Analyze the depth and breadth of shows ranging from various genres that Netflix as a platform has facilitated. On the whole, the cultural products emerging from this Netflix Originals platform are daring and experimental with a progressive bent. Discuss this choosing a particular set of shows or genre. For me it is striking how many fantastic documentaries they are facilitating. Documentaries that otherwise wouldn't be produced or would be extremely obscure. The recent documentary on the 13th amendment is amazing, also the recent one covering the minimalist movement shows interesting aspects of countercultural realities.
You could also explore where this counterculture comes from and why. Many of the shows are British, but are they more inclusive, less? Is it based on creators? Age? Or even sex? This could all be explored in a study of the counterculture. – TheSwampThing8 years ago
It would also be interesting to look at the politics of such shows in connection to ist audience. Who watches which Netflix prodcut? Who is reached by Netflix/ Who can enjoy ist content? – Laura Jungblut8 years ago
Given the popularity for thrillers like Gone Girl to be turned into movies, did The Girl On The Train meet expectations? Did it live up the the standard set by the book? What makes a movie adaptations successful. Analyze how and why this female-driven thriller genre is gaining popularity.
Great topic! I read the book and saw the film and found a lot could easily be analyzed between the two! You could even ask about the differences in rhetoric in the movie and the book, did if give two different views or was one more convincing than the other! – brittanieclark8 years ago
Analyze how these two films balance multiple, often opposing, genres to create something unique and engaging. In what ways are the films similar in their approach to genre-switching? How do the liberties or risks each film takes illustrate that risk-aversion in movie making can be limiting?
I agree 10 Cloverfield really tried to keep viewers guessing because they utilized viewer's expectations of multiple genres at the same time. At one point you're wondering whether this is apocalyptic horror vs just captive horror all while drawing suspense; confirming apocalyptic horror first, keeping the captive horror and in the end reintroducing the alien invasion horror. It was a nice juggling act. Mind you I felt that once she got out of the capsule it was really jarring but that was good! It's great to actually get confronted by other genres that have been leading up to, when really you're just sitting there thinking "they won't do it, that'd be too much". Nice combination. – Slaidey8 years ago
Hi, just to clarify, are you talking about Drive (2011) with Ryan Gosling, Carrie Mulligan, and Albert Brooks? Or is there another movie called drive from 2015? Sounds like a very interesting topic! – SeanGadus8 years ago
Yes, that was an error. Thanks for catching it SeanGadus! – Kira Metcalfe8 years ago
And are genres restrictive because they have 'requirements'? If I wrote a rom-com noir would people lose their minds (joking)? Genres are entirely human-imposed, so they're infinitely interesting to me. Thanks for the positive spin on the debate! I feel like using genre expectations is a great film-making practice (as long as it's not obnoxious/self-important, ha). – m-cubed8 years ago
After watching many Nicolas Winding Refn movies, I have observed that Drive is very much the director's most "tame" film in terms of how he balances the art house genre with a "mainstream cinema"-esque style. Therefore, I would say that it is good that the film takes risks, but it does not take nearly as many risks as other films he has released. Most have been very divided by critics on their release because he implements even more genre-switching, to the extent that it becomes somewhat challenging to watch. I think for this reason while the risks he took in the movie worked well, the modesty in risk that Refn takes on Drive as compared to his other films actually benefitted it in terms of its wide understanding and accessibility to the audience. – dboyer8 years ago
An analysis of existential themes in cyberpunk fiction. How does the genre deal with questions of human nature? What is the value of the human experience when it can be replicated? Good examples can include Ghost in the Shell, Blade Runner, Neuromancer, etc, tackling existential situations from those perspectives.
Is there a connection between the human bias towards visual stimuli and the way people react positively to the prospect of having something they love (a book, a video game, a comic strip, a play, etc.) brought into the screen realms of either television or movies? Conversely (or complementarily), is there something similar in the way people react adversely to having something they love "done badly" onscreen? Does the visual override other sensory inputs? other memory centers (be they intellectual or emotional)?
The question is about what connection there might be between humans being visual creatures in their cerebral hardwiring (biology) and their reactions to "seeing" something created in live action that they'd only before imagined or seen in non-moving pictures. It would be up to the writer to "narrow" the topic to include whatever genre(s) interested her most. – pjoshualaskey8 years ago
Your note provides much more clarity and sounds interesting. It was not as evident beforehand. The psychology and biology aspects are the gem of the topic and should take center stage. – aprosaicpintofpisces8 years ago
Thanks for your help in clarifying the topic! – pjoshualaskey8 years ago
Analyze why Harry would've been romantically better for Hermione. If not, why is Ron best for her? Compare them in both the books and the movies.
I think you made a typo here. It should be "Hermione." – aprosaicpintofpisces8 years ago
There are a bunch of articles on this topic. The writer may want to look at these articles, some including actual quotes from J.K. Rowling, to enhance their own thesis. – Jaye Freeland8 years ago
Perhaps they should have. But their relationship was primed from the beginning to represent a sibling like arrangement, while conversely Hermione and Ron always bickered like a married couple. – mynameisreza8 years ago
Despite receiving mixed reviews from fans, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child can be referenced for this topic since it gives some insight into the married life of Ron and Hermione and their parenting. In the play, Ron serves as a character mostly for comedic relief, but perhaps this compliments nicely with the immense pressure of Hermione's career. – AlexanderLee8 years ago
Ron is in more need of Hermione than Harry. When you watch all the movies, with this question in mind, you notice immediately that Harry and Hermione don't go well together at all. Hermione is a strong-willed and able leader in her own right, and being matched with Harry, who is also the leader type, is awkward. Can you imagine Hermione taking a backseat to anyone, even Harry? Ron on the other hand compliments her much better because he is not a leader, and is in the backseat throughout the movies. – MikeySheff8 years ago
What happens when an actor takes on a character played by someone else within the same franchise? I'm not talking about reboots that completely refresh the cast (as in Tobey Maguire, Andrew Garfield, and most recently Tom Holland as Spider-Man). I'm talking about a single franchise where the film brings an entirely different actor to play the same character. For example, in the Harry Potter film series the initial actor who played Dumbledore passed away and Michael Gambon had to step in for the rest of the series. There are also The Mummy movies, where Rachel Weisz dropped out of the cast by her own volition and was replaced by another actress for the third film in the franchise. In my experience, the different Dumbledores didn't bother me at all but to have Brendan Fraser's character with a different woman playing his wife was confusing. How have these transitions fared for films that have replaced actors in the middle of the same series? Were they considered jarring and rejected by audiences or did they do little to affect the series as a whole? Does the nature of these replacements have an effect as well (i.e. an unprecedented event such as an actor's death vs. an actor's or studio's decision)?
I wrote a long response that I think got erased... TLDR; The actor switch with Dumbledore suited the dark progression of the movies. The first guys was sweet and soft spoken, all about love while the second actor was full of movement, emotion and "did you put your name in the goblet harry?!" I think it was a fortunate (but unfortunate since the actor died) turn of events. In such a case, say, an actor can't fill a role right later in a franchise, better to replace them than have a sub-par rendition? – Slaidey8 years ago
You make a very good point about the Dumbledore example. Michael Gambon's portrayal adds a great deal of emotional heft to the role, which is fitting for the increasingly darker tone of later Harry Potter films. It also aligns well with the change from an optimistically bright, Chris Columbus-style introduction to the Potter universe in the first film to the more melancholically heavy, David Yates-style of the final films. – aprosaicpintofpisces8 years ago
In both formal and informal marketing efforts, modern horror films are often compared to classic horror films. It's not uncommon to see statements that a new horror film, for example, "evokes" or "is the scariest film since" a classic like The Exorcist (Friedkin, 1973) or The Shining (Kubrick, 1980). But do these comparisons ultimately help or hurt modern horror films? And how, specifically, do these comparisons contribute to marketing efforts that are effective (or not)? I think the role of factors such as hype and viewer expectation may be particularly interesting to consider.
I think this is a good topic. I expect the comparisons to the classics will form certain expectation for the audiences, and failing to do so would hurt the sale. It would also be important to examine the cases of success and failure in such marketing and what contributed to the results. – idleric8 years ago
As you mentioned comparisons to classics are marketing tools to inspire hype so at what point does it become ineffective? It would be neat to find examples or modern horror advertised in this way and review two case studies where audiences felt completely differently about the films themselves. Does claiming something is "like" a classic become diluted the more it's said or just when audiences respond negatively to the claim? Has these kid of claims ruined any third party rating or review sites? – Slaidey8 years ago
Amazing idea! Might also be interesting to throw in a couple of examples when horror films claim to be "like nothing you've seen before!" for comparison and see how they've succeeded. For example, I think the marketing for Paranormal Activity (although not an entirely new concept at the time) really played on the idea that the film was the scariest thing anyone will ever see, with those videos of audience reactions in the cinema. – Sonia Charlotta Reini8 years ago
I think the shifting of subgenres in horror provides an interesting counterpoint to go against the need to compare the old with the new. There will always inherently be comparisons, but Saw and Rosemary's Baby are two completely different types of horror, and even looking at the box office takeover Paranormal Activity had against Saw, there's less of a comparison of content and more so a comparison of what audiences want to see. – SarahKnauf8 years ago
