Both Ozu and Mizoguchi were excellent film directors in Japanese cinema history. In their films, they pictured various kinds of people and their lives. Through the cinema, we could see the living situation of people in that period. I would like to see an analysis of how the two directors pictured the personalities, lives, and/or struggles of modern girls. Are there any similar traits of their films? What are the differences considering the cinematographic techniques and styles they used? The examples can be narrowed down to two films.
Joe Russo, co-director of Avengers: Infinity War, recently stated that other major film studios should avoid trying to establish cinematic universes like the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Although Russo said that audiences crave new methods of storytelling, he stated that some things simply cannot be "sustained through a cinematic universe." Do you agree with Russo?
I think that no other studio simply has the resources to create such an in-depth and comprehensively filled out universe quite like the MCU. I think more takes on this interesting idea would be fascinating, but the reality is that I don't know who could really keep up with Disney's high standard that's been established. It might be best for other film-makers and studios to explore new ways to tell stories, like Russo suggested. – Dimitri7 years ago
The MCU has managed to prevail even when it has released some less triumphant movies (by MCU standard) in its line of released. I think more than several factors go into a successful cinematic universe. I recognize a sense of difficulty now to become immersive in another cinematic universe, when the MCU has been relatively successful in capturing my attention for the past ten years. I personally find it difficult not to compare a new cinematic universe to the MCU because I've become accustomed to the MCU as a sort of figurehead for a successful, engaging cinematic universe. Then again it could all be boiled down to fan expectations and taste. I think I would like to see film studios try to establish a cinematic universe, but with Disney's influence with the MCU I believe it'd be rather difficult to set a new cinematic universe apart as a new, original method of storytelling without the obvious comparison. – pinkofthemoon7 years ago
Every studio has the freedom to express their own cinematic style and I wholeheartedly accept that, but there are many characteristics that the Marvel franchise possesses that it wouldn't hurt other studios to strive to as well. While I deeply love DC comics, the DC Cinematic Universe is, to me, beginning to lag as of late. The casting in some of their recent features is less than stellar; some actors are failing to embody the characters we've come to know and love. And the plot of many recent films, "Wonder Woman" being the exception, seems to be rushed and severely lacking. While Marvel films run long, it is because their plot is well thought out and perfectly paced to ensure that their are no holes or pointless scenes. Every bit of humor or drama that they add has point to it and adds to the big picture; they don't add a five minute long joke just for laughs or to fill time, which ends up taking away from the main plot line. Their films are also thoroughly planned and expertly cast. – EmskitheNerd7 years ago
I think that one of the main reasons that no other studio can do what the MCU can do it because the majority of their content is based on comic books that have been sucessful for decades and already have a huge fanbase even before the movie is made. – NikkySalvatore7 years ago
I am still waiting for the next installment of the Avatar Universe. I think that there is huge potential, and last I heard there are supposed to be at least 4 movies total once it is completed. One of the more interesting universes out there is the Alien universe. It includes crossover movies like Alien Vs. Predator, and well as the unofficial prequel Prometheus. However, this universe isn't very cohesive, and could use some tying of loose ends. – TPA977 years ago
Probably something interesting to note is how DC's cinematic universe pales in comparison to MCU's, but its television-based Arrowverse does quite well. Perhaps the difference in time constraints, air times, even the medium of television itself play a role? In an attention economy, you'd struggle to hype up movies in a cinematic universe, what with trailers, interviews, other promos your only main ammo. TV shows, though. They can leave a trail of breadcrumbs towards a bigger banquet. – Starfire7 years ago
Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog is an internet short film in three acts created by Joss Whedon and starring Neil Patrick Harris as the titular Dr. Horrible, Nathan Fillion as Captain Hammer, and Felicia Day as Penny. This was project was created in 2008 amidst the writer's strike, the Great Recession, and Election Season. What political themes exist and how might they have changed in the decade since the release of the work?
Ever wondered how creators come up with fictional languages? It would be interesting to look into some of the processes behind creating fictional languages and their popularity amongst fans. Some examples to think of: Elvish (Lord of the Rings/ Hobbit), Klingon (Star Trek), Valerian (A Song of Ice and Fire Series/Game of Thrones) and Na'vi (Avatar).
This is a very interesting concept. I know that Tolkien spent a lot of time in the development of his based both on the plethora of modern and ancient languages he knew as well as cryptographic codes he developed at college. – SaraiMW7 years ago
there is an interesting YouTube series produced by Wired about this very topic. Valyrian was pretty much gibberish until the show came along. Klingon was gibberish in the original series but then turned into a real language with TNG. – LFH7 years ago
Very cool topic! I have seen books in the film and television sections at Indigo that teach you how to speak fictional languages like Klingon, but it would be interesting to find out how these languages were actually created – Scalera187 years ago
David J. Peterson, a linguist who has recently written a book called "The Art of Language Invention," is the creator of the Dothraki and Valyrian languages as it is spoken in the TV version of Game of Thrones. He invents languages for a living. – Jos7 years ago
From the Italian horror 'Suspiria' (1977) to the psychological thriller 'The Neon Demon' (2016). Neon lighting typically implies something sinister, maybe something otherworldly. It's most frequently associated with horror genres or sub-genres and something perhaps set in the past. There's a certain nostalgia that comes to mind with the combination of dramatic synth music and a high contrast monotone, a la 'The Guest' (2014). It's gritty in 'Springbreakers' (2012) and uncomfortable in 'Enter the Void' (2009). No matter the colour, the scene or the themes one thing's for certain. Throw a high-key neon light in a film and your audience is bound to feel uneasy. Any thoughts?
I've always felt that neon is the new black. It is good reflection of modern society too, we love bright lit skylines and surrounded in art/culture. However, we like to eventually escape to darkness, look up at the sky and see the stars. Darkness is almost a comfort these days as if it is the only form of privacy. Seeing that neon is comfortable for most of us, throw it in a horror film and it would mess with the audience mentally and emotionally. If I ever get to make a horror movie, neon will be something I use. – MoonKat7 years ago
Another recent example would be Riverdale. Neon lighting seems vital to the mystery of the show. – Indigo7 years ago
Films like Freaky Friday and She's the Man glamorize the topic of body/life switching. Why do we as human beings hold such a strong fascination for trading our life experiences? Other films with the theme could be discussed, as well as the reasons the character in these films switch bodies or lives (willingly or not). Perhaps some human psychology to flesh out the thinking behind some ideas why we romanticize body/life switching.
Great topic! Empathy might be a good psychological concept to explore in an essay written on this topic. Empathy is all about being able to imagine yourself in someone else's situation, seeing things from their point of view, etc. "Human psychology" might be better termed "humanistic psychology." Empathy is a key concept in humanistic psychology. "Romanticize" (meaning something like "treat as idealized or heroic") doesn't work for me as a term here. – JamesBKelley7 years ago
I think this is such a fascinating topic. Talk about how people becomes so internalised that it is refreshing to think that there are other people that are living similarly complex lives as we are – thomasin227 years ago
The 2010 film "The Switch" might also be worth discussing. I think this topic is all about a) developing empathy for another character and b) exploring what it would be like to not be us- the body swap is usually preceded by the character's frustration with their own lives- experience how the grass is greener on this side, and then come to the conclusion that we would rather be ourselves- a sort of attempt to reassure people that even if the grass seems greener on the other side, that side also has a whole host of problems you're unaware of and ultimately you'd be most comfortable in your own situation. – Shivani7 years ago
The recent Netflix series "Counterpart" is fascinating. It is not so much about life-switching as it is about meeting, interacting and trading lives with an alternate version of oneself! – Jos7 years ago
Sorry, "Counterpart" is on Cravetv, not Netflix! – Jos7 years ago
Historically we could argue that there were film makers who genuinely controlled all aspects of their creative work, Sergei Eisenstein, Orson Welles and Stanley Kubrick come to mind. Today in an increasingly complex cinematic world and one in which investment in films is perhaps more directly controlled by mega-studios how do we make this distinction?
An interesting question. We do still have this with filmmakers such as Guillermo del Toro and Quentin Tarantino, but they are not prolific filmmakers and we do see people wanting to put their stamp on their films. I think this would be a good discussion to have. – SaraiMW7 years ago
After a little more thought, Pedro Almodovar (in his early incarnation) would be a 'classic' auteur. Can an auteur be classified on the basis of one film - that is another thing to consider e.g. Robert Rodriguez after El Mariachi, or is he an 'incidental auteur' based on the expediency-triumphs approach he took to making a film for less than $30k... – Menadue7 years ago
What do you think of Victor Frankenstein and his monster? I have always believed that the death of his mother caused him to go mad. His creation of the monster was his ill attempt at trying to resurrect a being so that the same method may be used on his mother. I have heard that he may have been mad since childhood and the death of his mother catapulted him into his obsession with creation.
I just re-read Frankenstein in my English class this semester and I must say, the connection you made between the monster and his mother is something that has shooketh my perspective on the book. I never looked at the experiment this way but it makes sense and gives Frankenstein some purpose. It is clear to me that the monster is more Victor, less his creation. – Kiranpreet Sandhu7 years ago
Mary Shelley's Frankenstein has always been a book I over examine. I made the same connection with the death of Victor's mother and his growing insanity, however I usually took an extra step further. The monster would open a door of possibilities for Victory. As you pointed out, he could use the same for his mother. I think that Victor also wanted to make something he could maintain, control and have as a companion for ever. He could replace body parts as they decay and he could keep it living for all time. His mother died and that made Victor realize that everyone, including his love, will eventually die. A manufactured monster? Could be his friend, companion even a lover for ages to come. – MoonKat7 years ago
