Topics

In literature, stereotypes of alternative subcultures are rampant. Analyse the possible bases for such stereotypical depictions.

In Joanne Greensberg's "I Never Promised You a Rose Garden", the protagonist, who is based on Greensberg, is diagnosed with schizophrenia. However, in a 1981 New York Times article, two psychiatrists challenge this diagnosis using the diagnosis criteria in the DSM-3. Using the DSM-5's diagnosis criteria, can it be argued that the protagonist suffers from schizophrenia?

How important do you think historical accuracies are in a historical drama/novel? Should you sacrifice accuracy for drama? To what extent should the writer be held accountable for spreading inaccurate info, especially if the subjects of the drama are still alive?

In Anime such as Full Metal Alchemist, anime can be seen pulling story and other aspects from different historical time periods. This can affect they way the production is portrayed. Discuss the different historical time periods that Anime pulls from and how they affect the plot. story line, costumes, and characters. As well as how the original history compares to the Anime

Despite the popularity and artistic greatness of "Breaking Bad," the one critique I continue to apply to one of my favorite series is the relative weakness and low amount of characterization of its female characters in relation to the multi-faceted, finely constructed male characters. This article could take the form of diving more deeply into each woman's psychology (to prove me wrong, perhaps) or (if you agree with me) supporting the lack of balance between the men and women of the series in terms of characterization. The primary women under question could include Skyler White, Marie Schrader, Lydia Rodarte-Quayle, Jane Margolis, Andrea Cantillo, and even Saul's secretary Francesca and the school principal Carmen Molina. Maybe even Gretchen Schwartz? Let me know what you think!

An examination of how color, light, and dark have been used in Tim Burton's films to reflect the view points of his characters and the observance of the mundane vs the outrageous. Specifically looking at how Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children differs from many of of Tim Burton's other films by providing more "grey" spaces that are neither colorful "dream worlds" nor colorless "realities". It would also be interesting to include an analysis of the film Edward Scissorhands and how the "normal"/suburban world is portrayed as the "dream world" through color reflecting Edwards viewpoint.

An explanation of the way time travel works in Donnie Darko, why Donnie was the chosen time traveller, the role of Frank the bunny, and whether or not the events that took place were as a result of time travel or took place within an alternate universe/reality.

For all the DD fans who just can't quite wrap their head around all the theories.

I read another note entitled, 'The effects of Iconic roles on an Actor and his/her career' and I was excited that it might be a topic on something I've long contemplated on, but the description specified a different interest. So I decided to submit my own topic. I'm interested in hearing about the ways in which taking on certain roles have impacted an actor's personal life. By acting as someone else, do they find themselves becoming that character at times in their personal lives? Having had practiced traits that were perhaps new to them before their role, does it change them? Does it help or hinder them? Have they learned about new things because of a specific role, i.e. an actor acting as an astronaut – have they learned about space? This might perhaps be interesting to research into child actors as well. Since they're in a bubble surrounded by adults, is it daunting? Etc. Mainly though how specific roles have impacted their personal lives is my interest.

Let me start with the situation that brought this topic to my mind. In the interview in 2016(Jump Ryu, vol.1), Akira Toriyama, the creator of Dragon Ball, commented that the show's hero Son Goku does not feel any friendship towards other characters, including Krillin. This caused some controversy among the fans who saw this interview, because many thought that Goku and Krillin were the best friends; after all, Goku's anger exploded on Krillin's first death, and it was Krillin's death that triggered Goku's transformation to Super Saiyan. Does that mean the death of someone, whom he had no strong feelings for, made him angry enough to transform? Did he vow revenge for those he felt no friendship? The some fans were outraged, and some found Toriyama's comments ridiculous, because that was far from what they read in the text, and this new information did not clear any questions they had.

Toriyama's comments caused few controversies in the past, due to how contradictory it sounded to the readers, and also the fact that he was often forgetful of his own creations. Some even questioned the validity of his comments on Dragon Ball.

But there are other creators whose comments outside the completed text that sometimes clarifies few points. Take Tolkien's defense of Frodo. When a fan wrote to him that Frodo does not deserve to be a hero because he had succumbed to the Ring's seduction in the end, Tolkien explained that though Frodo could not bring himself to destroy the One Ring, his sufferings and humility up to that point deserve highest honor. In this case, the author's comments clarified his intentions to the readers.

So this got me thinking: how should the readers treat the creator's comments when reading the text? How critical should the readers be when considering the comments made by the creators? What analysis should be made when it seems to contradict the readings?

When mother! was released earlier this year, it created an inescapable schism between those who saw an ever-shifting always-engaging artistic study of human nature and creationism, and those who saw an over-bloated pretentious meaningless mess of a film with nothing to say. What can the praisers and detractors agree on?

Walter White wasn't the only character breaking bad during the series. One could argue that each character had their own character flaw that led to Walter's path of self-destruction. Could it be the Schwartz's greed? Gustavo's manipulation of White's ego? Jesse's lack of assertiveness against Walt? Or maybe his emasculation at the hands of Skylar and Hank?

Discuss common philosophical, social, and psychological themes in David Fincher's films (Alien 3, Seven, The Game, Fight Club, Panic Room, Zodiac, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, The Social Network, The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, Gone Girl).

Most actors play a plethora of roles in film and on television shows. Some actors though, are best remembered for one or two iconic roles, even after the film has been out for years or the show gets cancelled. Examples include Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen, best known for their portrayal of Michelle Tanner, Jaleel White (Steve Urkel), and Daniel Radcliffe (Harry Potter). More examples: Juliette Binoche (Vianne Rochet, Chocolat), Julie Andrews (Maria Rainer, Mary Poppins), and Leonardo DiCaprio (Jack Dawson).

Does being associated with an iconic role help or hurt an actor's career? Does it make a difference whether the actor was a child or adult at the time of the role (s) in question? Do viewers prefer that actors stay in iconic role "molds," or would they rather actors create new characters/avoid typecasting? Explore these and other questions, as well as any examples you might choose, to determine the positive and negative aspects of associating actors with very specific roles.

Analyse why the adolescents of our generation are so desperate to reach viral fame, and the impact this is having on the online world, and on their future. Discuss the rise of social media platforms, such as Youtube, Instagram and Musically, and the influence viral stars from these platforms have on our youth.

When we see a moral dilemma presented in creative mediums, we will all generally pick a side. People have their own moral compasses that dictate how they might react to a given situation. With Bethesda's new title "Wolfenstein II: The New Colossus", a controversy of sorts arose with the games marketing campaign for being blatantly "kill Nazi's". This is a game that is reflective of the tense current day political atmosphere in the United States; one that had some more conservative gamers taking offense to it. To them, it was seen as a blatant political statement by Bethesda in taking sides and being "politically correct". To more liberal gamers, it was pointed out that in American culture, Nazi's, by the definition of World War II, are the bad guys and they always have been. "We've been killing Nazi's in this series for many years now. Why should it be an issue now?" was a common response.

So the following question came about as a result: How might you, if you could, handle a story if it tells a tale of an individual of a dissenting opinion (perhaps if it takes a political siding), and convince everyone, regardless of personal views, liberal/conservative or otherwise, to still enjoy it just the same? And can this be done effectively and appropriately at all without angering one side or the other.

"Detroit: Become Human" is a video game made by Quantic Dream coming out in 2018. It's a choice based game shaped by the player and there has been controversy over the acceptability of it's brutal story telling/choice based outcomes. The main character may supposedly choose to act or not act in a situation that can result in the death of a child by her father's hands or the main character killing the father instead. People are calling for the scene to be taken out from the game. Some say the former outcome will fuel abusers' fantasies while others worry the latter outcome will put victims of abuse in danger by inspiring them to seek violence in return. Neither situation is unique, as in, such events have been written about and occurred in films and art before. People want to draw the line so harshly for video games and what they can portray because of the interactivity. Is it fair to treat video games so differently? Provide examples of highly controversial video games depicting violent or disturbing scenes from the past, and speculate on whether their reception will shape Quantic Dream's decisions in addressing such concerns. Are these concerns valid?

We cannot deny the impact that video games have made and continue to make on our popular culture. Consider the evolution of the gaming industry. How, in fact, has it evolved? How has it become more mainstream? What do video games offer us emotionally, mentally, and sometimes physically? What can we learn from video games that we can apply to every day life, as well as in our intellectual and educational pursuits? After analyzing these factors, consider how (and perhaps, if) video games should be taught, possibly someday at a university level. What universities might already do this, and how do these courses operate? How are they taught? What do they offer?

My Hero Academia first garnered attention when it gained a surprising amount of momentum soon after its debut in Shounen Jump, often being heralded as a spiritual successor to highly successful and soon-after ended shounen titles like Naruto and Bleach. Now, with one completed anime season and a second one ongoing, MHA can be seen everywhere in otaku culture, particularly in the realm of visual essay analysis videos posted on Youtube and elsewhere. All this, despite the fact that, as many fans and critics have pointed out, there's nothing particularly new or inventive about it. MHA takes almost every traditional shounen trope in the book and runs with them, using them to their greatest effects. It'd be interesting to pinpoint what some of those tropes are and how MHA uses them so effectively. The writer could also analyze how outside factors (like timing and anime adaptation) affected its popularity growth over the past 2-3 years.

"A Cure for Wellness" is a movie filled with loosely defined answers in need of a good article to analyze it's potential hidden meaning. The movie is saturated with the presence of eels; why eels over any other aquatic life? A quick google search says seeing eels in a place they aren't meant to be is a sign one is out of their depth (as the protagonist clearly is on multiple occasions) and the touching of an eel represents a missed opportunity. This fits well enough with the protagonist's experience/character but that leaves the question, how often were these sightings real? The movie tries to throw watchers back and forth between believing whether everything is real or in the protagonist's head. At the end when the Baron is confronted it's assumed for a short time that all the strange happenings were real and influenced by a degree of brain washing, however, in the last frame of the movie the protagonist is seen smiling with a full set of teeth when earlier in the movie he lost two. When asked about this the directors remained ambiguous on the significance, if there is any at all. Can it be deciphered how much of the film is based in reality or illusion, or is the it an unanswerable question?

Whether it be Marvel’s “Champions” which introduced a variety of different super powered teenaged individuals with an equal amount of variety when it comes to their racial backgrounds or the introduction of a female Iron Man for a new generation of Marvel comic readers, or DC Comics giving Superman a different outlook to the planet he calls home in the comics as well as the Man of Steel and Batman vs Superman movies. While comic readers sometimes read about these extraordinary individuals to take a break from reality, they often tend to reflect the reality that we the audience lives in.