Topics

Analyze the emergence of therapeutic discussions of violence, tragedy and character killing in the Walking Dead spin-off called Talking Dead.

Blending fact and fiction, biopics are not simply stories labeled with a note of "based on a true story/actual events", but narratives that attempt to depict someone's life to some a degree of accuracy. Do biopics educate us on great people, or do they disrupt the truth and distort history? What are some specific times that a biopic has done right and wrong?

We all know the ways of the Jedi: truth, compassion, meditation, wisdom, etc. We also know the path of the Sith: anger, hatred, rage, jealousy, and power. However, the question remains, who is right and who is wrong? Exploring this topic would entail research into the creeds of both the Jedi and Sith and question why their black and white viewpoints cause them to fail. It should also discuss Grey Jedi, as well as Jedi and Sith who have resigned from their beliefs such as Ahsoka Tano, Count Dooku, Jolee Bindo, Asage Ventress and so on. Explore the differences between the teachings of the Old Republic Jedi/Sith and the teachings of Luke Skywalker's generation of Jedi/Sith.

Anyone who has been following the US elections knows about Donald Trump's moral values, though many would argue that his morals are more than questionable. With such a person taking charge, how will Trump's radical ideals effect the entertainment industry which uses its productions to highlight ethical values.

Is Marvel’s Luke Cage, a superhero of today’s society? In the new Netflix series, Luke Cage is a black, bulletproof man with his only costume being a hoodie and when it is up, it is worn as superman wears his cape in a fight of justice. The significance of the hoodie touched on a real life matter we faced four years ago, in regards to the death of seventeen year old, Trayvon Martin. With all the shootings and killing of black men today, it is important to many that we have a hero that is black. Whether it is real or not doesn’t even matter, it is the point that our youth can watch Luke Cage and see a black hero who actually takes pride in who he is and acknowledges it. I think the series is literally and symbolically trying to make a connection with black people, culture, society, and the issues and injustice certain individuals may face today. Do you think this series succeeds or fails, barely touching the surface in making a connection to society today?

It seems that in most popular movies the set or the setting isn't considered as complexly as the setting of say, a stage play or novel, would be. The article would seek to understand the purpose behind settings in modern films, and if they are (or ever were) an extension of the message the film was trying to get across. Consider the following: Does it really matter that the fight took place in a warehouse instead of an alley? Are there cases where the setting is still heavily influenced by symbolism and imagery? Is it all about the mood or is there something deeper?

Take a specific case, such as Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice: one of the most popular of the classic novels, it has been subject to various reinterpretations which of course include the occasional modernization. But updating such a novel comes with a hefty set of challenges, not the least being this: is there anything Lydia could do in our time which would ruin her sisters prospects as completely? That is, the social norms and stigmas from Austen's time to ours are so different, is it possible to construct a modern analog for this novel? Is it worth it?

Terminator 2: Judgement Day (1991) and Jurassic Park (1993) are considered landmark films in regards to their special effects; the T-1000 and the dinosaurs were considered ambitious projects modeled around still-new computer generated imagery. Two decades later, it feels that the modern summer blockbuster uses these effects to a fault rather than to intimately inform the narratives as was the case in those two films. Have filmmakers taken CGI for granted?

There you are in the front row at a concert for your favorite band. The guitars pierce the air. The drums pound through your chest. You can almost touch the lead singers guitar. And then your door bell rings, shaking you out of the intimate show. Virtual Reality is quite possibly on the verge of becoming the new video game phenomenon. The possibilities with VR are endless. One of the topics being discussed are concert experiences held in VR. There is sure to be many who watch a concert on their VR in the comfort of their own house. But to many, that isn't a concert experience. Will this trend take off with music fans? Will artists agree to stream live shows on a VR?

Any genuine Star Wars fan cannot deny how closely the plot of The Force Awakens resembles that of A New Hope. Fans have generally had mixed feelings about this idea, but there are points to be made in the reasons as to why they're so comparable. Just because they have similar plot points does not make The Force Awakens just a re-hash; in fact, The Force Awakens is as every bit as strong as any other Star Wars movie. Any comparable aspect of The Force Awakens has a reason behind it, and that's why people can't say that it's just a remake of A New Hope.

What is the role of pregnancy in the first two seasons of American Horror Story? In the first season, we have the housewife pregnant with a monster that eventually kills her in childbirth. In the second, we have two women pregnant who are pregnant from the same man. There are many factors that make them different, even to the extent that one is black and one is white. There could be interesting "black and white" comparisons drawn between their roles in their lover's life, how they become pregnant, how they handle their pregnancy, etc. What are the implications of using pregnancy as a plot device?

Time travel. It is always something that everyone knows that should not be messed with, but people tend to go with the flow and try to do something about it anyways whether it is leading to the past, present or future. But the one thing, everyone know is once you do it, there is no going back. In characters we have seen throughout films or television, such as Back to the Future, a memorable trilogy well-known for its flying Dolorean that can travel throughout any time with one Doc and McFly changing their own fates as well to those they care for or in the Flash, about a determined superhero who's more than fast abilities can lead him to travel throughout time with the use of the speed force, but by doing that can lead to massive consequences. How important is knowing time travel? Do we already know what consequences can lead to them? Or what becomes of by using it? Or is it something we end up learning can never change on our own?

What makes Gilmore Girls different from other shows? Is it the fast-paced dialogue and the type of humor, how real it feels? Is it how the writers always leave you a little unsatisfied, never really giving you what you want? All the above? Something totally different? Compare the show to other hit comedies and/or dramadies and talk about what sets it apart.

Matt Sautman's recent article on the popular and strange FX series "American Horror Story" and its new sixth season, Roanoke, prompted me to again pose a reasonable question about the program. Mostly, from a narrative standpoint, I've not heard or read any persuasive argument for what makes the series good.

I suppose part of it is contemporary and topical – horror, in the form of ghosts and zombies and whatnot, is a saleable cultural commodity today. But what I don't understand is how the program works narratively. I appreciated the first season, which seemed straightforward by comparison, to what followed and what we're seeing today in Roanoke. Asylum, Coven, Hotel, and Freak Show introduce a complex cacophony of characters, motivations, conflicts, and arcs. Some of the best and most acclaimed TV introduces a full cast and varying conflicts, but the seasons of The Wire or Girls or The Sopranos or Breaking Bad don't push such radical variance in the characters and dynamics.

I wanted very much to enjoy Asylum. But, as an example of the sort of narrative problem in each season I'm describing, Asylum layers horror on horror on horror on horror ad nauseam. As I wrote before, you get an old asylum (sufficiently disturbing), layer on a set of Catholic nuns (again, sufficiently disturbing), layer on demonic/Satanic possession of a kid (right), layer on a transfer of that possession to one of the junior nuns (terribly disturbing), layer on a Nazi eugenics doctor in hiding (um), layer on that the Nazi is breeding scifi monsters and interacting with aliens (what?), layer on an interracial couple and alien abduction (…), layer on a serial killer who decorates his home with human remains (wait), and so on. Add, of course, that the show tries to keep you invested in roughly the same number of characters as the number of the episodes in the season.

Again, I don't see that Coven, Hotel, Freak Show, or Roanoke did anything all that differently, from a narrative convention. Sautman can use it as a pop culture vehicle to critique racial politics in the US, but I would like someone to address the program and its structure, its coherence. I mean it seems as if the writers choose a setting and then have the team brainstorm everything horrible that might occur in that setting, even if those horrible things might not fit the genre evoked by the setting (e.g., devil-possessed nuns and Nazis and

What are your thoughts on the prevalence of live action remakes of animated classics on Disney's upcoming release schedule?
How do you feel about the ones already released e.g. this years The Jungle Book. Is it cheap of Disney to invest only in the cost of CGI for these animal tales, knowing they have a sure thing on their hands financially, rather than in innovation and creativity to produce new stories?
Finally, are you looking forward to your favourite animated classics being retold, live action, with your favourite actors, or would you rather these remain untouched?

What are the best of the best, and the lowest of low? Is there a wrong or right way to go about adapting manga? What are some of the logistical and artistic factors that sometimes lead an anime storyline away from its source material? Can these changes sometimes be for the better? Compare a few studios and their work, see how they vary, and analyze!

The HBO success "Game of Thrones" brings on screen a wide variety of characters with clear mental issues. From Joffrey's violent nature, which lacks any form of remorse, to Ramsay's damaged personality or Jamie and Cersei's incestuous relationship (also Sansa Stark, Jon Snow and Theon Greyjoy can be interesting examples). It would be fascinating to use psychoanalytical concepts, taken from Freud, Jung or Klein, in order to offer a reading of these characters and their backstories and objectives.

In comics, mentor figures are critical to the development of super heroes. Batman is by far one of the most famous characters in comics and his origins involves the death of his parents. Despite being considered the "Dark Knight" and usually being considered a isolated character, the Batman mythos involves a large amount of mentoring and parenting within its long history. In many comics such as Scott Snyders new 52 Batman and Batman Earth One, Alfred moves beyond a servant figure to acts as a supportive and mentoring parental figure for Bruce Wayne as he struggles with his role as Batman. This relationship remains a critical and long lasting relationship for Batman. Additionally, throughout his history, Batman has mentored a variety of side kicks including the robins (Dick Grayson, Jason Todd, Tim Drake, Stephanie Brown, Damian Wayne, and Carrie Kelly), Batgirls, and others, acting as a mentor figure, and sometimes a parental figure (in the case of Damian, Bruce is his father). I think this is a rich area for analysis and that it would valuable to examine the parental and mentor relationships within Batman comics, there success and failures, as well as how they impact our hero.

From legendary classics like Final Fantasy and DragonQuest, to fresh new experiences like Undertale and Indivisible, these worlds are all unique in their own ways, but are all bound by a common trait in their blood; they are all RPG's. This style of gameplay has been around for a long time and is still going on and seeing numerous titles with this kind of gameplay in mind. But what makes these types of games so fascinating an immensely popular? What do you find so intriguing about RPG's and do you have a favorite and if so, why? But to go even beyond, why do RPG's seem to have the most diverse and complex stories, and what about them draws you in?

I have had this question in my head for years, but I've never had a space to ask it. When writing a narrative, how important is it to recognize one's own positionality? When I say this term, I mean one's social makeup and characteristics — As a white, cishet, middle-class man, does it really makes sense for you to try and write about the struggles of a Latinx transwoman from impoverished rural Oaxaca? Research aside, can you really embody someone whose experience is established by their otherness?

This is a heady question, and the above paragraph may not be clear. Essentially, how can you know the experience of someone who has known the world differently because of their positionality as a marginalized or oppressed person? Is it really possible to understand someone's lived experience based on research or testimonials? And if it is possible, should we do it?