Analyze how that in recent movies and TV shows, there seems to be an increase of inclusive characters and current event topics that make a temporary or permanent appearance in these shows and novels. Some people believe that this shows that society is moving closer to accepting and including everyone equally; others believe that some shows or movies do not need to be inclusive all the time, or current events do not always need to be tied into everything.
Consider comparing TV show characters' dynamics and demographics from early 2000s to now, and even looking at how the dialogue between these characters has changed. What did someone say on TV 10 years ago that we cannot mention now?
While addressing this issue take note of tokenism. It's especially apparent in sitcoms from the late 90's and early 2000's. Have we moved past token characters to more nuanced and genuine ones? If so, where is it done well? – Zuzia5 years ago
It's a firm belief of mine that there should be a reason behind what race/gender/sexuality you choose to make a character, because it should have a significant baring on their personality, experiences, and reasoning. Avoiding the trap of tokenism by not having 'the gay character' or 'the black character' is important. Write to make a good story - don't write to fill a fill a hole because all you'll do is shovel shit. – Jacob J.5 years ago
This article could touch on the reaction to inclusivity. Does affirmative action make us look at media with certain individuals with more respect, understanding and normativity or does it cause us to assume they only achieved that position because they look/identify a certain way? – Emiris5 years ago
I was born in New York though I have always held European citizenship. I have noticed after viewing mostly European films and a few series over the many years I have resided here, that after returning to watch an American series, there is overt political propaganda in the story lines. Perhaps, this was always the case to an exten, but I did not notice it as a child. However, now it seems the messages are clear and I find that it is often unhelpful propaganda which tends to divide people rather than unite or bring a sense of well-being. Certainly it is not the only contributing factor but do you agree that Television is contributing to the societal divisiveness and strife the United States has been facing for decades?
I haven't watched TV in years for (partially) this reason. Of course every story needs a theme (as it is THE MEssage), but I would agree that contemporary media is becoming more divisive as writers lash out at perceived threats. Especially since the current administration is the most divisive in recent history, it makes sense that the state of american politics is reflected in the media we produce. – Jacob J.5 years ago
This topic could use Orange is the New Black as a reference (featuring LGBTQ ideals), or the newer The Society (featuring Socialism, deaf actors and stereotyping male power as problematic). Perhaps comment on the overarching political tilt and what it seems to want to achieve. – Emiris5 years ago
Recently, the online outcry over the horrific design of Sonic and the very poor execution of Game of Thrones' final season lead to a) a total redesign of Sonic commissioned by the film studio and b) over a million people signing a petition request a complete re-make of the final Game of Thrones season. This seems to be a new trend; people massing online to demand corporations adapt a piece of art (I know it seems a bit iffy to call the Sonic movie art, but hey, what else is it?) post production to suit consumer needs. What does this trend signify? How could it go wrong? Should we really have this power? Is it democratization, or making us somehow even more subservient to capital? Could be cool.
Since seeing these responses to Sonic and GoT, I had a very similar reaction, and I would love to see this topic explored more fully. I think the question of creator vs audience power would provide the best, narrowed focus if someone chose to approach the topic with depth instead of breadth. The pressure of the audience can be intense for creators, especially when they are working with franchises that have such a large following, and I imagine this has an impact on the process of creation and final quality of the art itself. Artists compromising their visions to cater to the demands of the large portions of the public could set a dangerous precedent in which art becomes more of a product with the intention of making the most money by reaching the most people instead of reaching them with a new perspective, idea, or story that means something more than the dollars and cents. Excellent topic! – Aaron5 years ago
Part of the reason GoT ended the way it did was to showcase the tyrannical nature of power, regardless of gender, with Dany representing a feminist sentiment and, though valiant in her acts, ultimately becomes corrupted by absolute power. Maybe touch on how even though this message may have meant to be informative about absolute power corrupting absolutely, it was still a political message that made the show seem weak in the end by focusing more on a political angle. This could also comment on overarching moral in good stories vs. political ideals. – Emiris5 years ago
Part of marketing is the driving up of hype, but in fact little active promotion is needed by many films and TV these days as most fans drive the movement with their own social media discussions and excitement. But is this proving detrimental to the work? For instance, with the close of the saga 'Game of Thrones' the hype and expectation around the wrapping of the series was incredibly high, with people taking time off work/study etc. to catch the "on time" release on Netflix around the world. But what seems to have come out is a post malaise of criticism about the ending that for some may have soured the entire show. Now is this a fair state of affairs? Was the ending really poor or is this simply a reaction to heightened expectations that just can not be met?
It would be interesting to explore the fan expectations, hype and marketing surrounding the completion of 'Game of Thrones', 'End Game' (throwing as hugely hyped film into the mix) and 'Big Bang Theory' (maybe even look back at other colossal series ends such as 'How I met your mother' and 'Breaking Bad') to examine how their completions differed and seemed to have resulted in a very different spectrum of responses from fans.
What makes an ending great? How do you manage fan hype? Can anything live up to a finale expectation?
This is really awesome and what you wrote shows how much you really like. – Markh325 years ago
I love the question you pose at the end of the first paragraph. Was it really that bad of an ending, or did we have unbelievably high hopes? It definitely gets the reader thinking about the topic. Personally, once I got past the disappointment the ending actually made a lot of sense. The other examples of shows are good to include as you're appealing to different genres. It will allow more readers to think about the questions you're asking in context to shows they enjoy.
– briannat5 years ago
Around WWII the television began to become more and more welcomed as a member of the average household in America. In the 1950's the television became the primary means of influencing public opinion on world events and politics. Later in the 90's we see the reflection of the culture surrounding television programming in postmodern writers like Don Delillo and David Foster Wallace. How have the infusion of the passivity of television-watching culture influenced the literature of subsequent decades? How has the expectation of the average reader been affected by this mass incorporation of this form of media in the average household?
You could also mention the shortening of people's attention spans, and could tie in the influence of social media here too. – Andi5 years ago
Disagree. I believe it was during the Cold War, not WW2. – T. Palomino2 years ago
Also, I feel like some sources and examples would support and illustrate your claims. – T. Palomino2 years ago
"The Office" is such a widely known series that it is almost impossible to have a conversation with someone without referencing a joke or moment from the show. The internet is littered with Office memes, and people joking about only ever rewatching the series. People put Michael Scott quotes in their bios, their yearbook quotes, and their Tinder profiles. Why does this show, which has just as many cringy, immoral, distasteful, and insensitive jokes as it does sweet and kind moments, speak to so many people and demand a large role in so many peoples life?
I would love to see this explored more fully because I certainly fall into the category of "The Office" fans that you reference, rewatching it and using it as background noise for years. A couple of points that I would like to offer is that it seems like people relate to the mundane setting of the show that allows them to project hilarious moments and observations onto an office setting that they may have thought in the past but never stated. This deeper connection to the setting or overall atmosphere that the setting creates has the potential to provide escapism for people trapped in very dull work environments by finding the humor in less dynamic work places (obviously, not for everyone). Lastly, I think it's important to recognize that the immoral and distasteful jokes you note are usually presented as critiques since they are coming from characters that are lovable in some way but clearly presented as twisted personalities that should not be imitated. Younger or less critical viewers may be negatively influenced by these moments, but I would argue that that's not the intent (and I acknowledge that intent only goes so far). As I said, I would love to see this expanded because "The Office" is a piece of our zeitgeist that is thriving across generations since the early 2000s with its presence on Netflix. – Aaron5 years ago
"The Office" is not the first of it's kind to produce these outcomes. Pop culture references have been a long-term epidemic similar to reading the latest books or sharing the latest news and gossip. The normality of Netflix and additions to tv series provide individuals with a way of relating to others to feel accepted - this is most prominent in a digital environment which provides a social sense of reality that people potentially lack in their everyday mundane lives. – TheAuthortoria5 years ago
As Aaron stated above, I think The Office provides escapism for those who find themselves dragged down by boring and tedious corporate working environments. While the U.K Office used more dry and drawn out humor, the U.S Office failed to emulate this in season 1 and the writers instead went with a more upbeat, albeit unrealistic approach of an office environment. This does correlate more with U.S values, which are usually more optimistic and persevering. The characters in my opinion are what make the show. It's no surprise that Michael Scott and many of the other characters would be fired for various actions and interactions, but that's one of the show's advantages. It's an exaggerated take on the typical, American corporate work place inhabited by distinct and generally likable characters. The distasteful jokes are also done well imo because they're from the characters' distinct behaviors, who are portrayed as in the wrong and not to be emulated or praised. They're often sourced from their flaws. The Office also isn't the only show to have such type of crude comedy, see It's Always Sunny, Family Guy, South Park, etc. – ImperatorSage5 years ago
Characters who hold political office have been portrayed for television in a number of cases. Take those in the White House for example, whether it is House of Cards, Madam Secretary or The West Wing. Shows like these often capture corruption, tie in to real world events and provide some insight into the work of government. A recent study (link) showed how Argo and Zero Dark Thirty changed respondents view of government and others (link) have also explored the connection between political T.V. fiction and political engagement. Does this empower us, deceive us or inform us as political actors who vote, commentate and follow real world politics?
May I suggest also taking a look at political satire. There was an excellent British comedy series titled 'Yes, Minister' (and its follow-up series 'Yes, Prime Minister'), which was not only hugely popular with TV viewers, but was frequently acknowledged by members of parliament to be uncannily close to the truth, concerning the blunders made by government. In many ways political satire can tell us a great deal more about the true workings of government. I'm sure there are American series that deal with the same. – Amyus5 years ago
I definitely would consider tying in the actions of Edward Snowden, who released top government secrets to the people to show that our government was doing questionable things, and some of those actions have been bases for movies and popular TV shows. Shows like Castle, about the NYPD and other aspects, highlighted quite frequently the corruption in political positions and even in the police department as well. These shows offer real life scenarios that could easily occur or are occurring at this moment. Definitely something to consider looking into! – reschilke5 years ago
An analysis into why modern streaming services like Netflix are picking up, and even creating, content that is modeled after the 1980s. Why is a decade that most of the viewers of these shows never experienced so popular in contemporary culture?
I'd attribute the current 80s trend mainly to two main factors, though I'm sure there are many more. On the one hand, people tend to remember their formative years in a positive light while simultaneously shutting out more complex issues they weren't paying attention to at the time. The 1980s, like any decade, had its share of crises (the AIDS epidemic, the Cold War, the state of the global economy, etc.). For children and teens, however, their focus was probably not on these issue they couldn't or didn't want to engage with, instead focusing on music, movies, video games, or other media that we would now identify as "classic 80s." So now that those former kids and teens are older and producing their own content, their memories of that time tend to be overwhelmingly positive and rose-colored (unless they're creating something grounded more in reality). And if those trends hold up, their creation becomes popular and delivers on their creative investment. Which leads to the second factor: If someone comes up with a popular idea, everyone will want to copy it to get some of that sweet revenue; for every Stranger Things that hits a cultural chord, you'll get Ready Player One or Fuller House to that exists mostly to ride the 80s nostalgia wave. I don't think there's anything inherently special about the 1980s that makes it any more ripe for nostalgia than any other decade, it's just the one that's in vogue right now. But then again, my nostalgia is for the 90s, so maybe I'm just biased. – CulturallyOpinionated5 years ago
