Film

Latest Articles

Film
62
Film
49
Film
35
Film
29
Film
19
Film
34
Film
26
Film
78
Film
46
Film
36

Latest Topics

2

The Cameo: Purpose, Impact and Popularity

Analyze the reason why directors use cameos. What impact does it have on the audience? Why is it gaining popularity?

From Kareem Abdul Jabbar to Stan Lee to Stephen King, highlight examples that will look at why the crossover from reality to media is so popular. Big Bang Theory regularly played with this trope with great effectiveness. Why do we love it?

  • Neat topic! In the case of Stan Lee, I like to think of it as a nice little "wink" to the audience. With other cameos, I usually find them to feature celebrities - were they just in the right place at the right time? Did they love the show that much that they just couldn't help but be on it? Did the producers just love that actor so much? It would be interesting to see what answers one could find. – EJSmall 5 years ago
    1
  • I believe some actors are fans of a show and ask to be on. Stan Lee’s cameos were pretty funny. There is one where he plays Hugh Hefner that he did because people sometimes mistake them for each other. I would love to see a list of all time great cameos. SPOILER - There is a awesome one in Hobbes and Shaw. – Munjeera 5 years ago
    0
  • Though there is no direct possible way to verify, I wonder what is the percentage of viewers who do not like cameos or find it distracting. My friend once mentioned that he felt "left out" whenever there was a cameo he did not know about. – kpfong83 5 years ago
    0
  • Good point. Are cameos a distraction? – Munjeera 5 years ago
    1
  • Maybe the need is to distinguish when it is done well and done poorly. Bill Gates on "Big Bang Theory" (well) versus Martina Navratilova on "Hart to Hart" (poorly) provide examples as a starting point. – Joseph Cernik 5 years ago
    2
  • Navratilova on H2H? – Munjeera 5 years ago
    0
6
Published

Sometimes, adaptations are better than the source material

We bookworms grew up with the idea that "reading the book" was better than watching the film/TV version of it. In fact, if we ever messed up with that order we believed we were dishonoring our identity as literature lovers. The reality is, adaptations can be much better than their source material when it comes to making us care about the story. My personal examples are The Princess Bride, The Count of Montecristo, Anne of Green Gables, and Stardust. That being said, I invite you to analyse the elements that may influence how good an adaptation can be compared to its book predecessor: is it the change in structure, the plot pace, the characterisation? I'm curious about your opinion on this idea and if you have more examples that support it.

  • I totally agree that adaptations can be better than the source material. It only makes sense that the majority of adaptations would be worse than the original. Very few people make an original work without some sort of love for what they are making while anyone with eyes could tell that throwing the title of a best selling book on a piece-of-crap movie will make at least a sizable chunk of money. I believe that quality in any media will come almost entirely out of passion. As long as the person adapting the work has a vision for what they are doing and truly wish to add to the original or are simply making a new way for new people to enjoy it; there is no reason it can't be better than what came before it! – pastelnon 5 years ago
    2
  • I very much agree with this, as I was one of those dedicated bookworms back in the day. I can identify with the Princess Bride example simply because that is a movie with a book that I would not necessarily be inclined to read because the movie was so well done. – HannahGrace 5 years ago
    1
  • I completely agree; when I was young I would have rather gone to my grave than admit that there were movies that were better than the books they came from, or at least adapted really well. Out of your list, I completely agree with The Princess Bride and The Count of Monte Cristo; and especially the latter of those two. – aserraglio 5 years ago
    1
  • Make sure you have a clear criteria for this article about what makes the films better. I would actually argue that Princess Bride Book and Film are different but equally good. Also I'd like to remind readers that William Goldman did the script and there are rarely books where the author has such a prominent role in the film making process. – Sean Gadus 5 years ago
    2
  • As heretical as it may sound, Peter Jackson's "Lord of the Rings" trilogy is arguably the best example of a successful book-to-film adaptation, both financially and critically ("Return of the King" alone is tied for most Academy Awards won in movie history with "Titanic" and :Ben-Hur"). I feel the success of these movies also made the property more accessible to a much wider audience than the books alone. As culturally influential and rewarding as the books are, they are a slog at times for casual readers. This might be a good example to explore in this topic. – CulturallyOpinionated 5 years ago
    2
  • In my view the "Deadman Wonderland" anime is in many respects better than the manga even though it was never finished. The problem with the original manga is that it had a lot of interesting concepts and characters but didn't necessary explore them to their full potential, and so some of them ended up seeming fairly gimmicky or silly. The anime took a lot of those same characters and concepts and refined them, making them much easier to take seriously and get invested in. It's enough to make me think that if only it had followed the manga's plotline to the end it would have been the superior work all around. – Debs 5 years ago
    2
2

Kylo Ren: Where the Journey Ends for a Fallen Hero

In the new trilogy of Star Wars films, Kylo Ren is a character repeatedly examined as one full of conflict, being pulled in two directions by opposite sides of the Force. At the end of The Last Jedi, he chooses to tear down all remnants of a legacy that has overburdened him and build a new one in its place, seemingly cementing himself in an ill-natured goal that prompts Rey to stop him.

However, it's believed by many fans that he still isn't too far gone, and that enough light exists in him that he could in fact be turned, as Rey was determined to do for much of The Last Jedi. On the other side of the spectrum, one could argue that Kylo going through a redemption arc that mirrors his grandfather's would render Luke's sacrifice meaningless, that his declaration to Leia that "no one's ever really gone" was more in reference to the memory of who Kylo used to be rather than suggesting Kylo is still capable of saving.

Should Kylo be redeemed in The Rise of Skywalker, the final installment in the Skywalker saga? And if he is redeemed, would that take away from the positions the characters decided to defend by the end of The Last Jedi?

    3

    Interpreting the Joker

    The Joker is one of the most iconic supervillains in popular culture. He has been brought to life via the standout performances of numerous actors including Cesar Romero, Jack Nicholson, Heath Ledger, Jared Leto and most recently Joaquin Phoenix. While the Joker has usually been presented playing against the Batman, Phoenix's Joker is unique in that it provides us a character study of the villain's origins without relying on the presence of the Batman. But is it possible to define a Joker in the absence of a Batman? Who would he be in that case?

    • I just saw the film and think this is an excellent topic. The 2019 film brings this question to the forefront of any discussion of character's identity. – Sean Gadus 5 years ago
      1
    • The Riddler – L:Freire 5 years ago
      1
    • I'll be the first to admit that I didn't think a Joker standalone would work in any capacity without the involvement of Batman. That said, while the movie has shown there is merit to seeing an origin of his devoid of Batman's presence, I think his absence takes away a lot of the depth of who he is after his transformation. – Ben 5 years ago
      0
    • @L:Freire This comment made me giggle, given I'm greatly into the Batman lore, and the Riddler to me comes by as both one of the most comical and narcissistic individuals in the Batman showcase of villains. @Ben I think it depends on the interpretations I guess cause could it be taken as a loss of depth that the Joker is the result of the society that Batman's own father was a part of, or the fact that the "killing joke" at the end of the movie is the fact that Joker's actions inadvertently result in the death of Bruce's parents leading to Batman's birth, thus showing that they are both two sides of the same coin. – ajaymanuel 5 years ago
      0
    • Well, it's like the law of binary. You need one to let the other survive. Joker is the extreme alter ego of Batman, someone who Batman can never be. Batman needs Joker because the latter defines his existence. I would even go as far to say that Joker atleast has an identity in the first place, Batman forms his identity in relation to that. – spriyansh 5 years ago
      0
    7

    The Biographical Film - Good acting or Practiced Mimicry

    Every time a new biographical film hits the big screen I find myself in a debate, both internally and with everyone with whom I come in contact. Is what I just observed good acting or just the ability of an actor to mimic what he/she has seen of the person whose story is being portrayed? Examples of this include Val Kilmer in the Doors and Joaquin Phoenix in Walk the Line. In interviews, both actors said that they studied hours of film in order to get every nuance correct. And, indeed, they nailed it. However, is that Oscar-worthy? Look at Daniel Day-Lewis, who played Lincoln. He did not have videos to examine, just small bits of written information about Lincoln's demeanor. He nailed it as well, yet my reason for thinking so is that he met my expectations of what I had read about Lincoln. So, the Oscar goes to… To summarize — If an actor is able to replicate a well-known and documented historical figure's every characteristic, is this good acting or good mimicry?

    • This would be an interesting topic but it might an idea to provide mimicry and acting clear definitions as a springboard to set up the piece being written. Also, I'm not sure good mimicry and good acting are mutually exclusive. Why not both? Wired have a pretty in depth series that might be a good point of reference - 'Critique Technique' (have a search on YouTube) - that touches a lot of the technical aspects (accent, facial posture, methods of portrayal etc) of actors' portrayals of real people. – JM 5 years ago
      3
    • For anyone interested in taking this topic, I'd suggest taking a look at some of the acting master classes on You Tube. Michael Caine's contribution is particularly interesting. It's also worth considering just how far some actors will go to 'inhabit' their roles - even going to far as to remain in-character between takes and, in some cases, for the whole film shoot. What psychological effect could this have on the actor? Anyway, excellent topic suggestion. – Amyus 5 years ago
      2
    • This is would be super interesting to look into. It's always interesting to look at the debate of an impression vs a good take on someone. There are a lot of good videos on this from that one guy that looks at accents from Vanity Fair I think? Again, very interesting! – tredmond 5 years ago
      0
    2

    What Will The Future of James Bond Look Like After Daniel Craig's Final Film?

    Daniel Craig will soon be suiting up for his fifth and final James Bond film, titled "No Time To Die", set to release spring 2020. The film will reportedly see Bond retired in Jamaica (a familiar spot for the Bond series and original author Ian Fleming) at the start of the film. Presumably, Bond is reluctantly called back for one last mission. With this being Craig final Bond film, changes are on the horizon for the massively successful and long enduring franchise. Rumors have long been floating around the internet that the next bond may break gender or color barriers with the casting of the next 007. After Craig's final film, will the James Bond producers make ambitious changes to its iconic character, or will chose to continue the series's status quo?

    • If we're going to see a Jane Bond, then I demand to see a Marty Poppins! – Amyus 5 years ago
      0
    • I have a feeling that they will go hard in one of two directions. In one they go even darker and more gritty than they have before, OR they decided to go goofier and more comedic. Either way I will be right there watching. Great idea! – tredmond 5 years ago
      0
    • I think it'll be interesting to compare it to the Mission Impossible series where you have multiple directors of varying backgrounds using an established IP to experiment and tell a new story. Obviously exploring the potential casting decisions is a hot topic right now but what would a James Bond film look with an expressive and experimental director aiming to turn the genre on its head? – CAntonyBaker 5 years ago
      0
    • I don't think James Bond will be as relevant anymore. He'll just be another action star/spy like John Wick or Jason Bourne, no longer as unique. With the #MeToo movement and political correctness, his character would also be more different than it was in the 60's and 70's. Maybe better, but not as distinct. And no, I don't believe he should change genders. It's James Bond. 007 as a woman isn't James Bond. People watch 007 because he's a man. I feel a gender change would lose more people. Better yet, do a different agent - you don't need a female 007. Given the fact that he's been a racist at least once and was written as white, it probably also wouldn't be a good idea for him to change races. I wouldn't be against it, but it wouldn't make sense. – OkaNaimo0819 5 years ago
      0
    3

    Monsters and Racism

    I'm interested in examining a few monsters that appear in horror films (ie zombies, ghosts) and how these monsters reflect racist ideologies of marginalized bodies. For example, the zombie emerged in Haiti as a result of the transatlantic slave trade and a reflection of the feeling of enslavement. I want to closer analyze how these monstrous figures are embedded in racist histories (maybe examining 2-3 films).

    • This is a really great topic I'm actually exploring now. For suggestions, I would look at how Frankenstein's monster often represents the Other, especially women. Dracula was full of Eastern European stereotypes and a fear of London being imperialized--like they did to much of the world. The xenophobia and racism I'm exploring are tied to Lovecraft--the "fear of the unknown," which may be helpful to explore. I'd also add, since the topic is films, I'd look at Peel's US (the underprivileged and economically disadvantaged are quite literally in the underground) and The Shape of Water, where a disabled woman, a gay man, and a black woman all connect to the "monster" in some empathetic way because they're underestimated or communicate differently. – Emily Deibler 5 years ago
      3
    • It might also be worth it to bring up Candyman, which explores both racism and classim in complicated and sometimes problematic ways. – Emily Deibler 5 years ago
      3
    • I would also consider addressing the sympathetic monster in The Shape of Water. Most monsters are rooted in racism, but even the simple concept of the other, racist, sexist or otherwise. Even going back to older monsters like Grendel's mother in the Beowulf, and the other to the normative Anglo-Saxon woman implied there. Not really a modern horror film I know but there are several adaptations that stray considerably from the source material to reflect the "horrors" the modern audience would understand. – TabathaCass 5 years ago
      1
    3

    Battle of the Fictional Bands: The Best Bands in Film We Wish Were Real

    There are musical films like "Walk the Line" that tell the story of legendary real-life musicians, and then there are those like "Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story," that, while perhaps equally legendary, bring to life new, fictionalized musical talents. In the case of one of the more well-known fictional bands of all-time, Spinal Tap from "This Is Spinal Tap," the band ended up becoming something of a reality. After making their film debut, Spinal Tap actually went on to record a few albums and even embarked on concert tours. Is the experience of Spinal Tap something of an anomaly? Has Hollywood missed out on opportunities to capitalize on a potentially successful musical acts from film that could have been something more than just fictional? If so, what bands/artists from film might have made it in the musical industry?

    • This is an exciting and intriguing topic. My favorite is "Stillwater" from Almost Famous, which is almost the prototypical 70s rock n rock band. – Sean Gadus 5 years ago
      3
    • I sort of love this topic! I'll admit, I'm a big sucker for transmedial narratology and anything that blurs lines between fiction and reality, so this just pushes all the right buttons. Two more "anomal-ish" examples that come to mind are The Monkees and Hannah Montana, although they operated as almost an inverse of Spinal Tap, being conceived from the outset as both TV characters AND actual pseudonymous touring musicians, as opposed to Spinal Tap having (as you mentioned) only beginning to tour in response to the success of the film. Honestly, I think leaning into the anomalies might make for a more fruitful and thought-provoking discussion than what might otherwise read a bit like a Buzzfeed-esque list of micro fan-fictions about "what if Dewey Cox/Conrad Birdie/Llewyn Davis/Stacee Jax/School of Rock/Hedwig and the Angry Inch/Stillwater/Chum Bukkit/Mouse Rat/etc were real." Anyway, just some food for thought. Looking forward to reading the finished article! – ProtoCanon 5 years ago
      2
    • I’m not going to lie, I don’t think I’ve ever genuinely thought about this topic. But I would have loved to see school of rock tear it up as a kid, Jack Black is something else. – ShaniaRachelle 5 years ago
      1