Pi's storytelling is another method of psychological survival. The narrative itself can be seen as an attempt to make sense of his trauma and find solace in a version of events that is more bearable than the brutal reality.
I feel this could use a bit more context for the potential writer. – Sunni Rashad3 weeks ago
The writer could explore further the psychological element of storytelling in order to deal with trauma – Laurika Nxumalo2 weeks ago
This article could analyze how schizoid personality disorder (SPD) is portrayed in movies, examining both accurate depictions and those that lean into stereotypes. It could explore characters from films like Taxi Driver, Her, or Donnie Darko, discussing how their emotional detachment, introspection, and isolation reflect aspects of SPD. The article might delve into how these portrayals provide insight into the human experience of disconnection, often serving as metaphors for broader societal issues.
You might also consider discussing the challenges filmmakers face in representing SPD authentically while balancing narrative engagement. Exploring the potential impact these portrayals have on public understanding of the disorder — both in terms of awareness and misconceptions — could add a valuable dimension. Addressing how the nuanced representation of mental health contributes to more empathetic storytelling would make the topic particularly relevant in today's cinematic landscape.
I think Christian Grey from “50 Shades of Grey” would be a good character to look at with regard to the depiction of SPD – Laurika Nxumalo2 weeks ago
The original Jumanji (1995) remains a nostalgic classic almost 30 years after its release. Its technologically updated sequel might have gotten the side-eye from the original film's devotees, but also pulled in a flock of new fans, as evidenced when a third movie invited viewers back to its jungle. Zathura, which featured a space-themed board game, is arguably less beloved than the Jumanji films but has plenty of fans. And the new film Family Pack has thrown players of yet another magical game into 1497 France to face werewolves while grappling with their personal problems, deep emotions, and general dysfunction.
Analyze the presence and appeal of magical board games in family films. What makes magical board games the right catalysts to bring families, siblings, or even strangers (thus, "found family") together in these films, as opposed to say, video games or a game on the sports field or court? Do these films have something special to say to families in today's technology-driven age and if yes, what is it? Do "magical board game" stories have potential as a bigger subgenre, and if yes, what other board game themes, family structures, or themes of the human condition could be explored? Use the mentioned films as a jumping off point, but feel free to explore what as-yet-untapped plots might look like.
Analyse Hayao Miyazaki's use of picturesque European-inspired aesthetics in his movies. Think "Howl's Moving Castle", "Kiki's Delivery Service", and "Porco Rosso" – all are either inspired by 19th and early 20th century Europe, or in the case of "Porco Rosso" use real countries such as Italy in the 1930s. How does Miyazaki draw on these elements of aesthetic to create beautiful and magical settings? How does the source material, British author Diana Wynne Jones' novel "Howl's Moving Castle", and the real world influences of the time period, World War 1 etc, influence Miyazaki's renditions? What does he include, what does he exclude? What is the affect of these renditions on Japanese and international audiences especially when considering Japan's relationship with the West? You can also compare these European aesthetic/story films with the Ghibli films set in Japan, such as "My Neighbor Totoro" and "Spirited Away". Plenty of questions to ask yourself when doing this article. I recommend potential narrowing down the subject to certain aspects of the aesthetic, such as subject, technology, colour etc.
You could also include the set design for the live stage play of "Spirited Away" and if that is catered to the audience or true to the source material. – yoderamy172 years ago
Book-to-movie films (and—more regularly, now—shows) are especially common in young adult franchises such as The Maze Runner, The Hunger Games, and Divergent. The first three Harry Potter films are some of the most beloved book-to-movie adaptations in history. The latter movies, while successful in other regards, were criticised (especially by book purists) for cutting out, altering, or ignoring large chunks of the source material. I have heard several fans say that they would watch a Harry Potter reboot if it was a high-budget streaming show that adapted each chapter into an episode, with the dialogue and plots and sub-plots remaining exactly the same as the books. Whether this would ever be done remains to be seen,
Movies face an issue in that they are limited in run-time. While there are long movie adaptations out there (The Lord of the Rings is a prime example), more commonly, they are cut to fit at a little over 2 hours. They prioritise entertainment and a streamlined story. Books can vary in length to a great degree—the first Harry Potter book was around 77,000 words while the fifth (the longest) was around 257,000. Yet the fifth movie (2hrs and 18 minutes long) was actually shorter than the first (2 hours and 32 minutes long). The movie arguably benefited from cutting much of the meat of the book, at least from an entertainment perspective, if not from a story and world perspective.
How important is it for the plot to be accurately represented in films, given that they are, indeed, adaptations of the source material and not direct translations? Is it enough for the characters and world to be represented with care and detail? Are fans right in complaining about inaccuracy and missing scenes in book-to-movie adaptations? What are some examples of book-to-movie adaptations done well, and done poorly?
The different approaches to book adaptations and the merits or detriments of shifting the medium of a story would definitely be an interesting topic. Another possible aspect of the topic would be the question of whether a movie or an episodic show is the most effective format, whether this is case specific, and what sort of plots and subplots lend themselves to short or long form cinema. – Quodlibet2 years ago
Movies and books are two extremely different mediums with unique characteristics, potential benefits, and potential barriers. Consider this example: In the book Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, there are several significant internal monologues. In my opinion, one of the most substantial ones is Alice's internal monologue while questioning her own identity (inside the rabbit hole); however, I was unable to locate a single movie that featured this internal monologue. In a novel, a character could typically have an internal monologue for a whole chapter, or even more, but in a movie, it would be disastrous. In light of this, I believe the questions to be asked are: Which elements should be removed in order to make room for the new medium? What elements need to be modified to take advantage of the new medium's potential? etc. The issue is not whether there should or shouldn't be disparities between the two - because there will always be disparities between the two; rather, it is how to implement these contrasts without compromising the book's basic concepts and takeaways. – Samer Darwich2 years ago
The benefits of a series format compared with that of a film would definitely be an interesting topic. In my opinion one of the interesting examples to explore would be the adaptation of philip pulman's series 'his dark materials' and how the movie compares to the HBO series. Whils both effectively translate the novels into another format, both fail where the other succeeds. For example the HBO series is more detailed and has better pacing whereas the movie has a tone that is similar to that of the books. Another example is all quiet on the western front which has been adapted into a television sereis and two different movies, the most recent havign been released this year. I'm sure some interesting comparisons can be drawn between the different adaptations that would help furthere develop this topic. – Matilda2 years ago
The debate of making a successful book to movie adaptation is great to engage in. There first needs to be an acknowledgement that there ate two different mediums and depending how abstract or explicit, its down to directors' and writers interpretation the book. – ml223702 years ago
I think that books do more intense and detailed descriptions of the story. But the adaptation of a book to the movie is really good as not all can read books but most people watch movies tho! – dancingnumbers2 years ago
I think the recreation of famous stories in film can be a really beautiful thing and gives more options of accessibility for a wide range of audiences. Although I can agree that film adaptations can be missing the "spark" of the novel, there will always be different versions that exist. A recording of an audiobook with a different voice actor than the original recording will have nuances and tone that transform the story, just as a movie will create a slight variation of the original tale. Within these changed adaptations we can add new, modern factors to elevate relatability and relevance to modern society, such as increasing diversity (which is always a good thing). – tayloremily292 years ago
A lot of this has with the personal connection to the material. I remember hating the Watchmen film when it came out. I was not familiar with the material and I remember not feeling invested in any of the characters - I left the cinema about half way through (the only other time I did that was in Batman and Robin). Friends of mine who I trust and are familiar with the source material loved it and it felt to them like a very accurate representation. There is also the nature of time passing to consider. Perhaps a piece of literature is twenty years old (or more!) and has key elements that need to change to reach a contemporary audience - these might not be the core or 'the message' of the story, but they might be things that seem essential to some readers of the original material. If there were a way to judge the access of the new audience to the original authors intent, that might be something to look at. – ggmills8 months ago
I would argue the best adaptations sit along their source text or are in dialogue with them rather than being carbon copies. Dune the novel is not the same as Dune the film (2021 and 2024) but both can exist side by side and their themes and ideas are have overlap in many ways. How a film or tv show diverges from a source text and why is as interesting as how they remain faithful. Many readers and fans of novels/book franchises need to be more aware/conscious about the necessity of changing a text when adapting it to another medium. Fundamental structures/narrative techniques of a novel or short story may not translate to a visual medium. The more beloved the text, and the more strictly constructed the text, the more potential for criticism there are from fans of the property. The Rings of Power is a fascinating case study in the process of adapting texts for tv. House of Dragons is another fascinating case study. – Sean Gadus3 months ago
DON'T LOOK UP was a controversial satire on the climate problem, and while every political satire is bound to divide audiences– this one made a large mistake. It wasn't just a satire, it was a call to action. It was a combination of the greatest forces in entertainment, telling you, the average moviegoer, that we need to solve this problem. Perhaps if the film had given a portion of not all proceeds to climate action, there would be a legitimate attempt at change. However, because of its lack of self-awareness and enormous star-power, whether or you liked the film, nothing is going to change.
Other films have successfully navigated this fine line of educating vs enlisting (Wag the Dog, 1997 comes to mind) but for a giant industry with enough money to solve world hunger to shake their finger at an audience made up of working class moviegoers is both ignorant and somewhat classist.
I'm probably one of the few people who didn't like the movie))) – mikkejames2 years ago
The idea of an apocalypse has existed in history for hundreds of years, but why in recent times has the idea of an apocalypse become to mainstream? Whether it's zombies, nukes, or anything in between, these stories have taken a deep root in our modern culture. Is it because we feel detached from our primal survivalist selves? Take for example the show The Walking Dead. The show is a massive success, second only to Game Of Thrones during its run time. Apart from the amazing writing and impeccable acting performances, there is a certain allure to the idea of a group of at-first strangers growing into a family through trials and tribulations and lots of zombie guts. It is also interesting to see how these stories are received in different cultures around the world. For example I know that in many parts of Asia, there is a massive love for all things zombie. Why do you think this is?
Good topic! I think apocalypse-style media is cathartic. People consume it as a way to reassure themselves that what they see can't really happen for one reason or another, or that if it did, they would survive. Sometimes people consume this media and plan what they would do in certain situations. There's also an element of dark humor, as in, if we laugh at the poor decisions we think characters are making, the apocalypse won't seem so threatening and potentially realistic. – Stephanie M.4 years ago
Something really cool that was taught at the UNiversity I attended was an analysis of 'Ecocriticism and Popular Culture'. It took a deep dive into enviro-apocalypse stories (like Snowpiercer) - why we tell them and why we love reading/watching them. The concept of 'man vs wild' is a binary that has long existed conceptually as a means by which humans understand themselves. However, contemporary ecocritics have been challenging this binary. Especially now in an age where climate change and environmental catastrophe (referred to by scholars as the Anthropocene) continue to escalate. Things to research when exploring Environmental Apocalypse stores in pop culture:
- Anthropocene
- Biopolitics
- Examples of this in film/literature: Snowpiercer, Elysium, Interstellar, MaddAddam Trilogy (by Margaret Atwood) – Amaani3 years ago
Something to consider: for many people and species on this planet apocalypse is already here and we are living in a post-apocalypse scenario. So maybe these representations of "another apocalypse" are how we confront our reality that we don't want to see. – ProfRichards3 years ago
It might also be worthwhile to bring up how many cultures and people who have experienced genocide often say they live in a post-apocalyptic world and how that translates into the art and media they create (i.e Indigenous, Black cultures) – Anna Samson3 years ago
Another thing to consider is how differently post-apocalyptic films and shows are written nowadays compared to the 70s, 80s, and 90s. So many shows have been redone, with some performing well and others being worse than the originals. I think it's important that we compare what captured viewers back then compared to now. – cbrneticwrites3 years ago
What came to mind when I read this was Amazon's adaptation of the 'Fallout' series which attempts to appeal to fans of the franchise while capitalizing upon and making light of our sentiment and horror with real, seemingly apocalyptic events. Recreating a post-apocalyptic landscape with acute attention to nostalgic detail without any meaningful storytelling serves as performative sympathy and distraction from our reality. It seems to be mostly an attempt by major streaming networks to relate to their audiences and garner sympathy without taking accountability or advocating for real change. – Erin4 months ago
There is a very interesting blog entry on the Harry Potter Amino Apps page that compares Lord Voldemort (nee Tom Riddle) from the Harry Potter series to Andrew Nehman, the protagonist of Whiplash. The main thrust of this argument is that both characters come from a long line of mediocrities, and develop an obsession with being the best in their chosen fields in order to counter this, even if it costs them their humanity and personality. They also share at least one other similarity that goes unremarked upon in the blog: namely, that both of their mothers died in childbirth.
The question is, does Voldemort have any other traits that make him similar to other obsessed creatives (real or fictional) besides just Nehman? What, if any, artistic talents does he possess, and what are some of the lengths he goes to master them? In terms of his characterization, just how essential a role does creativity play in making him who he is? Is there actually anything to the idea that Tom Riddle/Voldemort's backstory and arc are that of an obsessed artist or creative personality, or does he just happen to have some traits in common with one obsessively artistic character purely by chance?
