Film

What are alternative Christmas films to watch and are they any particular reasons why they turn away from traditional Christmas narratives.

Recently, in the wake of Star Wars Force Awakens, there has been something of an uproar over the absence of the female character Rey from many action figure or doll sets. This is not a new phenomenon. Provide some examples of other times when female characters from movies have been excluded from merchandising targeted to boys and explain why this intense seems to be different. Is this the fight which will determine the future of merchandising?

Analyze the historical accuracy (both at the time of conception and with our new-found knowledge, i.e. Marble thought to be white but now is known to be colorful). Additionally, point out the historical or mythological tales conveyed within the film. For example, Maximus being portray as a "general who became a slave who became a gladiator who defied an empire" is much like Spartacus in the Third Servile War in the first century B.C. He was a Thracian Auxiliary officer for the Romans who at one point apparently fell out from grace and was then enslaved to be trained as a gladiator in Capua. From there he led a group of other gladiators in rebellion which rocked the Roman world for a couple years. As for mythological tales, there could be a comparison the relationship and plot of Commodus and Maximus to Romulus and Remus's conflict and founding of Rome.

There used to be an almost unbridgeable gulf between critically-acclaimed roles in Oscar-worthy dramas and the roles in action movies. A new generation of stars, exemplified by Jennifer Lawrence, Oscar Isaac, and Michael Fassbender, is pursuing both Oscar-level performances and roles in genre films. Jennifer Lawrence won an Oscar for Silver Linings Playbook, but has also starred in X-Men and Hunger Games films. Michael Fassbender has played villains from Magneto to Macbeth, including a slave owner and a creepy android. Yet, beyond big-budget productions like Prometheus and X-Men movies, Fassbender has also starred in indie films like Frank. After critically-acclaimed roles in Inside Llewyn Davis and Ex Machina, Oscar Isaac has joined the cast of Star Wars: The Force Awakens and X-Men: Apocalypse. Why are some of the most talented actors now drawn to major franchise films in addition to more reputable projects?

In Atonement, much attention is paid to items and their influence on the characters and world around them. This is portrayed through long, wide-angle camera shots that linger on objects such as Robbie's letter, the vase, Cecilia's star hairpin, etc. Address these items from a Marxist perspective, in particular, using the theory of the "commodity fetish". What does the film's focus on these items do for the plot development and narrative? Why is so much attention paid to them? My suggestion is that the items represent the culture of Britain pre and during World War II. As the film progresses, the items reflect the decay of wealth, power and culture in Britain.

In light of the spectacular box office failure of "Jem and the Holograms," I think it's worth looking into what factors make a strong IP (Intellectual Property) and what factors make a weak one. I suggest using units of measurement including popularity (this can be measured through sales, views, audience engagement, etc.), critical reception, audience penetration (how widespread the IP was, can be determined by looking at the marketing campaign, for example), and nostalgic value (how relevant is the IP years after its air date?), as well as any other factors you come up with. Tie it all back to the failure of "Jem and the Holograms." We all know it was a weak IP that probably will never recover from that failure at the box office, but I want you to do a bit of research to find out why that is. You can also apply this research to other franchises if you like (for instance, talk about why an IP is strong), but the core of this paper is finding those units of measurements and defining them for subsequent researchers.

Analyze the incongruity of releasing scary movies during happy holidays

A discussion revolving around how horror films are more than just about how scary they are and that the scare factor does not solely define a movie as a horror.

There are films that are visually/semantically not horror films (Alien is THE example) yet the arc of the film strongly resembles that of a horror film.

Horror films usually have some sort of political/social/cultural message to them. There was an Israeli called "Rabies" (or "Kalevet") that had incredibly strong political viewpoints about it's home country wonderfully summed up by the last line in the film, "Country full of shits."

Of course, this could be taken to include how horror movies should also be scary and how that is still an important but not integral aspect to the genre. Also the concept of how what we are scared by/how scared we are is more subjective than objective would be an interesting point for discussion.