Discuss the ways in which past elected officials in the U.S. have found themselves the center of one comedic play or another. How have these individuals, from presidents to senators, reacted to the satirical jabs directed at them? Is it possible to maintain the decorum of an elected official in face of a grinning Voltaire? Be specific and really focus in on one or a select core of presidential and or political figures that really fit the bill. Focus on a genre or style of humor like satire and really explore the mechanics of this humor as used for substantive critique. Great potential here, enjoy the adventure.
just an awesome topic considering the political season is coming to an end. Use things such as late night comedy to analysis deeper. Saturday Night Live does an awesome display of political satire and persuasion. It also holds a bias that makes it even more interesting. – Brittanie8 years ago
Don't leave out Amos and Andy. A political satire about the trial of Rodney King. – Munjeera8 years ago
Premium cable are cable channels an individual pays for, a common example is HBO or Showtime. TV networks that label themselves as premium services have flagship shows that are more graphic with topics like violence and sex. The question is, does the liberal approach to the arts make the shows better or the same content with more of a mature approach?
Whoever writes on this topic could show HBO developed. I would be interested to see how HBO as one of the first cable companies has maintained its cutting edge quality. – Munjeera8 years ago
Unlike her counterpart in the novel, the makers of Sherlock made a bold decision with their attempt at giving Mary Morstan a very prominent story arc in the third season of the hit TV series. However, the first episode of this season put a tragic end to this promising character's role. Now, with her part on the Sherlock series over, analyze what part her character played in the lives of the leads, how Sherlock and Watson had their individual priorities changed and what changes may be anticipated in the equation shared by them,especially considering that her death was partly caused by Sherlock's actions. Also, with Molly Hooper still having a very minor role in most episodes, analyze the consequences of the death of the only major female character in the series and whether this was justified(the makers have stated on record that her character was diverting all the attention from Sherlock-Watson and their bromance) considering that her murky past still held the promise of being fodder for more episodes…
I imagine one will not be able to fully complete this article until the season has had its run, as Mary's death will no doubt factor into Sherlock and Watson's relationship - I wouldn't call her part "over" quite yet. I like the mention of Mary's novel counterpart, yet it's sad they created such a strong female character to have her die in what I considered a rather ridiculous and undeserving manner. – Karen8 years ago
Dealing with hard issues using humour, with focus on Netflix Original, Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt. Tina Fey explores a survivor's journey after escaping years of abuse with lightness and humour. Moreover, the show also makes reference to issues of cultural appropriation (or misappropriation), political-correctness, and other contemporary social issues.
What I like about this show is how it has an almost satirical approach to the topics you've mentioned, and so, it's not 'mindless' humour. Additionally, I think Kimmy is very relatable. There are so many traits to explore that make her an excellent character such as her modesty, genuineness and undefeated optimism. Try giving that a shot too! – Suman8 years ago
I think in particular the issues with PTSD in the second season would be a notable example of Kimmy's endurance – Darcy Griffin8 years ago
It took me a moment to appreciate this show, but as it progressed, I enjoyed the way in which difficult subjects were tackled in a comical manner without mocking the seriousness of the issues covered. – danielle5778 years ago
Whether it is Ned Stark's everlasting nobility or Joffrey Baratheon's undying wickedness, a static character in Game of Thrones always seems to perish. Analyze this idea and why this may be the case. Compare unchanging characters to dynamic ones and analyze why changes in character lead to success.
Interesting topic, it'd be intriguing to read whatever kind of explanation someone might try to come up with. But first I think it's important to discus in these notes what makes a "static" character to help the future writer of this article along? Are there exceptions to the rules? I feel as though some characters seem dynamic when in reality we they've been motivated by the same thing this whole time, we just didn't know what that was. Who is static, who's dynamic, and who's in trouble of becoming static and killed off because of this theory? – Slaidey8 years ago
I agree with Slaidey in that knowing who is truly dynamic vs. static may be premature at this point. Especially in light of the fact that some characters who are declared dead, may in fact be still alive (the Hound). But being unsure of the ultimate outcome certainly makes the discussion more interesting... – heliddick8 years ago
Yes, a substantial counterargument you'll encounter is that it's not the static characters that die, just the ones that are not central enough to the story that we have to know their complications. Ned's death and Littlefinger's persistence may be some of your strongest cases of proof, but Catelyn's death and Daenerys's continued living may not be in your favor. – IndiLeigh8 years ago
While it can be said that TV has slowly progressed to tight, more concentrated storylines in the past couple of decades, I've noticed a dramatic increase in the uses of drama and suspense with the recent surge of programs that are written for an audience that is expected to digest them all in one sitting. One big troupe characteristic in these binge shows is the steady, unrelenting increase in stakes, giving little time to breath and let tension or peace linger. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Can made-for-streaming shows still be considered TV, or are they moving towards more extended movies?
I like this idea, but I have to say that I am a little worried about how you are going to prove any of these ideas. For example, how will you tangibly prove that binge watching is either bad or good? By what metric will you judge the circumstances? These are factors that need to be considered... – agramugl8 years ago
Agree with agramugl that proving whether or not binge watching is good or bad will be challenging at best, however perhaps this can be compared to potential effects it may have on the way people watch films? Most binge-worthy TV shows are more or less extended films, as you said, particularly with their high production values. Perhaps this could be likened to how a lot of drama/suspense/action films nowadays have a run time of around or over 120 minutes - any less, don't we feel they're not giving us enough? Would anyone bother going to the cinema to watch a short mediocre film, when they can watch something epic on Netflix? – Sonia Charlotta Reini8 years ago
Examining show elements such as the continuously growing cast, numerous lands/worlds, and the dual timelines, discuss the arguments for whether the television show has presented a storyline that is too confusing to follow, or if the show continues to show the creativity of the show runners.
One of my favourite shows. Up to the last season, the show was absolutely marvellous. The plot was complicated but quite understandable. In the current season, although I haven't watched the last few episodes, things seem a bit pushed, meaning they are making stories where non exists. I should probably hold my judgment till the end, although I read a spoiler which has not made many happy about the season finale.
– Nilab Ferozan8 years ago
I find this show really interesting as it often subverts fairy tale stories and pushes the envelope a bit while at other times it is extremely cliche, making safe choices. – mindthegap8 years ago
I think the show is very interesting, but sometimes hard to follow - which I don't mind cause it makes me pay more attention to the show while its on cause I want to figure everything out.
– RegalScarlet8 years ago
While Once Upon A Time does seem to maintain a understandable plot, I would say this is because they temporarily drop elements of their universe in the favour of keeping the plot simple. During the Underworld plot of the most recent season, the audience only received a few glimpses of what was happening in Storybrooke. That kind of closing off makes their huge universe seem narrow at times. – Lbrook48 years ago
Happy to be the voice of dissent: I was absolutely on board for season 1, and then felt that the series went to garbage. They didn't abide by the rules of their own universe. The fan service outweighed the quality of both the writing and the plot. I felt repeatedly like the characters brought in were an effort in publicity to capitalize on fan craze rather than thought out or complex. – Piper CJ8 years ago
I definitely agree with Piper. I started watching OUAT when it first aired, however many years ago. I loved it until it got to the Frozen arc. Yes, I'm sick of Frozen, but I stomached it enough to continue. I think, for me, I just became so annoyed with how drawn-out the series became. Again, like Piper said, the show broke its own rules and sort of just made things up for the heck of it. It became what Lost became in its last few seasons. I haven't watched it since the Frozen arc, so I don't know where the writers have taken it since then, or where they intend to take it, or if they have any inkling of ending the show soon. – Christina Legler8 years ago
I appreciate this show, but I lost interest after season 1. I know many do not feel the same way but it just was exploring too many avenues at one time. Now, I enjoy complicated, intricate dynamics in shows and cinema as I like to stay entertained, but something was lacking. From what I'm hearing from previously die hard Once Upon A Time fans, the show has definitely taken a leap in the wrong direction. – danielle5778 years ago
I stopped watching Once Upon a Time midway through season 5. Some of the plot lines began feeling repetitive, and I started to wonder if the writers have any inkling of an ending in sight. – KennethC8 years ago
In my experience, I could only stomach through Season 1 and a couple episodes into the 2nd season. Initially, I thought the writers were upholding decent quality characters and plot premises. However, once I got to the 2nd season- the writers thought it would be a good idea to make Mulan a lesbian. I had a tug of war with myself... shouldn't I be happy that shows are not sequestering "princesses" to certain stereotypes? But, then I thought- why, of all fairytale female characters, would they designate Mulan as the lesbian? The answer is obvious, so I won't go into that. But isn't this also continuing a stereotype about lesbians and how they act? Just because Mulan is a masculinized character does not mean she automatically has to be a lesbian. You can be girly and still be a lesbian. OUAT, if you really want to break boundaries, write female characters in a way that doesn't succumb to the same, basic stereotypes. – Nbrull128 years ago
Once Upon A Time was a great show for me until the middle of season 5. I think that the characters were stuck in the underworld for too long and the ending of season 5 was very anticlimactic and that's when the show started heading into a new direction. – Jai Modo8 years ago
I really enjoyed this show at the beginning when it was easier to understand and actually followed the stories and fairytales. But not it has become some sort of a mess. I really do think someone should explore more of this topic. – veronicamarie118 years ago
I'm a big fan of OUAT, as my screen name might reveal. I love how the writers have cleverly updated fairytales--stories we all know and grew up on--since 2011. However, I can be objective enough to say some arcs work better than others. I loved the first two seasons, but the Neverland arc of season 3 was a bit stale for my taste. I also felt the show broke its own rules with the season 5 Underworld arc. Mythology is not the same as fairytale. Plus, when you start examining how people interpret the afterlife, you're bound to hit some pitfalls and lose your audience. Oh, well, at least they didn't make Hades' Underworld some kind of ultra-modern Vegas casino-type destination. They stayed true to mythology, which I can give them credit for. – RubyBelle8 years ago
With the swing of a bat, the Walking Dead was easily the most popular show on television. However, with increasingly more characters to adapt into the story, the loss of fan favorite characters, and rehashing of similar story lines, how much longer can the show continue to receive this unprecedented popularity? Within this season, the shows ratings have already drastically declined from the season premiere. Why has the show lost its fervor? Can the directors/writers take steps to salvage the series, or will it be too little too late?
The show should have taken a more 'Game of Thrones' approach to the plot. 'Game of Thrones' established very early in its airing that main characters and fan favorites are not immune to death. If the fan-base is more story-driven, the show is easier to steer from a writing standpoint. – MikeySheff8 years ago
The decline of ratings for the Walking Dead can also be attributed to the complex storyline. Especially this current season has a lot of parallel plots, that all develop very slowly and keep the audiences waiting for anything to happen that could bring the plot really forward. Even though it makes sense to establish characters like Negan as the evil villain and show the audience what he is really capable of doing, it drags on and on. Additionally a lot of fans read ahead in the comic series and stir up discussions online, which makes it difficult to keep up a neutral stand on the show. The killing of popular characters then takes another toll on the audience. The early exploring/surviving mentality, where the group tried to built on something has disappeared, along with beloved characters. This atmosphere that was created in earlier seasons could be one thing to bring back the show to its original success. – lajungbl8 years ago
