Topics

It is common to see celebrities of all stripes coming out and championing various causes. This makes headlines and is good publicity. However, is there any real evidence that this type of campaigning by modern celebrities has made any difference in real life? Is there evidence that the world is a much better place for this type of activism?

Take a look at how Denzel Washington's character, Whip Whitaker creates a disconnect between consciousness and his underlying alcohol and drug addiction. Modern cinema doesn't often put viewers in the shoes of someone who realizes their problem by the end of the film. Some of the saddest scenes in the film occur when Whip is drinking. Additionally, he is a great pilot and his drunkenness does not seem to get in the way of that. Perhaps it would be interesting to see how addiction becomes reliance in this case, and how well the movie portrays two characters: drunk Whip and sober Whip.

Mom and Dad is a polarizing movie, to say the least. But critics are focusing on the acting, and not enough people are talking about the over-the-top and louder-than-necessary soundtrack that plays throughout the film. Were the music/audio queues a miscalculated mistake, or a statement?

Write an article assessing the accompanying audio to the movie. Do the loud stereotypical mood sounds take away from the narrative or add to it?
I found the soundtrack an interesting element that added extra commentary to the narrative. Although the actors took their roles seriously, the audio's juxtaposition to their struggles, highlights a lack of seriousness (especially when scary buildup music is playing in the beginning, constantly threatening danger before any is close to being presented). The situation the characters experience are dire and unfortunate, but the noise in the background continuously reminds audiences that the premise itself is still ridiculous.

The term "creativity" or "creative" was once connected solely with art. Now, both business and science have adopted this term as a way to cast themselves as innovative, relatable, lively and fun. Some even use "creativity" as a way to insinuate that they are progressive and efficient (though there is nothing efficient about being creative!). If business and science are adopting the term "creativity," does that then encourage artists to adopt the qualities of business and science? Does art need to justify itself or can art still be produced for art's sake? Should creative be reserved only for the arts, or is the broadening usage of the term an exciting development?

I’m a big fan of the screen – films and tv shows, I wondered how come Australia doesn’t produce more films and television shows based on science fiction, fantasy or even the superhero genre which has taken over the world.
America and Europe have many films and TV shows dedicated to depicting these things and Australia doesn’t have much and if we do, they don’t get much air time. This fact doesn’t irritate me but if depicting films and shows within these genre's are such huge successes in other regions how come Australia hasn’t tried it?
I know there are a few films and shows out there but if there a more I would love to know.
Is Australia against these films?
Is it against our film/tv industry to make these?
Have they tried and failed?
If/ when a film or TV show in Australia has elements of science fiction / fantasy involved how come they don’t get the same exposure?

Has someone written about this already and I don’t know?

The Oscars recently announced that they are introducing a new award category for "outstanding achievement in popular film." Although the Oscars have periodically added new awards categories, some might think that this is a desperate ploy by the Academy to attract more viewers. On the other hand, others might perceive the introduction of this new category as a legitimate attempt to celebrate both the commercial and critical successes of box-office hits that are rarely nominated for Oscars. What do you think? In the context of this latest award category, do you believe that the Academy is under pressure to attain higher ratings? How have previous awards additions been received by the public, such as the "Best Makeup and Hairstyling" award in 1981? In comparison to the introduction of other awards categories, do you think this new award will have any kind of impact on the film industry?

'Charmed' is a tv show that spanned from 1998 to 2006 following the lives of sister witches that vanquish demons. The show remains a popular choice for reruns and still has a strong following. Although in no way original in plot, lore or dialogue it has remained an enduring favourite. I would argue that in many ways, similar to 'Supernatural,' the show's popularity is based not on the genre but the relationship between the sisters and the drama inherent in their lives. An interesting discussion would be to look at the comparison of the fantasy genre elements to the drama elements to see what truly is the appeal of this show.

This topic requires a look back at the early days of TV, which might not seem to matter but still has an influence. TV, at one time, was an experiment and it might end up being a surprise that certain shows became popular and had a following. Looking at the early days of children's shows and how they contrast with the present provides an insight into how far TV has come–not necessarily always for the better, just a reflection on how far we have come. Contrasts or evolution or maybe it is just development are a way to measure change: What is different about the present and whether it is better or just different from the past is useful. An historical perspective is a good way to look at the present. In this situation, looking at children's TV shows can provide that perspective. Change should not always be seen as an improvement, sometimes it is just change–we do things different than they were done in the past just not necessarily better, just different.

It is possible to look back after the first season of a show and develop a feeling that it was a good show, or even after several seasons. But, when a show first appears on TV and all that exists are those first few episodes, maybe no more than the first two or three, then what type of opinions can develop about it? It is possible to talk about a "tipping point" what something starts to take off, but here, at the beginning, the tipping point might not yet have been reached. Early on character development, character interaction, plots, story lines might be seen in different ways then might be the case after the show has been on for a longer period. When a show has been on for a season or more, the audience has more of a history to draw upon in how they see character interaction and plots develop, that is not there with only a few episodes. Those first few episodes can begin to lay the foundation for what is to come and, perhaps, it is how the audience speculates about where they think the show and its characters might be headed that matters in determining if viewers see a show as having the potential to be a good show.

I think everyone has suffered from anxiety at some point in their lives. Whether it's gut-wrenching anxiety with extreme mind fog or worrying about present/future events. Being a writer, I understand exactly what it's like to have several things pulling me in different directions, in a single day. I want to write, I have creative ideas, I've gotta find leads, family, friends, exercise and all of the other things, I need to do to "adult".

What if I could tame the beast with creativity. The ability to transmute anxiety from one container and articulate it into a creative container. Creativity comes in numerous forms, whether you're cooking your favourite dish, writing blog posts or even arranging flowers in your garden. Practicing a creative cycle weekly has proven to lower stress levels and I think it would be an interesting topic in a day and age, where anxiety is at such a high.

Gone With The Wind (1939) can be seen as a good movie. But, at the same time, it presents an image of the South which was never true in the first place and which presents slavery in almost passing reference ways. There is this time before the Civil War where, we are to believe, that the South had an ideal existence. Seeing the movie from the present, makes one quite aware of what is left out and glossed over and makes one want to go "Wait! Stop! Go back!" How can we and should evaluate the movie today?

analyse the current trend of video game to movie adaptations and why they fail to perform in the box office; also make suggestions on what could be done to improve future adaptations.

The Legend of Zelda is a game series that many of us cherish dearly as gamers. However, when the previous Zelda games came out it seems as if they were all ahead of their time (Ocarina of Time, the Wind Waker). This doesn't seem to be the case now. Although BOTW is a great game, it seems to borrow pieces from other recent RPG's: such as Skyrim and the Witcher 3. Do we as a community think that this is Nintendo giving a nod to these other great games, or are they falling behind in the RPG community?

Much discussion has occurred widely, and here on The Artifice, concerning the representation of women. From their characteristics, values, roles, costuming and purposes within film, TV, literature and comics, there is a rising concern about the way women are represented in popular culture.

However, one area that has not received too much discussion yet is the concept of the representation of the female form. By this I am referring to the actual body type and shape of female characters. Although there is much written about the over sexualisation of the form – an emphasis on unrealistically sized breasts for example – there is little that discusses what constitutes a positive portrayal of the female form. For instance, if we go to the polar opposite and position women physically with almost a masculine form are we undermining the concept of femininity? Does that even matter? Or if we present them as pseudo-teenage boys does this then privilege the male form over that of the female form? As quite frankly, outside of supermodels most women will have pronounced breasts. Should this physical feature be depicted or ignored? What is the better choice? How can we continue to represent women in a positive manner without removing their gender altogether? I recognise that some would argue for this, an androgynous form, but would that form actually resonate with women or would it isolate them further?

How can we today present a positive version of the female form?

Sharknado is suppose to end its run on TV with the release of the sixth in the series of made-for-TV movies. These movies can best be described as "camp" which might express the poor quality yet, at times, hard to resist desire (or curiosity) to watch them. Camp and television have had a long relationship, with shows such as Batman and Gilligan's Island in the 1960s to Charlie's Angels and CHiPs in the 1970s and 1980s best described as camp. What is it that attracts viewers to camp TV? Is there a clear dividing line between comedy and camp?

The Marvel Cinematic Universe has, for better or worse, changed the way that many studios view big budget film making, world building, advertising, and developing film projects. The Marvel Formula, (with individuals films, team ups, and spin offs) has been enormously successful and with Disney's enormous backing and support, there doesn't seem to be any end in sight. Will there be a point where Marvel movies will stop being as lucrative and successful as they are now? What possible reasons could contribute to a slowing of this seeming unstoppable engine?

At San Diego Comic Con 2018, Tom King unveiled his upcoming Heroes in Crisis event for D.C. Comics. The event will focus on a super hero rehabilitation center that is the target of a mass shooting. Tom King has been up front about his belief that comics should confront real issue that society is dealing with, but will this subject matter be too serious and rooted in reality to be successful (both commercially and artistically)? this article could examine other situations that explore real world issues (the struggle of Pakistani-Americans in Ms. Marvel or Drug Use in Batman:Venom) and if and how these more grounded stories are successful. You could also include the comic book industry's use of rape and domestic abuse as a plot devices, which have largely been criticized by critics and fans alike as often being insensitive or used in inappropriate ways.

Those of you who have seen my profile and work on The Artifice know I'm a Oncer. Of course, Once Upon a Time ends next week, and of course, the fangirl in me is bummed about it. But I recently came across some interesting cast interviews, where Lana Parilla, Ginnifer Goodwin, and others talked about the "resonance" of OUAT. According to the cast, OUAT was a hit and ran for seven seasons primarily because it resonated with its audience. This got me thinking – what exactly is "resonance" in the television world? What other shows have achieved it, and are there different ways to do so? How do you know when a show has achieved the type of resonance that will ensure a multi-season run, a broad and loyal fan base, and overall endurance? Discuss.

Masks have a long history in many different cultures, but they universally serve the same purpose – to transform the identity of one into another. What I mean by this is that the act of wearing a mask is used to "mask" a person's real identity and allow them to adopt, even if only momentarily, that of another. Examples of this range from simple anonymity where the wearer wishes to hide their identity for a later reveal, to those used in theatre such as Kabuki masks were the mask represents a particular character identity, to the use in ancient ceremonies where the mask is used to symbolise the gods' presence in the ceremony.

As such masks have already been used for centuries in theatre, and are considered a fairly standard aspect of performance art, but this does not diminish the power and symbolism they represent when used well. Many films have seized on the use of masks, either as a central plot device, such as in Jim Carey 1994 film 'The Mask', while others have used it as an aspect of the film, such as in 1999 film 'Eyes Wide Shut.' I think it might make an interesting topic to examine different uses and interpretations of the mask in various films, perhaps even tying them back to their cultural or social heritage.

Recently old tweets (2008-2009) by James Gunn, writer and director of 'Guardians of the Galaxy' came to light and Disney fired him from completing the third in film in the series. The tweets contained "jokes" about pedophilia and rape, obviously inappropriate and not in line with Disney's ethos. Also in light of the recent Hollywood abuse allegations the industry is quite sensitive about such things.

However, the question here is a little muddled, as obviously Gunn has apologised, but not only recently, but previously. He has responded previously to his early career behaviours and has also called himself out over the years for aspects of his "humour." How genuine this is, is of course difficult to gauge. Yet the question remains, how much of a person's past actions should they be punished for? What behaviours are completely inappropriate (sexual abuse, etc.) and what is the work of youthful foolishness? I am still on the fence concerning Gunn myself, but I think in an era of calling for greater repercussions in Hollywood for actions we do need to talk about the lines. Because there is the risk of making every controversial action anathema, which is also not socially healthy as criticism and challenges are what help drive change.