Film

Humanities graduates get a bad reputation in this time of increased attention being placed on STEM fields that will surely drive our technologically-advancing economy. Mainstream U.S. films have been a contributing factor to this poor image in representing humanities graduates as aloof and/or struggling writers that are haunted by addiction and manic spurts of genius or inspirational educators that set the bar unrealistically high for actual teachers. Titles such as Stuck in Love and The Dead Poets Society circulate these narratives of humanities graduates, perpetuating a single image of what these graduates can actually do in society. Arrival was released in 2016 with great critical acclaim, and one of the most interesting aspects of the sci-fi epic comes in the form of a humanities vs sciences debate between the two leads – Amy Adams as the linguist Louise Banks and Jeremy Renner as Ian Donnelly – a physicist. Banks makes it clear early in the film that they need to focus on learning to communicate with the titular arrivals before working out the physics of their space-travel, placing the linguist in a position of privilege, but does this narrative manage to correct the one-sided image of the humanities, or does it fall short of shedding a positive light on a field that has been traditionally relegated to narrow, stereotypical representations?

"It's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes; it's dark and we're wearing sunglasses" (Elwood Blues)

"Hit it!" (Jake Blues)

That legendary quote from 'The Blues Brothers' (1980) introduced the viewer to arguably one of the funniest and most notorious car chases in cinema history and exemplified the road movie as a metaphor for the desire for freedom. Freedom from oppression, freedom from authority and the freedom of self-expression. The comically manic, self-destructive joyride of 'Goodbye Pork Pie' (1981) saw the protagonist taking a thousand mile trip across New Zealand, in a progressively disintegrating mini, just to reconnect with his girlfriend, whilst David Lynch's gentle perambulation that was 'The Straight Story' (1999) was based on the true story of Alvin Straight's 240 mile trip on a lawnmower across Iowa and into Wisconsin to see his estranged brother. In more recent years we've had the eccentric British film 'Driving Lessons' (2006), the Bonny and Clyde-esque 'God Bless America' (2012), Inmtiaz Ali's loosely scripted and superb 'Highway' (2014) and the somewhat off-kilter 'The Lady in the Car with Glasses and a Gun' (2015)…to list but a few examples. What connects all these films is that each is ultimately a life-affirming experience, even if the journey ends in disaster. It is the process of self-discovery, but in these modern times of ultra high-tech surveillance and ever encroaching self-driving vehicles, will we lose that chance to push the peddle-to-the-metal and engage with our thirst for a fleeting moment of automotive freedom?

With the rise of digital retail services like the recent "Movies Anywhere," is the age of owning films in physical formats coming to an end sooner than expected? With services like iTunes and Vudu, no one needs to buy a film in a store like Best Buy anymore. Is it for the best? Does owning a DVD or Blu-ray come with benefits, or is it now unnecessary?

We see people refer to the need for more diverse characters, and of course it is important to hear from a broad range of people, who all have different backgrounds and opinions, but is it important that these characters are always linked to social justice? Every time we have an action story with a female lead like Mad Max: Fury Road, Atomic Blonde, Star Wars: The Force Awakens etc, it turns into a tirade about how this character is monumental and never been done before, and young women everywhere should look up to this characters because there aren't any other female action stars (despite everybody else saying the same thing).

This topic is not intended to question the validity of diverse character, but rather investigate the effects of social justice on these characters. Is this layer of social justice harmful to these characters? If we introduce these characters without strong political and moral lectures, will audiences be more likely to embrace these differences?

An example that could work as a starting point could be The Simpsons: The character of Smithers is homosexual, but he isn't a protected species like social justice would dictate. All facets of his character, including his sexuality, are made light of. A few years ago, The Simpsons was listed as the most influential show for homosexual representation and the breaking down of homosexual stigma. Is it possible that social justice is standing in the way of diversity? I think it would be very interesting to look at the effects of social justice on the advancement on diversity and how we should move forward with more diverse characters.

Fan service has become a staple of modern Hollywood films, and while it's great to see the characters from previous iterations of your favourite franchises, it is also important to have fresh original ideas to go with them. The Force Awakens was criticised for doing this to much: for not just including characters and setting, but for reproducing complete story beats and plot devices. So, the question I would like to see explored is: How much is too much when it comes to fan service?

Do you know the origin of how James Bond came to be a spy? Does it take away your enjoyment of the Bond films if you don't? What about Indianna Jones? Movie after movie after movie, it's still fun, they are like issues of a comic book series. Why does Hollywood insist on pummeling us with repeatedly telling us the origin of a superhero? Whether it's 45 minutes of the "first" Spider-Man film, or a five minute recap to remind you (Batman vs Superman) before the next installment commences. Is it necessary? Can't we just go into the next installment of the movie?

Whatever happened to the good ole' bank job? A small team of dedicated villains who cased the job, drew up meticulous plans and (sometimes) got away with the loot. These days we are used to seeing technological spectaculars with the villains often touting hardware and computer systems equal to, or even superior to, that of the Police. The Bank Heist has been a popular movie theme since the days of silent film making, but times move on and so do the brains and specs behind the operation. 'Bonny and Clyde' (1967) showed the simple, violent approach to robbing a bank; 'The Italian Job' (1969) had a more lighthearted spin and instantly made the Mini car into an icon. In more recent years we've had 'The Bank Heist' (2011) a Canadian comedy and the Las Vegas-style showmanship of 'Now You See Me' (2013), whilst the British films 'The Bank Job' (2008) and 'The Hatton Garden Job' (2016) both harked back to old school techniques. Of course the list is endless and these are just a few examples. Explore the evolution of the bank heist and not just in terms of the advance in technology over the years, but also look at the characters involved, what their motivations are and why we, the international viewing public, retain a fascination for such villainy. It's not always about the money!

Analyze the use of music in the film. The music Baby listens to becomes a major part of the movie's score and also serves to punctuate many of the film's amazing chase sequences; it is often synced perfectly to the action, as Baby is meticulous in timing the music just right. A film's score is always deliberately attuned to the story's plot and themes, but do the musical choices, timing, and the fact it is usually coming from a character's iPod produce a new or different effect upon the viewer?