I love music, and though the first question is asking for an experience where I tried to censor music I can honestly say that I've never tried to divert someone else's taste or drive them into some place where they wouldn't want to be. Music is a form of self expression and its upsetting when people try to curate others tastes. Has there been music that's 'crossed the line'? Most likely but I wouldn't want to see it go away. I listen to a lot of Punk Rock and Hardcore Punk and a lot of the White Power music that lodges itself into the Punk music is honestly horrible but there are so many bands that stand against that so they're in the minority.
I feel that music is important for us to grow as people because we are accepting a voice that is different from our own and I love hearing how others feel.
My favorite form of music is Hardcore Punk. I thought about top five for awhile and for me it would probably be Minor Threat, Agnostic Front, The Nihilistics, Reagan Youth, and the Dead Kennedys
Thursday, August 23, 2018
Thursday, August 16, 2018
Week 8 Topic
For this week I decided to look at the controversial subject of banned books in the United States. There are some that I noticed right off the bat. All Quiet on the Western Front, The Call of the Wild, The Catcher in the Rye, and the one that surprised me the most was James and the Giant Peach. These books all feature some sort of content that would be seen as very controversial to give to kids who are just adapting to the literary world but I also feel like these books are crucial to understanding our world. All Quiet on the Western Front apparently featured 'anti-American' themes when the book tries to bolster the German military but how is that different from what our military does when confronting 'our' enemies. Call of the Wild has Socialist themes and during the time it came out the US Government was trying to restrict the outreach of the Communist agenda. The Catcher in the Rye follows a kid through a tough time, and honestly I think it's pretty boring and tame. James in the Giant Peach apparently was banned due to involvement with the psychedelic drug era.
I disagree with banning books. We should not limit what is accessible to developing minds. They should see other outlooks, and other ideas and learn to think about what it is they are reading about. Trying to contrive their minds does more harm than good. We cannot feed them safe books. I think feeding into this wave controlled viewing has also led to a narrow interpretation of world history, and events so I think we just need to let kids read.
I'm into spy novels like Ian Fleming and even Tom Clancy. I have Killing Floor, The Cardinal of the Kremlin, and Red Storm Rising just to name a few. The Cold War era spy novels jump into a world that might've existed beneath our very noses yet nobody really knows about. It's a genre of exploration into the sensibilities of nations, and the greed of the Arms Race. It opens my eyes to the possibilities of what is going on around us, and it has led me to think about many of our own issues and how it might all just be a ploy to keep us distracted when we think we're getting involved.
I disagree with banning books. We should not limit what is accessible to developing minds. They should see other outlooks, and other ideas and learn to think about what it is they are reading about. Trying to contrive their minds does more harm than good. We cannot feed them safe books. I think feeding into this wave controlled viewing has also led to a narrow interpretation of world history, and events so I think we just need to let kids read.
I'm into spy novels like Ian Fleming and even Tom Clancy. I have Killing Floor, The Cardinal of the Kremlin, and Red Storm Rising just to name a few. The Cold War era spy novels jump into a world that might've existed beneath our very noses yet nobody really knows about. It's a genre of exploration into the sensibilities of nations, and the greed of the Arms Race. It opens my eyes to the possibilities of what is going on around us, and it has led me to think about many of our own issues and how it might all just be a ploy to keep us distracted when we think we're getting involved.
Thursday, August 9, 2018
Blog Project 2
For my second Blog Project I really thought about what it was I should do, and it took me time to decide what kind of topic I wanted to fully immerse myself into. As an avid comic book fan I thought I'd delve into one of the more interesting comic book movies that came out recently. Avengers: Infinity War. It particularly stands out to me, as a comic book fan, because you can go to these movies without any prior knowledge of the comics and thoroughly enjoy them. In fact I think people who aren't engraved in comic book lore enjoy them the most because most who follow the comics always knitpick a little too much. The general public is going crazy for superhero films and Infinity War exceeds the high expectations.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZfuNTqbHE8
The movie was directed by Joe, and Anthony Russo and has a huge list of star actors and actresses such as Robert Downey Jr, Chris Pratt, Josh Brolin, Scarlett Johansson, Zoe Saldana, Dave Bautista and many more. The actors all deliver very strong performances throughout, with many praising Spider-Man (played by Tom Holland's) character. The beginning of the movie is about a very powerful being known as Thanos who is hunting for the Infinity Gems so he can cleanse what he determines to be an overpopulated galaxy. Standing in his way is an assembly of Heroes from all over the galaxy who are driven to stop him and protecting the fate of the entire galaxy.
When it comes to similarities and differences the first thing we can do is look at the original subject material which is the comics themselves. Now they've streamlined a lot of the lore so that general audiences can enjoy the movies without having to diverge time to look through the many seas of comics to understand what's going on. The movies still maintain the relative feel of the comics without a lot of the baggage that comes with it. In the Original Quest for the Gauntlet storyline that the movie is based on it's actually a big reveal to be Thanos, in the movie though it mostly centers around Thanos as a central character instead of an antagonist that appears at the very end for an epic battle. Another way it's similar is Thanos' motivations for cleaning the galaxy and many of events throughout the movie are ripped straight from a comic panel which is a good ode to those that follow the books.
Within the genre I say it stands different just based on the scale of the film. Most superhero films have a central narrative which is the character it tries to follow throughout. In this one the narrative jumps around a bit and for some it can lead to people being withdrawn from the whole process of the film because we're never in one place for too long. They also work to develop the motivations of the villain. In many films in this genre we don't get a lot of depth into the villain apart from the fact that he's an evil bad guy, the only other movie in this genre that really gives the villain as much depth that I can think of is The Dark Knight with Heath Ledger's adaptation of the Joker. These two movies stand on their own when it comes to character development for the villain. It's similar to other hero films because we still get the colors, crazy unbelievable things that happen, the powers that many characters have. You can watch fifteen seconds of the trailer and know what kind of movie it is without any knowledge of what you're seeing.
I think this film is important because it is full recognition of a type of literature that hasn't been well received when translating over to films for generations. Are these films perfect? No, but they deliver on a lot of the quality that is missing when you turn a novel into a movie. I usually despise book-turned-movie projects because they remove the qualities of the book but for these movies they do the comic books a lot of justice. It matters to me, and many other comic nerds specifically because it wasn't popular to be into comics several years ago. Growing up I remember being made fun of for enjoying comic books and now it seems like everyone is. It's a big shift in our culture. I think with how cynical our culture is we look to demagogues from the comics for inspiration because a lot of us just want to find something to be hopeful about and the message these films send are very positive. The target audience is kids through young adults but I think anyone of any age can truly find enjoyment in this movie. For stereotypes there's only one I can really recall off the top of my head and that's Drax (played by Dave Bautista). He's kind of playing the big, muscular, drooling idiot. The film does good things for him but there are moments that are meant to make you laugh, even if they are slightly offensive. Such as when he claims that nobody can see him when he's completely still, even when that isn't true at all.
The strengths are in the set piece moments, costume designs, character interpretations, and action sequences. This movie really delivers on the imagination of the comic book fan. The CGI is really top notch and there isn't any movie out there that I think is better. There are still moments where you can tell that it's CGI but it doesn't take away from the experience. One example of CGI that was noticeably CGI and detracted from the experience was when Iron Man gets into his suit for the first time but beyond that the CGI is great. I only have two things that I'd consider to be a weakness for this movie and that's the campy humor which is a staple of these movies. In this it's just too much and I think they should've dialed it down a lot. The last thing is the pacing. Sometimes it slows down too much and we're left trying to catch up, but then it speeds up and you get lost trying to keep up and process everything. I think there must've been two sides in the development team that were conflicted about how fast the movie should be going at. The movie is very good.
I'm not too familiar with the work done by the Russo brothers but since they've taken on many of the Marvel films I've felt improvement in the quality of the movies so I'd say they did pretty good. Considering the movie came out four months ago and people still talk about it I guess you can say it's pretty memorable.
Critics for the film have been very positive, mostly citing the effects, action, and the characterization of Thanos to be the best points of the film. One such reviewer claimed that: "Thanos' plot is explicitly, enthusiastically genocidal." Which is exactly what his character so happens to be. Another reviewer said this in regards to a criticism: "the plot is extended absurdly due to the film trying to fit a little slot for every character to shine. While it's good at first it does get a little predictable with how it fleshes the characters out." For the most part I agree with the positive reviews, but can also understand the negative ones because they do make valid points.
The many actors and directors used social media to promote the film, with many of the actors posting iconic lines from their characters. I'd say fans were so hyped up for the movie that these little posts didn't really do much to draw interest because people were already excited but it satiated the taste of fans up until the release. I actually went out and bought the film even after watching it a handful of times. I'm familiar with many of the actors and actresses careers so I do already follow the ones I like. Most of my friends enjoyed it, as did my family even though I had personally catch them up on a lot of the details prior to watching the film.
In giving this critique one thing I learned is how different expectations are for these kinds of things. Also I learned how nuts the public is for these movies when ten years ago superhero films were mostly B-movies you bought in the 5 dollar bin at Walmart. We've definitely come a long way.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZfuNTqbHE8
The movie was directed by Joe, and Anthony Russo and has a huge list of star actors and actresses such as Robert Downey Jr, Chris Pratt, Josh Brolin, Scarlett Johansson, Zoe Saldana, Dave Bautista and many more. The actors all deliver very strong performances throughout, with many praising Spider-Man (played by Tom Holland's) character. The beginning of the movie is about a very powerful being known as Thanos who is hunting for the Infinity Gems so he can cleanse what he determines to be an overpopulated galaxy. Standing in his way is an assembly of Heroes from all over the galaxy who are driven to stop him and protecting the fate of the entire galaxy.
When it comes to similarities and differences the first thing we can do is look at the original subject material which is the comics themselves. Now they've streamlined a lot of the lore so that general audiences can enjoy the movies without having to diverge time to look through the many seas of comics to understand what's going on. The movies still maintain the relative feel of the comics without a lot of the baggage that comes with it. In the Original Quest for the Gauntlet storyline that the movie is based on it's actually a big reveal to be Thanos, in the movie though it mostly centers around Thanos as a central character instead of an antagonist that appears at the very end for an epic battle. Another way it's similar is Thanos' motivations for cleaning the galaxy and many of events throughout the movie are ripped straight from a comic panel which is a good ode to those that follow the books.
Within the genre I say it stands different just based on the scale of the film. Most superhero films have a central narrative which is the character it tries to follow throughout. In this one the narrative jumps around a bit and for some it can lead to people being withdrawn from the whole process of the film because we're never in one place for too long. They also work to develop the motivations of the villain. In many films in this genre we don't get a lot of depth into the villain apart from the fact that he's an evil bad guy, the only other movie in this genre that really gives the villain as much depth that I can think of is The Dark Knight with Heath Ledger's adaptation of the Joker. These two movies stand on their own when it comes to character development for the villain. It's similar to other hero films because we still get the colors, crazy unbelievable things that happen, the powers that many characters have. You can watch fifteen seconds of the trailer and know what kind of movie it is without any knowledge of what you're seeing.
I think this film is important because it is full recognition of a type of literature that hasn't been well received when translating over to films for generations. Are these films perfect? No, but they deliver on a lot of the quality that is missing when you turn a novel into a movie. I usually despise book-turned-movie projects because they remove the qualities of the book but for these movies they do the comic books a lot of justice. It matters to me, and many other comic nerds specifically because it wasn't popular to be into comics several years ago. Growing up I remember being made fun of for enjoying comic books and now it seems like everyone is. It's a big shift in our culture. I think with how cynical our culture is we look to demagogues from the comics for inspiration because a lot of us just want to find something to be hopeful about and the message these films send are very positive. The target audience is kids through young adults but I think anyone of any age can truly find enjoyment in this movie. For stereotypes there's only one I can really recall off the top of my head and that's Drax (played by Dave Bautista). He's kind of playing the big, muscular, drooling idiot. The film does good things for him but there are moments that are meant to make you laugh, even if they are slightly offensive. Such as when he claims that nobody can see him when he's completely still, even when that isn't true at all.
The strengths are in the set piece moments, costume designs, character interpretations, and action sequences. This movie really delivers on the imagination of the comic book fan. The CGI is really top notch and there isn't any movie out there that I think is better. There are still moments where you can tell that it's CGI but it doesn't take away from the experience. One example of CGI that was noticeably CGI and detracted from the experience was when Iron Man gets into his suit for the first time but beyond that the CGI is great. I only have two things that I'd consider to be a weakness for this movie and that's the campy humor which is a staple of these movies. In this it's just too much and I think they should've dialed it down a lot. The last thing is the pacing. Sometimes it slows down too much and we're left trying to catch up, but then it speeds up and you get lost trying to keep up and process everything. I think there must've been two sides in the development team that were conflicted about how fast the movie should be going at. The movie is very good.
I'm not too familiar with the work done by the Russo brothers but since they've taken on many of the Marvel films I've felt improvement in the quality of the movies so I'd say they did pretty good. Considering the movie came out four months ago and people still talk about it I guess you can say it's pretty memorable.
Critics for the film have been very positive, mostly citing the effects, action, and the characterization of Thanos to be the best points of the film. One such reviewer claimed that: "Thanos' plot is explicitly, enthusiastically genocidal." Which is exactly what his character so happens to be. Another reviewer said this in regards to a criticism: "the plot is extended absurdly due to the film trying to fit a little slot for every character to shine. While it's good at first it does get a little predictable with how it fleshes the characters out." For the most part I agree with the positive reviews, but can also understand the negative ones because they do make valid points.
The many actors and directors used social media to promote the film, with many of the actors posting iconic lines from their characters. I'd say fans were so hyped up for the movie that these little posts didn't really do much to draw interest because people were already excited but it satiated the taste of fans up until the release. I actually went out and bought the film even after watching it a handful of times. I'm familiar with many of the actors and actresses careers so I do already follow the ones I like. Most of my friends enjoyed it, as did my family even though I had personally catch them up on a lot of the details prior to watching the film.
In giving this critique one thing I learned is how different expectations are for these kinds of things. Also I learned how nuts the public is for these movies when ten years ago superhero films were mostly B-movies you bought in the 5 dollar bin at Walmart. We've definitely come a long way.
Wednesday, August 1, 2018
Topic: Fake News
Do I think national media is obstructive? Yes, absolutely. When the president does it though it just seems a little hypocritical if I'm being honest because the role of the president is to provide a medium for shifting stories, and outright lying to the general public. When Trump started giving information about the ongoing conflict in Syria and how our military is to proceed the information given by Trump was very reminiscent of the information the Bush administration gave in 1991 (and again in 2003) to justify military action Iraq. This time the narrative was centered in Syria, however.
Again, the role of the president is to do disserviceable things that are hidden from the general public. Trump likes to wear his misdeeds on his sleeves and his followers covet this ability he has to nonchalantly act on his impulses. He even stated that he could 'shoot someone and not lose any followers.' He's fabricated this personality cult around himself and his loyal followers don't seem to have any issue with admitting that they admire him.
For the final question I have issues discerning whether it's a strength or a weakness. I think Trump is just as bad as any other lying, degenerate that's held the position of President. The things he says proves that he isn't above making comments that the previous presidents would rather keep in the shadows because he seems to have little fear of any ramifications regarding his erroneous comments. I wouldn't say he's telling it how it is because perspectives vary, but he's certainly telling it how I'd imagine an overconfident billionaire with no consideration for the people he views to be beneath would see the world.
Again, the role of the president is to do disserviceable things that are hidden from the general public. Trump likes to wear his misdeeds on his sleeves and his followers covet this ability he has to nonchalantly act on his impulses. He even stated that he could 'shoot someone and not lose any followers.' He's fabricated this personality cult around himself and his loyal followers don't seem to have any issue with admitting that they admire him.
For the final question I have issues discerning whether it's a strength or a weakness. I think Trump is just as bad as any other lying, degenerate that's held the position of President. The things he says proves that he isn't above making comments that the previous presidents would rather keep in the shadows because he seems to have little fear of any ramifications regarding his erroneous comments. I wouldn't say he's telling it how it is because perspectives vary, but he's certainly telling it how I'd imagine an overconfident billionaire with no consideration for the people he views to be beneath would see the world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)