9/11 drastically changed the action genre, which was previously filled with the blowing up of beloved buildings and terrorist attacks. Talk about how 9/11 changed the genre, how it evolved to fit a changing world, and if you believe we'll ever return to a world reminiscent of Roland Emmerich's "Independence Day"
This is fascinating. I would love to both read and write under this topic. It be especially interesting to consider films that in some way reference 9/11, either directly or with some kind of tribute (and equally interesting to consider those that do not). – badaster5 years ago
An interesting topic. Probably the way to address it is to compare several movies that covered terrorist attacks prior to 9/11 with changes after 9/11. But probably also in looking at post-9/11 movies would be the need to see how they were received at the box office. – Joseph Cernik5 years ago
Some movies give a tribute to 9/11 by making the movie about those on one of the planes that were terrorized that day. Other movies pay a tribute to 9/11 in a less obvious way by making their movie less about the blowing up of buildings and terrorist attacks and more about the bringing of people together within a nation for the common good. But still both types of movies pay a great tribute to the memory of 9/11. – autenarocks5 years ago
Compare and contrast the dystopian worlds of the film, Minority Report, and the anime, Psycho-Pass, and the conflict of predetermining criminal acts and passing out judgment against people who have not committed crimes, yet. PreCrime implements a system where potential criminals are apprehended according to the psychic abilities of the "precogs" while the Sibyl System measures the mentalities of the populace and calculates the likelihood of individuals committing crimes according to their "Crime Coefficient" index. How do these stories depict a future where judgement is passed before the crime even happens? What is the significance of the protagonists–John Anderton of Minority Report and Akane Tsunemori of Psycho-Pass–and their journeys as they gradually realize the flawed nature of the system they believed in?
if someone should choose to tackle this topic, i think that it could also be interesting to include an analysis of predictive policing––arguably a precursor to the systems in these imagined dystopias––which has been slowly growing in global influence. – ees5 years ago
With the recent announcement of Robert Pattinson in yet another Batman movie, the question should be asked: how many Batman movies do we need? How many times can you re-tell the same story in different ways and it still be interesting to experience? Are movie studios latching onto fandom/nostalgia to the point of having a negative effect on the original character?
I definitely would highlight how new movies especially remakes in the Marvel Universe have a purpose. Do these new movies change the interpretation of character's story and personality? Or is because the movies are all the same it has a negative effect not only on how people enjoy the character but on the movie company (in this case DC Comics) itself? – reschilke5 years ago
I feel like there have been an excessive amount of Batman movies, but they are there to appeal to the younger people who have not watched the older Batmans. To those who have been around since the first few, it will seem like too much. To those who haven't been around long enough to be interested in the most recent one, it will be very exciting to watch a new Batman film.
I do feel like studios are latching onto fandom/nostalgia but I don't think it has a negative effect on the original character. It gives people different ways of thinking about the character. You can watch all the movies; take what you like and leave what you don't. – Maiacara5 years ago
I think you are hitting on a very important topic, namely that there appears to be a trend (at least in the western world) for safe, reliable narratives that do little to shift us outside of our comfort zone. As much as the cinema going public may ask why don't studios make new and different movies, the reality is that most such movies fail at the box office. Producing a new Batman movie, a Joker movie, more Marvel movies etc... guarantees studios revenue and ultimately those studios are answerable to board directors and share holders. If we, as the cinema going public continue to pay money for these movies, studios are going to continue producing them and we sadly will soon be bereft of original ideas and exciting stories. – davidwhite5 years ago
Yep! It sure does seem like Batman movies are getting done and perhaps overdone! – autenarocks5 years ago
I think it is interesting to see how new adaptations will change key points of stories, like the retelling of Sleeping Beauty in Maleficent, but I do think another batman movie is likely to exhaust the story itself. – KeahMurdoCH5 years ago
There are only so many sequels to a number of movies, and "Batman" is a very good example of that. More creative ideas need to be expressed, and different movies produced, rather than the constant re-makes, re-boots and sequels to films. – WSSfan5 years ago
These are wrong questions. "To Need" is an irrelevant and inappropriate verb to talk about movies or any artistic production. Do we "need" a new Batman movie? What does that mean? On the other hand, assuming that a new Batman movie is going to re-tell the same origin story is unjustifiable. If an idea is profitable, the film industry is going to exploit it as much as they can. – T. Palomino2 years ago
Debate motion: This house prefers a world where climate change is a conspiracy, but people still believe it.
How has this been reflected in futuristic sci-fi films or series (take Stargate for example) that portray theories about the future etc.? Did people believe in the effects of climate change more in the past than today and why?
Edit for clarification: Though this is the first topic I've introduced I thought it would be better to keep it open to interpretation. The primary aim of this topic is to encourage you to think about how current day problems facing society were reflected only as conspiracy theories in old movies. From this, determine if you think people took issues like climate change more seriously when they didn't exist or weren't as prominent.
You've marked the all the rejections as revised, but your topic has not changed since. Please add more context to the topic and tighten your thesis. leaving an open-ended question to have a topic "open to interpretation" does not help someone who is potentially looking to write this topic. – Pamela Maria6 years ago
Discuss the representations of climate change in old films and its real-life implications on society – TheAuthortoria5 years ago
The source of people's disbelief in climate change is wilder than we first think. Many of these people are flat-earthers. Many believe the government is lying to us about everything. I spoke to one who wonders why affluent property investors are still investing in homes that apparently would be destroyed in the next few years – surely they'd know the truth, she thinks. It requires a complete transformation of someone's frame of reference, not just a change of opinion. – naseemrad5 years ago
You mention Stargate - which fascinates me. Can you make the connection between Stargate and your topic more explicit. – Elpis19885 years ago
The sub-genre of comedy that focuses on shocking sexual depictions, over-the-top jokes, and hyper-unrealistic scenarios seems to be going strong in 2019. Films such as American Pie (1999), Superbad (2007), and The Hangover (2009) cemented a place in the medium for these narratives with all of their try-hard humor and problematic treatment of identity (homophobic and misogynistic jokes galore!). Weaker off-shoots began to form as quick cash-grabs for studios looking to ride the wave of the main-stream comedies noted, and now the market seems to be saturated with them.
My interest with this sub-genre has taken shape after watching Blockers (2018), a film in which two up-tight parents (Leslie Mann and John Cena) team up with a laid-back father (Ike Barinholtz) to prevent their daughters from having sex on prom night. While Mann and Cena have more obvious motivations – not wanting to see their children lose their innocence – Barinholtz's goal is more nuanced. He's fully convinced that his daughter is gay (something she is still unsure of herself), and he is concerned that she is being pressured by her friends to have sex with a guy in order to feel accepted.
The set-up is the perfect representation of the interesting dichotomy that this film, and similar films in the sub-genre, present. While the plot is filled with ridiculous humor that is overly vulgar, graphic, and inconsistent, the "heart" or "message" of the film is clearly a positive one. In the case of Blockers, it's incredibly blunt in addressing identity politics to differing levels of success, but I believe it would be hard for the audience to walk away angry with the normalizing way in which the gay character is casually accepted by her friends and family, acknowledging the next stage of inclusive progress needed in the U.S.
My question for this topic is – does the graphic, vulgar, shock comedy sub-genre have the potential to encourage social acceptance, or is it a futile attempt that should be abandoned since the sub-genre has been pigeon-holed (by the creators and public) into a category of film that is designed to profit from being anti-politically correct or overtly offensive to shock the audience? I would love to hear additional thoughts on this topic as well as more titles that may fit into this small movement of shock comedies that are grappling with socially positive themes.
I've seen nothing but severely conflicting opinions on whether the Marvel films are going in a good direction or not. Audiences appear to be either diehard fans of the entire franchise, or completely disillusioned about the direction of the films. Despite this, there's a continuously large following, and I'd be interested to know why.
This is definitely interesting division to explore. It might be worth digging into why a similar but largely more negative split is occurring in the DCU as well. Is there something about these comic book worlds that especially lend themselves to diehardness and division? – JustinMoir6 years ago
Lately, a lot of movies are coming out and do not end the way that viewers hope: everyone together and happy. While this seems like it would turn a lot of people away from movies, especially those about love and relationships, it actually is improving ratings and gaining more viewers because many of those in the audience can relate to the negative life events. Is this bringing us closer as a society and enhancing reality, or have we lost the original goal of movies which was to give viewers an escape from reality?
I think it's an interesting issue, one worth researching further. I do not agree, however, with the generalisation. There are movies which are simply for entertainment (escapism), but there are also other ones which are very thought-provoking. It is difficult to take a stance that argues one or the other. I would suggest, instead, looking into some examples from both poles and exploring the effects and goals both types of movies have. :)
– Kaya6 years ago
I love the idea of this topic, especially now that The Avengers series has come to an end. Although "End Game" ended relatively happily, major characters were still sacrificed and lost, something superhero fans are not accustomed to (and "Infinity War" had everyone shook). Another good example is the popularity of Game of Thrones where death is ever present and characters perpetually suffer through tragedies. I especially like you bringing up romance movies, and personally think the sad endings are grounding people to reality and feeling more for the situations. Are we as a culture, growing up? – Slaidey6 years ago
I really like the idea of this post, but I am not so sure that all viewers are actually expecting or 'hoping' a movie to be ending a particular way ('together and happy'). Yes, a lot of movies are created with the intent to create some Utopian, idealised fantasy of happily ever after, but I also think that in the past there has been a lot of movies created along the romantic-comedy genre that end this way, and may be just what people expect to see sometimes. I think that the creation of movies that do not end in happy bliss are a good thing; maybe because it shows that in life things are not so perfect (and thus people can relate). But also, it may be a good thing as far as movies go in general, as variety in movie endings is always new and exciting. So, in fact, it may just be that viewers are just liking the different 'end' of movies, or it could be, like you said, because it relates to their own personal life. Regardless, movies are not real, they are art forms, depictions, and products of society and culture, and they take on different meanings to whomever may be viewing them. – jessicarealist6 years ago
It is a very interesting issue and agree that it is something to look further into! And also I agree that some people are just liking the different end of movie or somehow related to their life and personal issues ! – sunshinemegz896 years ago
With art now mirroring real life where not every ending is a happy fairy tale one, it offers more solace and acceptance to those who are really struggling with severe problems when not everything goes their way. It is okay to win and many times, lose. Not great endings allows people the chance of having something/one relatable to them and their fates in current times of increasing loneliness. For example, if a character they cared about failed miserably and then, a similar situation befell them, it will not prove as devastating as compared to having plots where everything is always happening perfectly as people on social media and increasingly in real lives, are trying to portray. – Dr. Vishnu Unnithan4 years ago
You don't need to be a dead rockstar to be martyred anymore! Rocketman (the film) is being released May 31, documenting Elton John's rise to fame. Bohemian Rhapsody (the film) came out last year, depicting Freddie Mercury's tribulations. This is It and Leaving Neverland offer some disturbingly different accounts of Michael Jackson's career. The Dirt (Motley Crue film) was torn to shreds for its authenticity shortly after its release. Compare and contrast rockumentary films and discuss what impact these glorified stories have on fans. Does it matter whether a rockstar is alive or dead when the film is made?
A legend in his own lunchtime! Nice idea for an article. Good luck to whomever picks it. You have my vote, emaglio. Approved. – Amyus6 years ago
No, it does not matter if the musician is dead or alive and it is essential that we show successive generations the musical talent of artists who played instruments because music is something which is disappearing form the curricula of schools across the United States and unfortunately commercial successes are almost never musicians anymore. Rockumentaries are essential to introduce new generations to the alternative to rap, to show them how Freddy Mercury was so talented at piano and how a beautiful melody enhances well-written lyrics. I know this is not what you asked but I wanted to comment on the importance of these biopics in the revival of real music not synthesized detritus. All of the musicians you mentioned played at least one instrument and it is VITAL that we continue to educate successive generations about the beauty and artistry of music. – youngmollflanders6 years ago
