Demonstrate some of the eerie similarities of the Netflix show House of Cards to some of the same elements that are going on currently in the American political arena. Research how the creators of House of Cards obtain their material, and who will prevail as the first female president Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton or Claire?
I think it would be good to dissect the political processes represented in the drama to see whether such a malicious pair could get into office in real life. Also how do British and American versions misrepresent parliamentary procedure in order to create good drama? – Benedict Hadley8 years ago
If there is a similarity of House of Cards to American politics in the real word, the obvious avenue of investigation would be, 'What is the source material?' – JDJankowski8 years ago
There have been a number of TV shows that have used voice overs. Such examples would be Veronica Mars, Burn Notice, Grey's Anatomy, Scrubs and Dead Like Me. Do voice overs add anything to the story lines or are they merely a distraction? Why are voice overs used? Should they be used more or less often? Are there examples of TV shows that have used voice overs, but weren't really effective? On the flip side, are there TV shows that could have used voice overs to help add depth or clarity to the story lines?
Good topic. Another possible example the article writer could use is Jane the Virgin. – Emily Deibler9 years ago
This would be great to write. I think bringing up something like Dexter as well. The show has a very complex voice over of Dexter the serial killer. Does he really believe in what he's saying? That he has no emotion and yet manages to portray it? Or is it simply him asserting that he is a monster and neglecting the idea that he could have other psychological levels? – tparish119 years ago
In my opinion, they are often used to explicitly summarize events of the show or a characters feelings about said events (Scrubs is the best example) and for this reason they are often redundant and/or heavy-handed. They are not necessarily "distracting", but neither are they useful to the storyline. – TheSnob8 years ago
There are a few shows that have tried different things: Arrow had voice overs in its first season, then dropped them, and it would be interesting to examine why. – bbctol8 years ago
The cliffhanger has become increasingly common in television as a means to sustain an audience's interest. Explore the history of when and how the cliffhanger originated. Also analyze the impacts of the cliffhanger? Does it engage an audience and make them want to continue watching the show to see what happens? Does a cliffhanger's impact depend on the duration of wait time between episodes or seasons? Or is the cliffhanger losing impact and resulting in frustrated viewers?
I believe with most trends in television show narratives they are designed to manage flow across (extended watching in a daypart) and through (continued watching in a week), which are programming principles. Ratings data is more powerful when there are "blocks" of programming, so networks (used to) bundle a series of new or anchor shows in primetime in the hopes of branding things like "Must See TV" for example. Sadly, I wish there was something more interesting afoot with cliffhangers, but they really are the oldest trick in the book that dates back to radio serials of the 30-40's. – Jason0527149 years ago
No, no please don't dis the cliffhanger. As long as the conclusion is satisfying and delivers then it is okay to use it. Maybe the writer of this topic could look at the some of the greatest cliffhangers of all time. Remember "24"? The solutions were as Byzantine and created more questions than answers. – Munjeera9 years ago
Maybe talk about why cliffhangers effect us and how they effect us. What is the science behind why they make us want to watch more or why they anger us so much. Look at how fans reacted to cliffhangers and why they reacted in this way. Even maybe explore why writers of the show use cliffhangers and if they are useful to keep people interested in show. – Mel8 years ago
A look at the upcoming series of Twin Peaks and how it could differ from the old series and how it fits in with this current era of 'Peak TV' and will that have any bearing on how the show looks or how we consume it?
Revisiting something as postmodern as Twin Peaks might cause a ripple in the space/time continuum. At this point Twin Peaks has come full circle and is more reflective of 1980's entertainment impressionism. But good topic, definitely. – Jason0527149 years ago
The Abominable Brides takes place at least partially (some say completely) in Sherlock's mind. Therefore, the characters are projections of his subconscious, and different from their real-world versions. Analyze the differences between the characters in the previous seasons and in TAB, and determine what it reveals about that character's relationship to Sherlock and the way he sees them. For example, Sherlock sees Mary as Mycroft's spy, or John is more violent than his actual self.
The Super Bowl has been around for nearly 50 years. In recent years, it's also become a fantastic opportunity for business advertising, as many Super Bowl watchers will be able to view their commercials. Some people even look more forward to the Super Bowl commercial than the games. Over the years, commericals ranging from monkeys wearing office attire in a CareerBuilder commercial in 2006 to a hybrid "Puppy Monkey Baby" promoting Mountain Dew products this year, and more going farther back than the beginning of the new millenium. This might raise a few questions for marketers and those interested in promoting their products. What constitutes a successful Super Bowl commercial? And how has this changed over the years? And why are there monkeys featured in several of them?
Please do note that Artifice Writer Ryan Errington published "Super Bowl Commercials and Sponsorship" so the writer for this article can refer to this article as a point of reference or starting point and then expand it while addressing some of the questions introduced by James.
– Venus Echos9 years ago
It might be of interest to discuss what makes a successful commercial from the audience's point of view, too. The author of this piece might talk about how/why people look forward to the Super Bowl just because of the commercials. What kind of commercials do they want to see? – Nicole Williams9 years ago
Analyze the mainstream fascination with media that depicts the misanthropic genius, focusing on the FOX drama "House." It has been established by "House" creators that the titular character is molded from Sherlock Holmes, with Dr. James Wilson existing as a John Watson figure. In recent years, Conan Doyle's infamous creation has achieved widespread mainstream success in various forms from the Robert Downey, Jr./Jude Law films to the Benedict Cumberbatch/Martin Freeman BBC series to the Jonny Lee Miller/Lucy Liu PBS drama, Elementary. Explore what makes this type of character so appealing? Do we gravitate towards these films and television shows because they speak to a deep fascination with a person who can consistently defy rules and get away with it because they're geniuses? Or, bearing in mind Dr. Allison Cameron's character, do we have a secret need to attach ourselves and fix the stunted social growth of these characters?
Other questions to explore with House. How far are we as an audience willing to go along with House? Can a genius be excused from moral culpability? Does genius need isolation? As one who cures ills - is House aware of his own "ills"? – MELSEY9 years ago
Explore whether the character is justifiably reckless as his behaviours usually ends in saving a life or is this behaviour just plane reckless and in reality would not necessarily tolerated. You can also maybe use science theories to see why women sometimes are attracted to guys that they need to fix. Like the guy that would change for them and be the good guy for them. – Mel8 years ago
I'd love to see what the writer comes up with. From a medical standpoint I love House, but I don't watch it much because I can't stand the titular character's behavior. A couple thoughts:
1. Are there limits to what we're willing to put up with from characters (ex.: when they're justifiably reckless vs. when they're just being cold or non-compassionate)?
2. Does our worldview impact how we view these characters? For instance, I'm a Protestant Christian and an INFJ, so it really jars me when a character is as uncaring as House. But I also have friends of different personalities, including Christian friends, who say, "Lighten up." Are there certain worldviews or experiences that make characters like House more tolerable? – Stephanie M.8 years ago
The art of female characters in film and TV shows and how they have progressed. Black Widow, Scarlet Witch, Peggy Carter.
We first see Peggy Carter in Captain America and now she has her own show Agent Carter, you can focus on the progression of that character from Captain America to who she is now and how she is perceived as well. Black Widow is first seen around in Iron Man, and how she has progressed from Avengers and etc., how they have used the character in their favor and have progressed her towards an awesome or not so awesome female character in the MCU. She may have started off as a character that potentially had growth, but with the recent plots she has had in Age of Ultron, does she have that same potential. Then last but not least, Scarlet Witch. She was first seen in Age of Ultron, which means this character is going to show up next in Civil War. That means she has had the least potential shown in a film in the MCU, this one can be based off what you know as a character — this could possibly derive from the comics as well. I added this one because it would be interesting to see how they have shown her progression just in this one film. Have they showed some potential in her character that can be positive?
Seems like Peggy Carter has developed the most as a crossover from movies to TV. I do believe she is the first Marvel female character to successfully crossover with the same actress. Given the success of Agent Carter hopefully the trend will continue. – Munjeera9 years ago
I find a lot of people thought Natasha's arc in AOU was stopping her storyline and taking from her being "badass" but I personally thought it made her more complex and realistic. There is nothing wrong with a super agent who has been deprived of life to wish she could have kids, etc. I think it'd be also cool to discuss how people expect certain things from female characters to define them as strong (no feelings, no boyfriends, etc) and how that often makes them just another form of 2D. – noursaleh9 years ago
I think the only reasons Natasha's arc was so hated in AoU is because some women are so sick and tired of the same old story arcs. Like Noursaleh said, it's not completely unreasonable and it isn't strictly misogynistic. That being said, some of the controversy comes from who wrote it. Might you want to include a section of this paper that addresses "Death of the Author"? Either a critique of it or a defense of it? Should things stand on their own, away from the author; Should folks take the creator into account when looking at a text? Would reaction to Romanoff's character been different had it been written by a woman? woman of color? etc.? – sniederhouse9 years ago
This article would now make for a timely read. Analyse the characters of Valkyrie, Captain Marvel, Shuri and Pepper Potts too. – Dr. Vishnu Unnithan4 years ago
