Jamie White

IAmA former film student with aspirations to become a struggling writer.

Contributor II

  • Plebian Penman
  • Common Writer
  • Lurker
  • Pssst
  • Sharp-Eyed Citizen
  • Town Watch
  • Actor
  • ?
  • Articles
    7
  • Featured
    6
  • Comments
    106
  • Ext. Comments
    22
  • Processed
    15
  • Revisions
    15
  • Topics
    14
  • Topics Taken
    1
  • Notes
    46
  • Topics Proc.
    15
  • Topics Rev.
    1
  • Points
    1919
  • Rank
    45
  • Score
    1019

    Latest Articles

    Latest Topics

    0

    The Flashback in Film (and Possibly Television)

    What use do flashbacks actually have? To merely give backstory to a character(s), to add a tension, to foreshadow something?
    What are good (and bad) examples of flashbacks in film and do they make use of the flashback in a suitable and compelling manner.
    One example that could be used is this "Saw" short film ((link) which uses flashbacks to portray the main ction and torture scenes. The torture scenes should create suspense with not knowning whther this man is going to live or die, but by seeing him being interviewed about what happened, any tension is lost.
    Tarantino’s "Pulp Fiction" and "Kill Bill" could be an interesting point of discussion, as well as "Red Dragon" which uses a scene to introduce the audience to Will Graham and Hannibal Lector, but it is also set before "Silence of the Lambs;" is this film a flashback in itself? Are there better examples of entire films being a flashback?
    DC CW television shows have also use flashbacks extensively (mostly in "Arrow" as a rhetoric device linking Oliver’s experiences on the island to present-day turmoils.)

      2

      The Ultimate Arrow "Who's in the Grave?" Theory Roundup

      Arrow season 4 spoilers.

      Going on the Arrow sub-reddit there seems to be several "who’s in the grave?" everyday. I suggest having a definitive roundup of who could be the person theorised about so much. Whose death would have the biggest impact on the show? Are Felicity and Thea in the clear now that they’ve survived near death experiences? The writers/show-runners say Felicity is not in the grave, but could her body be elsewhere and the Felicity in the car with Oliver be a hallucination much like Shado was in the flashbacks.
      What about Oliver’s son? He seems like the next character the show is teasing to die after Malcom told Darkh about him. Would a character the audience has seen maybe just two times leave a big enough impact on the viewers? Would they even go so far as killing off a child? Even with its somewhat darker tone, Arrow still doesn’t seem like the sort of show that would do this.

      This should aim to be the definitive piece for the "who’s in the grave?" theories. Which characters make sense? Which characters don’t?

      Prime candidates: Diggle, Laurel, Felicity, Thea, William Hawke and possibly Quentin Lance.
      Finally, is this who grave talk taking away from the rest of the show? This seems like a tunt to get the fandom in on speculating who is going to be killed off when this could have been handled as a surprise death.

        3

        Mental Disorders and Illnesses in Children's Animation

        What are some examples of representations of mental ilnesses/disorders in animations aimed at children? Who exactly are the characters that exhibit certain maneurisms of such things for? Are they for the children to idenify and connect with or for the parents to have an awareness and to help spot any symptoms?

        The big example for both it’s animation adaptation and book is Winnie the Pooh. Essentially all the characters appear to be diagnosable with specific mental disorders; Eeyore is perhaps the instantly recognisable one with depression, but Poo exhibits symptoms of ADHD, Owl dyslexia and even Christopher Robin with schizophrenia.

        Other animated characters that could be mentioned I can think of off the top of my head come from Pixar. There are various examples of depression in the Pixar film universe – Marlin(Finding Nemo, Carl (Up), Jessie (Toy Story) and Wall-E may exhibit some signs of OCD and/or anxiety disorders.

        There are plenty of different animations that could be mentioned for this, but the real driving point should be the questions mentioned at the beginning. How can these characters be read in terms of what illnesses they may portray? Who are these representations for? What purpose (if any) do they serve and is it useful?

        • I feel as though this topic is especially important since the new character released on Sesame Street (or that has been announced to be, anyways, I'm not sure if she's on the show yet). Julia is a puppet new to Sesame Street meant to demonstrate the struggles of autism and help alleviate stigma towards it. Will children identify the character as autistic, or just another puppet? Is she there for the kids or the parents? – Slaidey 2 years ago
          2
        • I think one thing worth mentioning is whether or not the characters were intentionally made for children to identify with or if the character is only speculated to embody that trait. Like the aforementioned Winnie the Pooh characters or Julia from Sesame Street. – Austin Bender 2 years ago
          1
        • I think there are a couple different reasons as to why as to why an artist or author would depict character traits so diversely without singling them down to just one. For instance, to add depth and diversity to the overall dynamics rather than having a variety of essentially all the same character archetypes, by differentiating personality traits, not only does the plot to the overall story thicken, but also the intended audience is no longer targeted down to one specific person or point of view. In doing so, anyone experiencing the show may be able to relate to a certain character that might reflect a certain quality or aspect in their own life and take comfort in that, especially children who are easily influenced and captivated by what they are watching. A young child may not have the capacity to fully understand the psychology behind a character depicted, but this doesn't necessarily mean they are not already processing that information and learning to recognize certain behaviors that they will inevitably learn to recognize in the real world or within themselves. In most animated shows, someone going through a tribulation learns to overcome it all the while taking away a hard earned life lesson, the road to happiness isn't always painted in bright colors. – IsabellasIncendia 2 years ago
          2
        • Don't forget the film Inside Out. I believe there's already been some discussion on how those characters can help children understand mental illness (i.e. sadness governs the mother's head = depression, anger governs the father's = anger issues). I found it particularly striking that the little girl was unable to access her joy and her sadness, so anger pretty much took over. Anger is commonly a cover for other emotions such as sadness. I also thought that it was interesting that the movie demonstrated that there was a place for every emotion... and ALL of them were trying to help the little girl, whether or not we might perceive them as negative. Overall, it really encouraged healthy psychological functioning! – Laura Jones 1 year ago
          1
        1
        Published

        2016 Acadamy Awards Analysis and Rundown

        The nominations for the 2016 Acadamy Awards are out! Analyse the nominations for their respective categories, mentioning whether any film/actor/director etc. to have missed out and maybe even some predictions.
        This could also look at how the Awards are potentially already won by certain individuals. Has the DiCaprio joke run its course and helped the actor to win an award regardless of whether he deserves it (on this performance in The Revenant) or not. Will earlier Awards ceremonies have any effect on the Oscars? And generally, how strong a year in film has it been?

        • This is a good topic. I would also mention how obvious blockbusters (such as Star Wars) might affect other worthy films and possibly hinder awards they might otherwise win. I'm interested to see where this goes! – Stephen Matthias 1 year ago
          0
        • One of the more controversial aspects of this year's nominations is the blatant lack of racial diversity, particularly through various African American actors getting "snubbed." – Christen Mandracchia 1 year ago
          2
        3
        Published

        Animal Symbolism in Life is Strange

        The use of various different animals in the episodic video game "Life is Strange" span from spirit animals to breeds of dogs assigned to people who buy drugs from Frank to even scientific theories (ie the Butterfly effect). There is a wide selection of animals to choose from, but the five with the most subject matter on would probably be: the deer, butterflies, dogs, whales and birds (specifically, the blue jay).

        Discuss the meanings and connotations certain animals have in "Life is Strange" and perhaps which human they can be assigned with.

        Does Frank’s buyers list accurately reflect who he has assigned to a certain breed? Is there any significant meaning to the list at all?

        What do the various appearances of the butterfly represent? Does it always show up when the Butterfly Effect in practice?

        • Max points out that the deer is specifically a doe and it seems to be connected directly to her. What is their relation? – LaRose 1 year ago
          1
        4

        "If it's not Scary, it's not a Horror Film"

        A discussion revolving around how horror films are more than just about how scary they are and that the scare factor does not solely define a movie as a horror.

        There are films that are visually/semantically not horror films (Alien is THE example) yet the arc of the film strongly resembles that of a horror film.

        Horror films usually have some sort of political/social/cultural message to them. There was an Israeli called "Rabies" (or "Kalevet") that had incredibly strong political viewpoints about it’s home country wonderfully summed up by the last line in the film, "Country full of shits."

        Of course, this could be taken to include how horror movies should also be scary and how that is still an important but not integral aspect to the genre. Also the concept of how what we are scared by/how scared we are is more subjective than objective would be an interesting point for discussion.

        • I love this topic idea. I feel like "scary" in modern terms tends to deal with "how many jumpscares are there," which is a technique typically misused in many contemporary horror movies. There are many movies as you mentioned that create a certain atmosphere (Alien; Silence of the Lambs) to the point that while they don't traditionally get labeled as horror (sci-fi; thriller), they have a certain tension and resonate on certain visceral levels of both the audience's and the characters' fears. This is similar to how a lot of people didn't see "The Babadook" as scary because it didn't have many jumpscares or scenes where it openly showed the monster, but it relied on dread and the topic of suppressed grief. Similar to how the movie you mention deals with politics, sometimes horror movies are terrifying because of what they reveal about humanity, i.e. Psycho. I'd also say that this goes back to Ann Radcliffe's "horror vs. terror" debate and the issue of ambiguity and unclearness. Unclearness creates terror, but it seems obscuring certain elements like not revealing the monster or not having obvious jumpscares can make viewers impatient or have the movie be seen as "not trying to be scary enough." For this topic, I'd definitely look into what "scary" means to viewers and if that element is necessary for an effective movie. Or can "scary" be wielded effectively? – emilydeibler 2 years ago
          2
        • I forgot to add in the main body of the topic that also the "monster" within a horror film can also represent fears of nations, societies, governments etc. For example, in the film "Them!" giant ants attack an American city and they are portayals of the fears of nuclear and atomic bombs, both those used during WWII and the testing of such weapons done in some unpopulated space in America. Along with this the "monster" can also be representative of sexual repression of certain groups (homosexuals I think is one example) of people; I believe Robin Wood wrote something regarding this that would be incredibly helpful. – Jamie White 2 years ago
          1
        • Along the same lines of what Emily wrote, it seems these days that a "good" horror film incorporates a lot of gore, jump scares, and violence. I don't think a horror film has to have all of these, but they do have to be scary in SOME way to be billed as a horror film. That being said, horror, like violence, can be implemented into a film in a purposeful way without making it simply spectacular or gratuitous. It's about balancing between cringe-worthy and necessary. – Christina Legler 2 years ago
          0
        0

        Televison to Film: The Right Decision After a Show Finishes?

        Hannibal show creator Bryan Fuller has recently spoken of the possibility to bring his show back in the form of a film. There are a few examples of this happening before with shows like Spooks and The Inbetweeners (both British, I know; a possible comparison to American shows could be done).

        Is this creatively the right choice? Have these sorts of jumps from small to big-screen worked well before?

        • Interesting topic. X files is a good example to look at. – Rachel Elfassy Bitoun 2 years ago
          0
        • I haven't watched it but I've heard Firefly made a movie after the disappointment from fans at it's cancellation. I hear it was a bit of a wrong decision, and that in a hurry to wrap up loose ends people with dissatisfied with certain character's ends. Firefly could contribute to this topic. – Slaidey 2 years ago
          1
        • This is a good and current topic idea. Perhaps if you include more examples within your research- it would help to paint a better picture for readers.Are you planning to branch out into other works- past, present and or current? Additionally, will you include some opinions from valid critics? Will you provide a prediction of TV shows shifting to film for the future?– arielsilkett 2 years ago
          0
        2

        Adult Cartoon Shows and Their Apparent Decline in Quality

        The Simpsons, South Park, Family Guy. These three programmes in particular have received a fair amount of criticism in recent years for their apparent decline in quality and a lot of he time earlier seasons are superior. But is this really the case?
        Are earlier seasons genuinely better than later ones or have the shows themselves just evolved into something slightly different? Or is it even the case of the audience changing overtime; these shows have run for a staggering amount of time.
        With The Simpsons, for example, a person who first watched the show at Bart’s age would now be watching the show as someone the same age as Homer.
        This can be done show by show and can, of course, include other long running shows that may not be exclusive to animation.

        • Good insight about how part of the change might have to do with the audience. Fans who have been watching since a show's inception will respond differently than newer fans to a changes in a show. A show that has been on the air for a long time will have to face shifts in audience expectations and perceptions. – S.A. Takacs 2 years ago
          1
        • Perhaps you can compare this to newer adult cartoons, such as Archer, Bob's Burgers, and Rick & Morty? – Nicole Wethington 2 years ago
          1
        • Thank you! I still love The Simpsons. I think it is the same quality, but people are just bored of the humor even though it is the same as ever. But people must like it as it keeps getting renewed. As to Family Guy, even Seth McFarlene wonders why it is still going. – Erin Derwin 2 years ago
          1

        Sorry, no tides are available. Please update the filter.

        Latest Comments

        I’ve not been able to see the film yet, but this seems to have confirmed some of my suspicions about how well the film was made. Nice concise article btw.

        Batman Vs Superman: What Went Wrong?

        I’m glad you’ve enjoyed it! It’s been really mentally stimulating talking with you. Hopefully I get to read an article of yours, which I’m sure will be every bit as intelligent as this discussion has been. Valar morghulis.

        Game of Thrones: Don't Judge a Boob by its Cover

        The Brienne scene in some ways pulls the wool over our eyes with this, as her femininity and showing as such through her naked body is a genuine “weakness” of hers that she hates showing. I don’t think the showrunners have always shown nudity as a female vulnerability, but definitely more so than not and by a long way.

        Another good point on cultural differences. It is often easy to forget that Mel is not from Westeros because she is just so comfertable (confident is maybe a better word) around everyone. I really like this scene because it brings together so many elements of nudity and nakedness: prurience, authenticity, cultural context as you so rightly pointed out, and now there is the theorisation that Mel was in her true form (the old woman from the S6 premiere). This brings in a completely new element to the scene. Selyse being a true believer and not needing to seeing the beautiful Red Woman, while the viewer (the objectifying viewer) still needs the beauty to be convinced to go along with Mel; it is not until the audience wants and “needs” her most that she reveals her true self to us (which was a great scene, too). The audience is willing to not care who she is or what she looks like for one thing everyone (seemingly) wanted – Jon Snow.

        I see what you mean when you say the audience is meant to be “aroused” by Cersei’s humiliation, but I believe a better word to use would be schadenfreude (taking pleasure in others’ pain/humiliation etc.). The one issue i have with this scene, Cersei’s all too perfect body. We’ve scene recenlty with OAP Mel that an accurate depiction of an elderly woman was done excellently, but why couldn’t they have done this with a mother of three? If we had seen the toll of three pregnancies on Cersei’s body it would’ve been a scene much more focused on her punishment than on her nakedness being a main focus.

        Game of Thrones: Don't Judge a Boob by its Cover

        Very, very well said and argued. I completely see your point now. The argument can be made then that it is the audience need to lter their expectations rather than how the show portrays nakedness and nudity. Of course, this isn’t the whole case, the show still uses nudity only as sexual. In fact, the only non-sexual example of nakedness on the show I can think of is that one brief scene where we see Hodor’s penis. Saying that, he is also a non-sexual character, simpleton, and a male (not that he cannot be found “sexy”).

        I still think Qarth is an odd place. I completely agree with your statments on cultural differences and historical contexts, and if a one boob out Dany was in Mereen or Yunkai I would definitely agree, but Qarth just seems too civilise, on the show that is. Obviously, they still have their own rules and standards because of their culture, but it is probably the most Western city in Essos, and hence I still feel the boob out attire would still feel a little off. Something like this has to be established very early on, and I don’t believe we are given any hints that the fashion is ridisculously different copared to what we’ve already seen – I think in the context of the show the way Qarth was portrayed was to make a substantial distinction between them and the only other culture we’d seen up until that point – the Dothraki. So I belive that if some form of fashion staement with a breast exposed would’ve blurred the lines between sophisticated Qarth…eens(?) and the Dotjraki.

        I ususally watch the show before my brother does and when he gets home he will usually ask me a couple of questions, and normally one is about whether there was boobs in the show. This annoys me to no end A) because he supports the notion of only viewing nudity as sexual and B) the nudity shouldn’t be one of the primary interests of the show.
        I do believe that some examples of nudity in the show isn’t sexual, but this is probably just from my sole perspective (hetero male viewer btw). Unfortunately, my brother embodies the majority that sees all boobs as sexual, and that’s just so disappointing.

        Game of Thrones: Don't Judge a Boob by its Cover

        Thanks for your comment and thanks for disagreeing! (I really mean it)

        I think the notion of prurience in Essos is a very relevent matter. The Dothraki, for example, are not considered as such for their clothing and sex scenes because of their tribal nature. Qarth is a more sophisticated place, more akin to Westerosi cities, so I do believe that nakedness in Qarth would more likely be considered prurient. All i meant by it being a good decision not to shows Dany’s breasts as was done in the book was because there didn’t seem to be any reason to do so.

        Re sansa stuff: 1. The undressing does not mean that her character changes, but how we as the audience look at her. She does not become any less innocent etc, but we see her in a different way.
        2. Yeah, fair point. i definitely should’ve included Tyrion’s nakedness in there.
        3. This is just a devil’s advocate here, BUT it was probably because no nudity was actually shown. I still thought that because her character was underage they still couldn’t show something. Apparantley not the case…
        4. I think someone has actually not some statistical analysis of book vs show nudity and I beleive the bok came out on top completely. I’ll try and find the link. The white male audience will also be pandered to, whether intentionally or not, and that is quite sad. I do believe that this is getting better slwoly, though.

        I’d have liked to have heard what you disagreed with regarding the Jaime/Brienne scene and what you thought about Mel’s and Cersei’s scenes.

        Also, never feel you have to apologise for having a different opinion. In fact, I’m glad you did disagree with most of what I said.

        Game of Thrones: Don't Judge a Boob by its Cover

        Thanks for your comment and thanks for disagreeing! (I really mean it)

        I think the notion of prurience in Essos is a very relevent matter. The Dothraki, for example, are not considered as such for their clothing and sex scenes because of their tribal nature. Qarth is a more sophisticated place, more akin to Westerosi cities, so I do believe that nakedness in Qarth would more likely be considered prurient. All i meant by it being a good decision not to shows Dany’s breasts as was done in the book was because there didn’t seem to be any reason to do so.

        Re sansa stuff: 1. The undressing does not mean that her character changes, but how we as the audience look at her. She does not become any less innocent etc, but we see her in a different way.
        2. Yeah, fair point. i definitely should’ve included Tyrion’s nakedness in there.
        3. This is just a devil’s advocate here, BUT it was probably because no nudity was actually shown. I still thought that because her character was underage they still couldn’t show something. Apparantley not the case…
        4. I think someone has actually not some statistical analysis of book vs show nudity and I beleive the bok came out on top completely. I’ll try and find the link. The white male audience will also be pandered to, whether intentionally or not, and that is quite sad. I do believe that this is getting better slwoly, though.

        I’d have liked to have heard what you disagreed with regarding the Jaime/Brienne scene and what you thought about Mel’s and Cersei’s scenes.

        Also, never feel you have to apologise for having a different opinion. In fact, I’m glad you did disagree with most of what I said.

        Game of Thrones: Don't Judge a Boob by its Cover

        i really think it was the best season for a while now. I particularly loved the Garrison-Trump story arc and, of course, the Canadians. From a social, political, cultural etc standpoint, it was very well done. I think the continuity in the episodes (which is nothing new for SP by far) was a little over done, though. They had so many storylines going by the last three episodes it just kind of tainted it for me a tiny bit. Still a great season though.

        South Park: Respect Their Commentarah

        I think while the semantics may change (heterosexual to homosexual/multicultural families etc.) the syntactics remain the same. Generally how a family oriented show works stays the same; the roles and stereotypes within the family are the same. Recently, inModern Family Claire has become the real breadwinner for the Dunphys. It even began to parody the switching of stereotypes with Claire the breadwinner and Phil the doting, trophy wife.

        How has the Idea of "Family" Changed on Television since World War II?