The sub-genre of movies known as "found-footage film" carries that unique sense of realism (brought about by shaky handheld cameras and lack of background music) rarely found in other films. With movies such as "The Blair Witch Project," "Chronicle," "The Gallows," and many others falling under this category, what makes some of these movies "better" than others? What sort of techniques have (or have not yet) been used to make these films feel valid/believable by an audience?
well, you have to look at the broader context. Consider the fact that The Blair Witch Project basically invented the found-footage subgenre and was an early example of viral marketing. That is probably why it feels so realistic-- no one had really done it before, at least not on the same level, and since then it's been extremely difficult to replicate, and I'd argue the only one that's done it successfully is Cloverfield, because it basically invented viral marketing as we know it today with the websites and social media pages for the characters. Seeing it replicated endlessly makes it less and less convincing. – sadiebritt288 years ago
With the revival of the beloved show "Gilmore Girls," watchers get another chance to see what their favorite people of Stars Hollow have been up to. It's no question that those who loved the show before still love the show after watching it over again. However, and with much regret, after enjoying the seven seasons once again, along with "A Year in the Life," some viewers can't help but question some of the choices the Gilmores make. From homewrecking, to bullying, to cheating, to using, being rude, and somewhat cruel at times, they still somehow manage to make audiences love them. What distracts us from these events? What makes watching it so enjoyable? What qualities redeem them? Why do we love them?
Focusing on the original series versus the revival might be helpful in keeping the essay focused. – mazzamura8 years ago
I was actually thinking about this recently and I was a fan of the series when it originally aired on The WB back in the early 2000s. I also own every season on DVD and tuned in for A Year in the Life on Netfilx with much anticipation. However, in watching AYIAL, I found myself really hating the Gilmores. They were bossy, self-righteous, and made selfish decisions that dragged others into their messy lives. I wanted to smack Rory and shake Lorelai. Emily, I just wanted her to open her eyes and ears to really hear herself and the racist and classist things that she would say to her hired help. Then I realized, I never loved the Gilmores -- it was always the characters around them that redeemed them. It was Stars Hollow, Paris, Lane and Hep Alien, Jess, Liz, TJ, everyone else (even Logan) that made the girls the magnet of my attention and appreciation. The pop-cultural references and wit were great, but the girls alone just didn't sit well with me. I felt it growing up with the series, but now I can more effectively express this feeling. Maybe the revival was too shady for me, but I think looking back at the series, I had more eye rolls towards Rory and Lorelai than I liked to admit. At least Rory got me psyched about applying to college and making something of myself...but how unnerving it is to see where she actually ended up... – khunt128 years ago
I really enjoy this idea and you can do the same for other shows as well such as Friends or One Tree Hill.
– boyerj8 years ago
I really like this topic as someone who was never a Gilmore Girls fan. I watched part of A Year in the Life recently and I just couldn't understand the appeal. My main issue was I couldn't understand why they spoke in monologues but that's mostly irrelevant. But I do think the issue isn't so much likability but maybe a bit of subconscious envy. It's appealing to see someone do or say whatever they want with no repercussions and remain the protagonist of the story. Even in something as trivial as eating, the Gilmore Girls live a fantasy idea. They eat junk food in large amounts at all hours of the day but remain attractively slim. Meanwhile the average person subsisting on pizza, ice cream, and pop tarts for 20 years would certainly not look like that. Many people love villains because they do whatever they want; in a way I think shows like Gilmore Girls (and Friends as another commentator mentioned) give viewers similar satisfaction whilst still rooting for the 'good guy'. – LC Morisset8 years ago
I've never understood the appeal of Gilmore Girls, and I've seen a few thinkpieces since AYITL came out posing this exact question. This could make for a good article, but whoever takes this on should be cautious to not repeat points made elsewhere, or to at least find new evidence for them. – Sadie8 years ago
Early in the show yes - the snappy dialogue makes them particularly attractive. As the show progresses, however, they slide into boy-obsessed women, often at the risk of other aspects of their personalities, which makes them unlikeable, or two-dimensional. – queeniesukhadia7 years ago
Many people love villains because they do whatever they want; in a way I think shows like Gilmore Girls (and Friends as another commentator mentioned) give viewers similar satisfaction whilst still rooting for the 'good guy'. – Clay Cain7 years ago
I have a very hard time enjoying this show because the rhetoric is nauseating. I like the characters, and the premise, but no one talks like that. I am on English Major at UW-Madison and I have never even heard extremely nuanced peers who have an immense capacity for vocabulary and language converse in the way the dialogue is written for that show. – kraussndhouse7 years ago
I think the vulnerability of the characters aids their likability. We can recognise some of our own mistakes and flaws alongside virtues and aspirations that many women share. I agree with previous notes, however, that later seasons are heavily boy-focused and make the plot/characters two-dimensional. After you've watched a show for 3-4 seasons though, it can be difficult not to follow through to the end! – bethlauren7 years ago
I think many of this show's characters are deeply flawed and often very unlikable. But I would argue this makes them more human. Every single person is occasionally unlikable, so is it good or bad to replicate that in fictional people? – Samantha Leersen4 years ago
Choose a celebrity or multiple celebrities and discuss the phenomenon of celebrity appeal in America. Do celebrities have an obligation to use their popularity and appeal to speak out against things like global warming and war? Also, their great and often rapid accumulation of wealth, should this obligate them to support social justice causes, and in what ways? Some clear examples to discuss are Dicaprio and Pitt or even Mortensen and Michael Moore. Recent developments revolving around the presidential inauguration and celebrity refusals to participate, could provide good points for discussion. One more point for discussion would be to evaluate the effect that certain celebrities have had on the social or political causes they've endorsed, in our contemporary moment or in the past.
This is an interesting topic. I think it might also be interesting to examine the effects of public social/political advocacy on celebrity popularity. At the risk of sounding cynical, it seems to me that a celebrity publicly stating opinions about political/social issues can work either for or against him/her - depending largely, of course, on whether or not people LIKE the opinions he/she is stating. This is admittedly just a casual observation on my part, but from what I gather, when people LIKE the message, they tend to cheer the celebrity on and praise him/her for sharing the message - but when they DON'T like the message, they tend to trash the celebrity, call for boycotts of his/her work, and/or declare that celebrities in general should "just shut up" about politics. The various reactions to Meryl Streep's Golden Globes speech are a good new example. – OBri8 years ago
Celebs are damned if they do or if they don't. If they speak out about social justice causes, they're labeled as phonies or ppl say that they're only speaking out because it's the 'trend' to do so. However, if they don't speak out they're criticized for not using their public roles properly. – seouljustice8 years ago
I think another important point to discuss in this is how much the celebrities actually do for the organizations they promote versus just talking about them. This goes a long with the affect they have had on those issues. I think drawing a clear line between the movements/organizations growing because of the groups own efforts and what the celebrities have actually contributed.
– JenniferRobinMc8 years ago
13 Reasons Why was hugely popular and important YA novel written in 2007 by Jay Asher. In 2017, it received a 13 episode Netflix adaption, which has renewed interest in the story. How did this story change, develop, or grow in its transition to the screen? Were these changes effective, or did they hinder or distinctly change the overall story or characters?
Take us through the changes between the netflix series and the book that inspired it.
Examine how shows like Stranger Things and Mr. Robot incorporate virtual reality content as supplements to their series. Will we see more of it? When will virtual reality stand on its own? Looking at how VR has exploded in recent years (Facebook buys Oculus for 2.3 billion) and how VR's growth in the video game sector is creating a wider base of VR headset owners, which could benefit TV shows adopting VR content.
It would be wise to cite examples of how VR has expanded not just for television content but for video games as well. – BMartin438 years ago
It seems to me that there can be said to be two primary aspects, roughly speaking, that go into any form of writing, but especially fiction writing. First, there is content, which includes everything to plot, to scenery, to dialogue and character development. Then there is style, which refers to how the language is being used in creative ways to express something. Many writers seem to have one down solidly, while the other side suffers. Who are some writers you think do one of these (or both) especially well, and how important to you think each aspect is to creating good fiction writing?
This one's tough. Usually people don't have acclaim for solely doing one aspect well. When I think of style I think of Hemingway and how many sought to mimic his writing for generations to come. And then there's Stephanie Meyers, who people say is a terrible writer with no style, but somehow she creates content that is wildly appealing to a huge audience. Dan Brown might be someone who has content (plot) down, but no style to speak of. – Nate Océan8 years ago
I have definitely encountered this in recent novels. The novel that I am currently reading seems to favour common tropes and lacks fluidity in the writing itself but the plot is constantly moving, hooking me in and forcing me to finish the book. It would be interesting to highlight writers that do both well and try to explain how they manage it. – ReidaBookman8 years ago
This seems to be an idea based around rhetoric. I wonder if the two can be mutually exclusive. Since style is the way a writer uses language, if literary devices such as plot, symbolism, dialogue, etc are lacking or suffering, would it not follow that the style is also suffering. If the use of language doesn't lift the plot, wouldn't both style and plot be suffering? Moreover, wouldn't plot (or whichever literary device) be suffering because of style? I wonder if the strong use of literary devices and/or style are suffering because of the pressure to publish. Does the market cause works to suffer? Does the lack of grammar being taught in schools cause these works to suffer? Is there a larger force causing this issue you've mentioned because I agree it exists. – DKWeber8 years ago
Analyzing the films that go against the common belief in Hollywood that every great story with a female lead must contain a love story. Meaning, there's a clear love interest for her character. Looking at films that follow and defy this tradition, and at what cost. From the top grossing film of the year that follows (Rogue One) to indie favorites that don't (Lost in Translation), what is gained and what is lost by following this trope? And why can male leads go against this tradition? Would Master and Commander be a bigger hit if he had a damsel to rescue? Or could the Matrix survive without Neo's love for Trinity? Compare the loveless 2001: A Space Odyssey vs. the love-driven Interstellar. Both are successful films with male leads. Why aren't there more non-romantic films lead by women? Take a look at the film Housekeeping, which stands out from the pack.
That is a great question. However, if you look hard enough you will find many more films being released today that do not follow this pattern. The Underworld series contain a female hero who is seen battling alongside the men and in most cases actually does more damage than they do. She is portrayed as the leader of her people and her main focus is to keep her species alive above everything else. Of, course there is a love story but he is on the opposite side of the war and she will not let her love for him cloud her decision to kill the rest of his people. – AnthonyWright7 years ago
You're right, in that example the love interest is not quite as pronounced as many other films. Thanks for the note! – Nate Océan7 years ago
With the popularity of online streaming platforms like Netflix and Amazon, who sometimes release an entire season worth of content at a time, how does this difference in presentation change how we watch and engage with entertainment. Just a few years ago, tv viewers had to tune in week after week to view the last hit t.v. show, but now, many famous and successful shows are released on Netflix at a season by season basis. For example, House of Cards, Marvel Shows (Daredevil, Jessica Jones, and Luke Cage), and Master of None all dropped with their entire season available for viewing from day one of their release. What is the effect on our thoughts and perceptions of a show when we can sit down and view the whole thing in one sitting rather than having to wait week by week for the next episode. What is lost and what is gained in this shift?
Very interesting topic. Another facet of it that may be worth exploring in relation to this is how the binge-format is changing, not only how we watch, but also how content is created and structured. For example, something that I noticed while binging BoJack Horseman is that most of the episodes (especially in the later seasons) end very abruptly without a punchy joke or poignant conclusion to facilitate the landing. This would be incredibly frustrating if you then had to wait a week for the following episode to pick up where they left off, but because the show is conducive to binging by design, it works quite well. That's just one example that comes to mind, but I'm sure there are plenty of other ways in which this new form has influenced the content to be found if you take a closer look at it with this in mind. – ProtoCanon8 years ago
Queer film critic B Ruby Rich writes in her book "New Queer Cinema" that television and film used to be community activities. Everyone would gather around a TV and watch it as a family or as a community, but now, it's all personalized and individualized. While people still watch TV and movies together, services like Netflix and Amazon make it much easier to watch television by yourself and in copious quantities. – X8 years ago
Definitely an interesting topic... any polls out there to show what people prefer? Do young people who have grown up with netflix see it as normal? Does the availability make people watch more? What kinds of people prefer binging or prefer waiting? – Sboother8 years ago
This is a particularly alluring topic to explore, especially from a psychological point of view. The concept of binge watching shows has become extremely relevant with the advent of Netlifx and especially, as you mentioned, their originals. Just because the whole season is out doesn't mean that viewers have to scrap their whole Saturday or stay home from work to watch it. The fact that binge watching has become a phenomenon has really highlighted the matter that consumers are showing less and less self control in yet another facet of life. – gabyelan8 years ago
Binge watching would also affect how tv writers create stories because there's no more waiting around. Before Netflix we would have to wait for the next episode to air & there was a suspense/feeling of anticipation, but that feeling has disappeared now b/c all of these shows are now available under our fingertips – seouljustice8 years ago
There's also the new water cooler elitism of those who can afford to pay for up-to-date programming spoiling shows for those who can't afford paid shows. Can someone sponsor me and solve this catastrophic first-world problem? – Tigey8 years ago
Film Crit Hulk, an insightful if somewhat informal writer, wrote a column about this: http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/10/12/luke-cage-netflix-and-the-death-of-episodic-tv I absolutely recommend that any potential writer on this topic read Hulk's thoughts before writing. – bookstudent48 years ago
I have found that the final episode of a series is much more bitter than sweet when I have binge watched the entire season. If I have waited week by week for episodes to air, the season finale is much more exciting. Being forced to patiently wait for the finale adds to the thrill of finally watching it. When I watch a show all at once, I usually arrive at the end of the season without even realizing it's the end. Then I am just left to reflect and be sad that the season ended so abruptly. – InvidaSin8 years ago
I really like to concept of TV shows as forming a community. Even if you sat in front of the TV Thursday night to watch your show at a certain time alone, you knew that many others were watching what you were watching at the same time. What's also interesting is shows "dropping" a whole season at once and then having to wait a whole YEAR to see the next season sometimes. You binge and then by the time the next season comes around you have to rewatch the previous season to recapture the essence of the show again and reconnect with the characters and their plots. – Gaby7 years ago
There has been a lot of static on YouTube about "Let's Play" videos, especially when it comes to Nintendo and their haste in issuing content strikes. Analyze the form of "Let's Play" videos, and offer an opinion of whether they are worthwhile original content, or just a more elaborate form of capitalizing on someone else's work.
Possibly talk about the origins of the Let's Play. This is not a new format, there was Mystery Science Theater 3000 and MTV shows riffing on music videos in the 90's. – Adam8 years ago
And if they are an elaborate form of capitalizing on someone else's work, what then? Elaborate on why that is wrong, or not as meaningful as something more original. – luminousgloom8 years ago
Everyone's masterpiece are in fact not authentic. Even if you admit or not. There's a source for it and that source doesn't come from you. – droy8 years ago
I believe it depends on how the format is presented. And honestly, most children, teens, or even adults could get excited over a game based on seeing their favorite online gamer play the game. But in the context, I'd say it is Copyright Infringement-ish, yet the Let's Plays often lead to more sales for the games and/or consoles for a specific industry.
– Analyzion8 years ago
It would server the author to look into both fair use and transformative works with regards to copyright law. Andy Warhol makes an interesting case study for this sort of thing. – John Wells7 years ago
Theatre has been prevalent in the film industry since Dorothy skipped down a yellow brick road in 1939 and existed even before that. While traditionally theatre is preformed live in front of an audience there have been several movies made including "Into the Woods" (2014) and "Les Miserables" (2012) that seek to immortalize those performances. Do film adaptations provide the same experience or is it a mere shadow of live theatre? When preforming live things can go wrong, people will improvise, and it turns out a little differently each night. Does this enhance the piece or take away from it? Conversely, there are musicals that are based on movies like "The Waitress" (2007). Do the musical adaptations add to the movies or do they make a difference at all? And lastly, what about the live recordings of musicals like "Hairspray Live!" in 2016? Do these hybrids provide a happy medium or is there even an audience for it?
It would be interesting to explore this topic, but be sure to cite how in recent years TV and Broadway have become one with these live shows broadcasted on TV or in theatres such as "Newsies."
– BMartin438 years ago
The 'liveness' of theatre vs. movies/television is always an interesting topic to write about. A good book to read about this topic is "The Theatre of the Unimpressed" by Jordan Tannahill. It has some great insights on theatre in the modern world of digital entertainment. – tysonfraleigh8 years ago
Keeping Up With The Kardashians is reality TV. I Am Cait is a docu-series. What's the difference, and what's the reason for the change? Across the board, documentary series have exploded (Making a Murderer, Chef's Table, OJ: Made in America, The Jinx). Is reality TV trying to repackage their reality TV content to catch the wave?
Mumbai, the City of Dreams, houses the prime centre of Hindi Film Industry, better known as Bollywood. Acclaimed as one of the biggest film industries of the world, Bollywood produces over 1000 films every year. Since 1913, Indian Cinema has made a long journey from simple silent movies to sound films, then colored films to technically advanced movies of the present day. Bollywood imbibed its name from the merger of the term Bombay (now Mumbai) and Hollywood, the American Film Industry.
Another point worth-mentioning is that Bollywood is just the part of Indian Film Industry, which also encompasses other language film industries. The movies churned out here are the major source of entertainment, with an audience of 3.6 billion people, which is more than half of the world's population. Bypassing the reality, Hindi films are usually 'masala' (spicy) movies that comprise all the ingredients like music, dance, violence and melodrama of a good entertainer. The languages of Hindi, Urdu and English are extremely common in Bollywood.
This topic is very broad. Is there a particular aspect of Bollywood cinema that you are interested in? One could focus on the "history" of the genre or "What makes a Bollywood film". I personally hope to write a piece on the use of flashbacks in Bollywood film some day. I did a fair amount of Bollywood cinema research in undergrad and would consider rummaging through it for a more focused topic. – derBruderspielt7 years ago
Analyzing the paradigm shift created by the new studios (Netflix, Amazon, HBO) and how they've given courage to a new breed of content creators (YouTube Red, AwesomenessTV, Vimeo Originals). What is the result? The emergence of Netflix-worthy shows on a whole new array of platforms, and a race for other media companies to become "content creators."
Nate, I think this would be an awesome piece for someone to research and write up an article. It is definitely relevant and becomes more and more relevant each day. I, personally, have never took a look at AwesomenessTV and other similar platforms, but I am very impressed with the contents Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, etc. produce. Rob – rdannunzio8 years ago
Kickstarter is the crowdfunding platform many video game developers have turned to in order to fund the development of their personal project. Take a look back at the biggest games of the last five years that have been created with the help of Kickstarter (Undertale, Mighty No. 9, Shovel Knight, etc.). What caused some of them to succeed upon release? What made some of these games disappoint backers and players alike when they released?
This topic is so good. It is incredibly relevant to the current gaming landscape. With Yooka Laylee out soon and Bloodstained: ritual of the night coming in 2018, the topic is not going away. Shovel Knight is a fantastic game and has thrived really well, with new expansions coming out every year or so. It has a great following. Mighty No. 9 was extremely disappointing for a variety of reasons. – SeanGadus8 years ago
A lot of people are losing hope in projects that feature in Kickstarter just like how people now naturally assume that Steam greenlight is filled with shovelware. A lot of people ought to know this is a platform that has made success possible for a lot of determined developers. The message seems to be deteriorating as time passes. – TheUbiquitousAnomaly8 years ago
Compare the success or failure between the original British creations and American versions of Shameless and The Office. Argue which version is more successful and the reasons why. Address the cultural difference that may have contributed to the popularity of the show.
I do think a big part of the argument would be exploring the cultural differences in how drama and comedy are expressed. Our traditional slapstick vs thier dry, witty humor; our drama tends to feel more exaggerated while theirs feels grounded in harsh reality. American versions of both these shows made American changes for the better or worse? How have these changes translated for audiences when there is access to the originals? – C N Williamson8 years ago
It would be useful to define what success is. – JDJankowski8 years ago
Analyze how the portrayal of gender roles and sexuality has changed during the last years and how it has changed in recent blockbuster films. For example the inclusion of a homosexual character in Disney's Beuty and a Beast (2017) and in the upcoming Power Rangers (2017) film.
I do love the topic, and though I feel like a lot of people have tried to tackle this, the fact that you are limiting this to blockbusters might take this discussion into a slightly different direction than usual (aka whoever writes this won't necessarily focus on the tragic gay story that dominated indie movies, or the recent "burn your gays" movement in TV shows. Though, even those might have their place, so I'd leave that to the writer's discretion). That being said, I'm thinking whoever writes this might like to focus the topic some more considering that even in the blockbuster realm, different genres of movies have different histories that point to various forms of progress/regress. Beauty and the Beast, for instance, might speak to the way representation of LGBT peeps is (very) tentatively making its way into children's movies, while the Power Rangers might open the discussion about how homosexuality might/might not challenge the hyper masculinity of male heros and the hypersexuality of female ones for instance (I have yet to see either, so these are mostly guesses, but it still feels like both movies could potentially lead to different discussions). In any case, I still think its a super relevant topic today and welcome more discussions on the matter. For Disney, their "easter egg" gay man in Frozen could be used for contrast when establishing a timeline, and in superheros, the erasure of Mystic's bisexuality and Deadpool's one being still pending could be interesting to look at. – Rina Arsen8 years ago
I am a fiction writer and voracious fiction reader, so I like this topic. Yet I feel like I shouldn't write it since it would be in first person, so it's up for grabs.
Do any fiction writers out there find their craft ruins the reading experience? For example, do you catch yourself zeroing in on when an author tells instead of shows, or when characters are undeveloped? Do books you once liked become tedious? If yes, how do you–and we as writers–cope with that? Is there a way to keep one's craft from ruining reading? Conversely, does writing make reading a great book even better, and does it enhance one's taste in literature?
I love the topic! I also write myself and I do often have this issue of honing in one possible mistakes or weaknesses in stories (writing- or even story-wise) that my friends miss. But I also think it's given me a higher appreciation for works I do love and that are written very well. Of course, this would be a subjective topic for anyone to write, but I do think you're onto something. – Karen8 years ago
I love this topic. I think some solutions should be addressed to help writers read without criticizing. – DB752B8 years ago
This is a great questions. Fiction has long been a part of literature and who knows if it has its own downsides. – BMartin438 years ago
I like this topic, and I think it could be written with an open-ended conclusion. I.e. writing might "ruin" reading in some ways, but it vastly improves it in others. I do find that as a writer, I notice weak plot devices or predictable character development far more than I used to or than other readers. As Karen noted, however, I also appreciate some things more, like artfully dropped foreshadowing, beautiful symbolism, or unique scenes. For me, these positive results outweigh the negative, but this could be argued either way. I also think it can relate to tv (I can't stand some shows just because the script is poorly written, while my friends are able to excuse that for high quality acting and cinematography) but it's up to the writers discretion to note this or not. – EmmaBeitzel8 years ago
I definitely agree writing fiction gives you a better eye for good books, although what is "good" remains subjective. I've also noticed it gives me a better idea of what I want my writing voice to sound like, so whoever writes the topic could discuss that if they wanted. – Stephanie M.8 years ago
I love writing fiction too, and I like see it all as a learning experience. I ask myself if these lacking characteristics of the book tie-in to the narrative, and whether or not my dislike of it is just a personal opinion. Then when I write my own works, I am sometimes inspired by these elements and then I deviate or incorporate them in a way that reflects me as a writer. – RadosianStar8 years ago
I think reading fiction will always be food for the imagination. If you are a writer reading the work of others allows you to discover your style. If you are reading a work of fiction and discover something the author could be doing differently you will make a mental note to avoid doing it. Conversely, if you find something you love you can further explore that pocket in your own writing and others. Even what you consider to be bad fiction can be educational. – ReidaBookman8 years ago
I would say that in order to write good fiction, at least in my experience, it's necessary to be constantly immersing myself in other people's work. While I definitely don't think that writing "ruins" reading, it definitely gives me a sharper eye when it comes to how a book is put together and how the language is being used. I start to think about things other than enjoying the story, such as how the author may have crafted it, what works and what doesn't work, and generally analyzing much deeper than many people might want to when reading something. It's the same thing with any art: I used to be really into drawing and I found myself always being extremely critical of other artists mistakes because I became much more able to recognize them. The same sort of thing happens for me with fiction, or writing of any kind, and I often get annoyed by what I consider poor writing, even in authors that I have massive respect for. On the other hand, I now have a grasp of what it means to write a story, and can better appreciate good fiction, especially when I come across something where I have absolutely no idea how the author did it. For some people this analytical mindset might detract from the enjoyment of a book, but I've always found that it does the opposite for me. – woollyb8 years ago
There is definitely an analytical side that kicks in. Instead if just following the story, you do notice the nitty gritty devices being used. I think it also deepens appreciation for the artform. When you realise how difficult it is, you become a little less critical and more understanding about the author's intent, and you don't fixate on the elements that bother you, but try to assess the story; both what works and what doesn't (at least that's how I feel). – AGMacdonald7 years ago
With the Wonder Woman live action film on its way, many people might be excited to see one of the west's greatest superheroines come to life…but let's take a second to compare and contrast Diana Prince to another superhero from the east: Usagi Tsukino.
It would also be important to look into the importance of the age on the differences and similarities between them – marvellaforever8 years ago
I would also add how different the worlds both characters come from are. – BMartin437 years ago
It's happened to us all. We received an email from an editor that dashed our hopes and dreams against the rocks. Rejection is a fact of life and even the most successful of writers have gone through it several hundred times, Stephen King, Ray Bradbury, and E. E, cummings to name a few. Today's publishing market is not as ridged as it once was. Now there are other avenues for writers to seek publication such as online-only publishing, self publishing, or paying to publish but the old publishing houses remain and rejection letters are still given out in healthy doses. An interesting topic to explore might be the sudden drop and forced recovery after receiving a rejection. You could use numerous examples of people who have survived and give helpful hints and tips for those feeling discouraged. In the words of Sylvia Plath "I love my rejection slips. They show me I try."
As you say, Stephen King, in his part-memoir part-creative writing course "On Writing", relates how he used to poke his rejection slips onto a nail in the wall above his desk. Eventually the nail bent under the weight. He carried on writing anyway, and with each rejection slip learned something new and to try harder and stretch his talent further. – ThomasB7 years ago
Queerbating is the attempt to reel in viewers by providing false hints that there is a potentially queer relationship. One example is Sound Euphonium, a series about high schoolers playing instruments where two seem to have an almost-lesbian ending. Is it harmful to the queer community? Or is it helpful that at least we get a little representation? Do writers/producers do it because they respect us but have to censor themselves or because they really just want a variety of viewers?
This is an interesting topic. I think you need to look at the history of homosexuality in Japan, Yaoi, and Yuri. For example, the medieval Warlord had homosexual relationship with their favored Samurais to ensure their loyalties while legally married to wives. With such historical evidences, the perception of homosexuality will be different from Western point of view, so it will require some cultural studies to explore this topic – idleric8 years ago