What are the benefits and drawbacks of a genre or franchise gaining mainstream acceptance? For instance: in what ways does Marvel benefit from being mainstream? How does grossing popularity damage Star Wars (or does it?). How does the MCU gain artistically from its mainstream appeal? What sacrifices must it make? Are the monetary benefits worth the trade of artistic integrity?
A game writer might focus on the social benefits gamers receive from the de-stigmatizing of video games vs. the "selling out" of catering to the main stream. The writer of this article could focus on any medium of entertainment, from television and movies to games, examining both privilege and hipster-esque shunning that comes with the main stream.
While I've provided an overly-broad range of ideas for medium, the writer of this article would focus on only one aspect of entertainment (film; television; games), not all three.
I think audiences are more sophisticated nowadays. Movies and TV shows used to be at the level of an 11 year old boy back in the 70s and even the 80. I don't think it was until the early 90s that movies really began to take off and franchises such as Star Trek after TNG the TV series really began going mainstream. Especially Sci-Fi. I think Terminator started that trend. – Munjeera8 years ago
This is a theme in many anime style films and series, but in watching Korra I noticed that every "villain" turned out to be someone who had been deeply hurt in their past. The analysis could be a walk-through of the prominent villains in the LoK books and how when they are defeated, Korra always finds empathy for the enemy.
Same could be said for Last Airbender, as well. Especially Zuko. – Natalie Sheppard10 years ago
I've watched up to season 3 of this show. I absolutely adore the character makeup and watching the characters evolve. It really gives me a lot of insight into my own creations. The one question I have is this: Are we talking about the LoK manga or the television show? Narrowing this topic's genre down is important to the article. Also, I believe that this article should focus mainly on the villains who are intricate to the plot of the story. There are some villains that aren't nearly as important, and quite frankly these villains won't provide enough support information in the article. – Kenneth Merchant10 years ago
It's worth mentioning how villains in general have changed throughout out the year, when regarding their motivations. The reason The Avatar villains work is because their motivations for doing what they do are relatable, besides being evil for the sake of being evil. Look at Kuvira: She wants to bring order to her kingdom, but she goes overboard, to the point she is a ruthless dictator. – Aaron Hatch10 years ago
Your could focus on Korra's relationship to those around her. How does she relate to the villains? How does this lead character deal with consequence compared to similar heroes? – Thomas Munday10 years ago
I think it's less that every villain had been hurt in the past, but more that each of them saw Korra as a direct affront to their goals; either her presence or absence made their lives more difficult. A major way that LoK felt more mature than A:tLA is that the larger point being made or situation being addressed by each villain is valid, and Korra does have to consider their ideology. The hero and villains weren't quite as black and white as Aang and Fire Lord Ozai. – chrischan8 years ago
Talk about various science fiction series and the types of technology or concepts which were once thought to be unbelievable, but have become reality, today.
An example of this is how Star Trek and other shows would have holographic projectors or screen talking which enabled the ability of sight in long-distance communications. Nowadays we have various means of video chatting with people from around the world such as Facetime that seem to have been encouraged by shows like Star Trek.
The movies Johnny Mnemonic and Back to the Future 2 are good movies to look into.
– JennyCardinal8 years ago
Look at some of the cyberpunk genre like Neal Stephenson's Snowcrash and William Gibson's Neuromancer and compare their use of the internet with the reality it's become. – Tarben8 years ago
Could the writer of this piece also examine ways we've sidestepped expectation? For instance, in older films we often see "the year is 2015, we have a permanent colony on the moon" or Back to the Future's infamous hover boards (not hand-free exploding segways we call hover boards). There are more extreme examples of cultural ideals, like assuming that we might have achieved world peace, have evolved beyond the discriminations of gender and race. I think examining how we've achieved Sci-Fi and how we've failed it would be a nice contrast. – Piper CJ8 years ago
To Piper, yes! That gives the article a more diverse viewpoint for readers. I feel by showing what has been done, what we have yet to accomplish, or attempted acts to resemble concepts in science fiction would help give more insight. Also Jenny and Tarben, those are all definitely some great resources for the article! – Kevin Mohammed8 years ago
I think Samsung used a scene from 2001: A Space Odyssey in court when Apple sued them, claiming that they had ripped off the basic design of the iPhone touch screen. Their argument was that the idea had already existed in the sci-fi imaginary, and therefore was not an original idea from Apple. – TKing8 years ago
There's at least one then-futuristic film I've seen that had personalized street and, I think, train station advertising change as each person passed. Personal advertising has been on the internet for a while, and might soon be here on the street. It's always the love of amassing even more money by the already-mega rich that drives these advances, so when it'll really piss them off when I refuse installment of their microchip so they can market me. I'll be laughing at them from my prison cell. Take that. I've read that Gen X has been written off by marketers as too difficult to predict (read, "lead like sheep"). Good work, Gen X'ers. Make 'em work for it. – Tigey8 years ago
In the former years of television, especially in the 1970's, there seemed to be a hoist of sitcoms and TV shows that revolved around working class families. Shows that focus on the working class like The Honeymooners, All in the Family, Sanford & Son, and Roseanne seem to have vanished in recent years. What does this say about modern culture and the kind of lifestyle it promotes? Does this create unrealistic expectations for families viewing at home?
I personally wouldn't say that the way certain families are depicted on sitcoms would set an "expectation," per se. Sitcoms may have changed over the years from focusing on working class families to more "updated" versions to most likely reflect on how certain aspects of society have changed over the years, such as gay marriage being legalized and that more people choose to remain single today. – enizzari8 years ago
The 'typical' TV family seems to be stuck in kind of a weird place, where it's clear that the middle and working classes don't exist the way they used to , like in shows from the 70s - 90s, but at the same time there is a lot of resistance to depicting families that reflect the reality of today, with single parents, same-sex couples, blended families, etc. I should probably note that I'm coming at this from watching a lot of shows more geared towards tweens (my sister is a tween), and those shows seem to really stick to the ideal nuclear family setup. – chrischan8 years ago
This is a rich topic. Our middle class is disappearing, so... – Tigey8 years ago
An unprecedented level and frequency of communication between television show cast/crews and fans on twitter, at cons, in polls, and generally online has begun to influence some shows' creation.
You have Hannibal's Hettienne Park responding in a letter to fans upset at her character (an Asian-American and Jewish woman detective) was killed off. You have all levels of fanservice and queer-baiting. You have Bryan Konietzko announcing "Korrasami is canon." You have Supernatural and Arrow keeping on and creating huge roles for characters once fated to die off (Castiel and Felicity respectively). But sometimes, for art or for format (e.g. Netflix series premiering a season at once cannot adjust), the shows do not bend.
My question is, do you think this new level of responsiveness can be called, overall, good or bad? If so, which? What types of shows are expected to be open or closed to fan suggestions? Have any surprised you? Also, more examples and especially counter-examples are very welcome.
I also think something to be taken into consideration is the affect fan interaction has on the business side. Does greater fan interaction increase the size of the audience? Do these fans also purchase merchandise to show their dedication to the show? – MichelleAjodah9 years ago
The interaction between cast/crew members provides even more for the fans as they get more content via what cast/crew share and connection as questions are answered and feedback is given.
But I can see some problems that usually come with social media having a negative effect, such as some voices getting heard more than others' or people jumping on bandwagons. – LaRose9 years ago
It is probably important to recognize that the Internet does impose a greater sense of responsiveness and involvement, due to the competition steadily arising from Internet based entertainment. YouTube and other services intend to drive the television audience away from that media, and grant the audience the kind of ability to achieve this concept. It may be a good idea to pair this with your topic to emphasize what kind of outcome television may have with its audience. – N.D. Storlid9 years ago
There is something dystopian about this, recalling the gladiatorial thumbs-up or thumbs-down decision. It also recalls the chariot race riots of Constantinople in 532 when fans nearly killed Emperor Justinian I. Sometimes fans can be so fanatical. – Tigey8 years ago
Many long-running television series have at least one episode where two or more characters switch bodies with one another (generally for comedic purpose). Given that it has debatably become exhausted and overdone by this point, why does this trope continue to be so popular? What fascinates us about the concept of swapping bodies? Is it another form of escapism, or simply a plot device with easy jokes to be made?
Are there series that put a spin on this trope or use it in interesting ways? If so, do they change the formula, or do they apply it in a new way?
I've seen some variation of it, like in Charmed which utilized it a few times. Instead of two characters swapping bodies, they swapped powers, and given it was was a married couple, could be utilized beyond the plot device as more along the lines of couples counseling. There is the old saying, "In order to truly know someone, walk a mile in their shoes." This trope is a more literal interpretation of that, meant to be a point of understanding and enlightenment for the characters involved. Our skills in empathy can become stunted past a certain point in our lives, and such an experience makes a point of enabling us to appreciate life as we know it, and to learn that what is different can be better or worse than what we think. Yes, it is a trope that is used for comedy, but is one that allows us to expand our horizons of connection, bridging the gaps that separates individuals, to better complement each other, because in being able to facilitate empathy and understanding, we cut away prejudice and hatred. – artemis8229 years ago
I totally agree with artemis, and to add, body-swapping often gives TV shows a way to explore another character without moving away from the protagonist audiences are used to. – chrischan8 years ago
I always thought that it had to so with the display of actor's range of adaptation and capabilities. A sort of metafictional device to pick the interests of audiences, but nothing more. – T. Palomino2 years ago
Sleepy Hollow is a supernatural show with a black female lead (Abbie) and a white male lead (Ichabod). At times, especially in the second season, Abbie would be sidelined so the narrative could focus more on Ichabod's love life, and now, as of the season three finale, Abbie has been killed for Ichabod's sake.
Analyze the intersected representation of both race and gender in Sleepy Hollow. How is Abbie portrayed compared to her white male counterpart? How are other characters, such as Frank and Jenny, treated within the show's narrative? When it comes to attempts to portray female characters other than Abbie, how are they presented? What is the effect of the characters of color who only appear when their culture is appropriated for story purposes? (Big Ash.)
Emily you were reading my mind. I appreciate the gender and all the color in Sleepy Hollow. I may take this one on, time permitting. – Venus Echos9 years ago
Analyse "canon" vs. "fanon", and whether the latter has any validity as regards interpretations and criticism of the former. Are fan theories a legitimate way in which to explore the deeper facets of a certain work or franchise, or is it merely a socially acceptable way for adults to waste their time? Discuss how certain fan theories have influenced (or not) storylines in different franchises and creator's rejections, adoptions, or subversions of popular fan theories (e.g., Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Lost, Doctor Who, etc.)
'Canon' has always had its 'fanon,' insofar as canonical work requires a certain apparatus of replication. Nothing is canonical if it does not get to the point where it invites imitation. Example: Cervantes's 'Don Quixote' invited, in C18th, the self-explanatory 'Female Quixote' of Charlotte Lennox. It also caused Flaubert to write, a century later, 'Madame Bovary' (about a woman who believes herself to be a character in her favorite romances). Tolstoy's 'Anna Karenina' also deals with a protagonist who feels misplaced in the world she is inhabiting. If Cervantes was the original, then all the rest are reinforcements of the same 'canon.' They are, to a certain extent, 'fan fiction.' But they are also excellent examples of how imitation of a precedent can create powerful independent work. – Francisc Nona9 years ago
The R+L=J theory for Game of Thrones/A Song of Ice and Fire is practically considered canon in the fandom even though it hasn't been revealed...yet. I think it would be interesting to look into the psychology behind fan theories. Why do people discuss fan theories? What draws them into engaging in "fanon?" – Lexzie9 years ago
Vince Gilligan's attitude toward Breaking Bad is something like, Sure that could be in there. I guess that's a strength of ambiguity, which he admits to employing throughout the series. – Tigey8 years ago
