Cernik6 years ago
Media has always been a reflection of the society it was created in, and there have always been media works that held themes of contemporary issues. Unfortunately, with social media and the political climate today, at least in the U.S, there's a lot of people who believe these things are biased towards an agenda or trying to be preachy. I do agree that there's a lot of media that can come off as preachy, especially if not well executed, but having underlying political/social messages in a work doesn't automatically devalue it, unlike what many, many groups see it. If that were the case, then works such as 1984, Brave New World, any Shakespearean work, etc. are all bad. Different audiences have different tastes, and when they encounter a work that doesn't cater to them, that's when you get the complaints, especially from those who want all their entertainment to provide escapism. – ImperatorSage6 years ago