Slaidey

Mom and Dad is a polarizing movie, to say the least. But critics are focusing on the acting, and not enough people are talking about the over-the-top and louder-than-necessary soundtrack that plays throughout the film. Were the music/audio queues a miscalculated mistake, or a statement?

Write an article assessing the accompanying audio to the movie. Do the loud stereotypical mood sounds take away from the narrative or add to it?
I found the soundtrack an interesting element that added extra commentary to the narrative. Although the actors took their roles seriously, the audio's juxtaposition to their struggles, highlights a lack of seriousness (especially when scary buildup music is playing in the beginning, constantly threatening danger before any is close to being presented). The situation the characters experience are dire and unfortunate, but the noise in the background continuously reminds audiences that the premise itself is still ridiculous.

"Detroit: Become Human" is a video game made by Quantic Dream coming out in 2018. It's a choice based game shaped by the player and there has been controversy over the acceptability of it's brutal story telling/choice based outcomes. The main character may supposedly choose to act or not act in a situation that can result in the death of a child by her father's hands or the main character killing the father instead. People are calling for the scene to be taken out from the game. Some say the former outcome will fuel abusers' fantasies while others worry the latter outcome will put victims of abuse in danger by inspiring them to seek violence in return. Neither situation is unique, as in, such events have been written about and occurred in films and art before. People want to draw the line so harshly for video games and what they can portray because of the interactivity. Is it fair to treat video games so differently? Provide examples of highly controversial video games depicting violent or disturbing scenes from the past, and speculate on whether their reception will shape Quantic Dream's decisions in addressing such concerns. Are these concerns valid?

"A Cure for Wellness" is a movie filled with loosely defined answers in need of a good article to analyze it's potential hidden meaning. The movie is saturated with the presence of eels; why eels over any other aquatic life? A quick google search says seeing eels in a place they aren't meant to be is a sign one is out of their depth (as the protagonist clearly is on multiple occasions) and the touching of an eel represents a missed opportunity. This fits well enough with the protagonist's experience/character but that leaves the question, how often were these sightings real? The movie tries to throw watchers back and forth between believing whether everything is real or in the protagonist's head. At the end when the Baron is confronted it's assumed for a short time that all the strange happenings were real and influenced by a degree of brain washing, however, in the last frame of the movie the protagonist is seen smiling with a full set of teeth when earlier in the movie he lost two. When asked about this the directors remained ambiguous on the significance, if there is any at all. Can it be deciphered how much of the film is based in reality or illusion, or is the it an unanswerable question?

Write an article about "I Am the Pretty Thing That Lives in the House," a Netflix original. It's format and creative choices in story telling, narration, and cinematics, leaves viewers surprised. It isn't what most expect to find, as many have become accustomed to jump-scare and gore films when it comes to entering a movie with the mentality "this will be scary."

Someone please write an article that not only examine the director's choices and how it differs from other modern films (more resembling the re-telling of an old abstract horror short story) but an article that will also contextualize it. Does it have literary ties to another work or was it made simply to resemble such? How and which literary elements did it adopt and to what effectiveness?

I've been asking myself for a long time what made minions from the movie series Despicable Me get so out of hand in merchandise and web presence. With the third movie soon coming out this topic could get a lot of attention. People tend to be in one of two categories: they love minions or they hate them. But, why Minions? There are plenty of slapstick sidekicks in cartoons but none have blown up to quite such proportions. There's a lot of them, they aren't identified as individuals, and they don't talk, but until they became mass-produced cringe inspiring merchandise, they contributed a heartfelt dynamic to the family image in Despicable Me and that's now been forgotten. Did they catch fame so quickly because of their central role in the movie or was it just their slapstick humor that caught people's attention… or was it something more subtle? From memes to merchandise Minions are presented as androgynous. Is this what made them so marketable? A non-gender creature appealing to anyone? In a world with so much gender controversy, maybe Minions were the solution to a time full of uncertainty and a need for PC? Study the marketing strategies presented for Minions, and perhaps on a anthropological level, explain their success.

ME!ME!ME! is not a new video but I recently stumbled across it and was taken away by it's imagery and symbolism. Normally watching such blatantly sexual animation is deterring, but it's underlying message shone through. Other critiques have been made on the video but I feel the Artifice's community especially would appreciate another thorough analysis. Pick apart ME!ME!ME! as a warning for the destructive powers of the protagonist's lifestyle (becoming overly obsessed with anime characters). You can find a light analysis on youtube by Gaijin Goombah, but he also makes it quite personal in the end. Write a more professional and organized article on the theory, hopefully starting with something close to his main thesis, followed by specific imagery in the video to solidify the stance. Perhaps address various case studies on the reality of being addicted to such fantasies; statistically how many lives are ruined by this fascination and is there such thing as rehab?

Where do you go for your news? Somewhere renown for legitimacy like The Huffington Post and The New Yorker, or perhaps somewhere mainstream like Buzzfeed? No matter the reputation of the site I've noticed one recurring thing: errors. Grammar errors, spelling errors, syntax errors. These are all extremely popular media sites, used by millions of people every day, and yet there seems to be no one taking the time to proofread or edit their articles. Where did all the editors go? Are media sites cutting editorial costs or is the flow of content too great for them to handle? Do popular sites even have editors?
Have we reached a point in our society where language standards are lacking to the point where it doesn't matter? Do people even care? As a writer, this is a topic near and dear to me and I'm sure to a great many others on the Artifice because we aspire to self produce worthy content. Give me an article with a definitive answer about the decline in quality writing for various magazines/newspapers and whether it's worth our time to try so hard? Has there been a recoil from dedicated readers over the decade or have such practices actually opened up their client base?

There was a massive overhaul to League of Legends' "Rift" after Riot's mid-season patch. Every new patch usually comes with some controversy but this one takes the cake. Players are complaining about "RNG" being added to the game with new random elemental spawning dragons. People feel that changes to the Rift Herald which now gives a twenty minute long buff (which in some cases is essentially the entire game) to one player that cannot be lost during death is unfair. And of course, there's the running saying that any newly released champion is overpowered (which marketing-wise is probably intentional, it gives people incentive to buy the character right away since it will be nerfed later).

Many players have access to the PBE and some youtubers make a living off of releasing the newest PBE content before it hits the game. With so much potential feedback it leaves me wondering how some obviously un-liked and controversial updates come to fruition. Though it need not focus on Riot I think it would be great to see an article focusing on the process of decision making that happens behind the scenes. What is the company structure? I'm sure gamers would like to know how much of their input goes into certain gaming companies' decisions. Perhaps it could even serve to relieve some tension from between the two parties. Are more direct and preemptive quality feedback strategies necessary for any variety of gaming companies; are PBEs enough?