Easy A

Directed by Will Gluck (directed Fire UP - some cheerleading movie)
Written by Bert V. Royal (sort of a new writer; not much of a previous work)
Starring Emma Stone (Previously starred in House Bunny, Super Bad, and even The Suite Life of Zach and Cody)

Before actually watching this film, I had some prejudice against it because of the overloaded amount of hype and commercialism. From the poster that really doesn't depict what's really installed in the movie - which has been the trend with these new "indie" romance comedies like Juno and Superbad to having the advertisement all over popular websites. Anyway, I decided to watch the film expecting that I will be giving a negative review, but HEY, the movie actually was quite good.

Really, the main idea of this film, the idea that a good, almost invisible girl going out of her way to become someone that is not her - like a super slut in this case - to save the day for some outcasts, but in reality still treasuring her innocense inside, is really the catch that will get a lot of audiences these days. I think this type of a character is a new "trend" in media. Someone who has a good heart, but looks strong on the outside so they still get a lot of attention, raised from a super modern family. The central character, Emma Stone is the center of the movie and the biggest factor in grabbing audience.

Also, the writer for Easy A is kind of a new writer, which is almost another reason why I appreciated his little alliteration to Huckleberry Finn or The Scarlet Letter. And, I absolutely loved the references to the 80's movies with little clips. That just gave a touch of classiness to the movie. Anyway, the writer's attention to detail really gave the story that could be on surface a meaning, depth, and connective factor for the audiences. There were a lot of lines that 'if you don't get it, the line wouldn't mess up the situation, but if you do, then you'll be laughing'.

Other than the story itself, I have to say two things. First, Emma Stone in the movie really pulled off "classy slut" fashion very well. I think it's because she actually looked like a decent high school, without over doing the whole "new slut" character with heavy makeup and such, so I highly applaud the fashion team for that.

Second, the edit of this movie with the insert of the podcast was actually very good, unlike The Social Network. The audience could definitely tell that with the inserts and definite organization, the story is easier to follow in chronological order. Also, the organization really tied in at the end with such a lovely ending that I absolutely adored with Penn Bradgley, "Woodchuck Todd" coming to ultimately save the girl who saved a lot people's reputation in a brutal high school society.

Easy A was a lightly humoured romantic comedy that will be missed whenever graduation time rolls along to remind me of some painful and also delightful memories of high school.

Net Neutrality

When I started the Media Studies class, I didn't really think Facebook as medium. I thought media is like news on television or the morning paper. However, media is changing, better or worse (that's a WHOLE different topic that I will cover soon) with the innovative technological advancements. If television was revolutionary decades ago, then internet, according to Postman is "television on stereoids". With internet we communicate with people freely, without the contraint of time or place (as we can simply write someone an email or write on his/her wall anytime, anywhere with any sort of internet connection).

Realizing how internet really changes how we perceive information in the current world, I became more facinated with information technology. Then, I ran into an interview of Tim Wu on The New Yorker, who is a current professor at the Law School in Columbia University. Apparently he is the inventor of the word net neutrality. The basic idea of net neutrality is that all the contents online gets treated equally, that they will all work in the same speed, servers not favoring subject versus another. For example, Bill Gates isn't going to receive his email any faster than me downloading music on itunes such beause he is more important and rich than I am. (story of my life)

Well, isn't that just great? We are ALL EQUAL ONLINE. How jolly.
However, this is might change with the drastic change in our communication technology.
Let's think about iphones/itouch/droids/etc. The apps that we use are mostly connected through internet. All all apps treated equally? Well according to Tim Wu, the information technologies guru, all apps might not be treated equally. The example he gave out was the fact that we can all use skype on our smart phones and never have to use the actual phone part, which will eventually bankrupt the phone service part of the smart phones. Because of this, the phone companies can disrupt the connections with certain apps, such as Skype. Is this illegal? Well not yet. The congress is trying to decide on this idea of net neutrality now - although the internet's been around for about thirty years now, the idea of net neutrality is just getting taken cared of now, wow.

So I guess the debate is, should we allow net neutrality or should we not? What is fair? Should everyone get the equality that we have always had our internet speeds? Well, I think we should, if we are not trying to make internet another object of monopoly. If the idea of net neutrality is broken and someone's information will be favored another according to importance or how much the service was, then internet cost would sky rocket. Just look at some people buying every generation of iphones. People are crazy about faster and improved communication, and are willing to pay a lot of money in exchange for communication advantages. Also, we don't need to form a new form of social status through internet by having particular 'packets of information' be treated better and faster. That is just so far from the ideals of democracy, but ironically too close to capitalism at best.

Here is the interview with Tim  Wu. He is a brilliant guy, and his ideas are quiet fascinating:
interview of Tim Wu about information technology on The New Yorker

The Delicate Issue of Race in Movies/TV Shows

Here is the basic point:

1. We are constantly bombarded by the media, which ultimately shape our culture
2. There has been a social movement to end racism

1 + 2 = the media is changing too slowly compared to how the real society is changing with social issues such as racism.

Yes, I understand that TV/ movies are mostly for entertainment (and that's why we are "amusing ourselves to death" according to Postman, but that's a whole another issue), and stereotypical characteristics of a certain group can be used as an entertainment value (eg. the way Black people talk or fat people are lazy). However, some people get affended and ask the question, is this right? Is this okay to portray certain social stereotypes on movies and television shows that the consumers watch to ultimately form different ideologies of the real society?

Well, according to CNN, movies have been improving the roles of hispanic women. It's only recent that these hispanic actresses - such as Jennifer Lopez and Jessica Alba - get roles such as housewives or any prominent figures rather than maids or nannies (which is the way it has been long time ago?). Well, IT'S ABOUT TIME. There are approximately 48.4 million hispanics in the United States, constituting up to 16% of the total population. Isn't it about time that we portray these enormous amount of population right? The media is too focused on making fun of this ethinicity - like Pez from That 70's Show. However, if the media or entertainment industries haven't noticed, there are tons of successful hispanic people in United States. Seriously, it's about time we give some credits to the hispanic population in the United States, and portray them properly for the entire world to see.

I guess we cannot forget the importance of The Cosby Show on the influence of deminishing racism on media. The idea of portraying Black family as an upper middle class that is not different than any other white upper middle class was a revolutionary idea back then. This show helped to improve the images of regular Black families, and implied that everyone can succeed if they get proper education and work hard. This show ultimately changed the perspective other White people had on Black families, seeing that Cosbys are like their own family. Thus, from analyzing the effects of The Cosby Show, we can be hopeful about how media's change in their portrayal of social issues can influence the audiences' ideas about newly emerging cultures in the United States.

So, why is an Asian girl talking about racism over Hispanics and Blacks? Well, because there is this really slow improvement in media in portrayal of Asians. Except for Aaron Yoo, from Disturbia, or Branda Song from Suit Life of Zach & Cody, there hasn't been much "normal" portrayal of Asians in the movies/TV shows. They are always people who can't speak english, or girls who are sluts. Or the most typical: nerds. However, there are a lot of Asian Americans who go through identity crisises because they do not fit any of those categories. Like some of my Asian friends would say, "I don't fit that Asian stereotype, I am not good at math". But isn't it time to break that stereotype sometime soon, when there are so many second and third generations of Asian Americans in United States, living a normal American life?

All in all, media is very powerful tool in shaping peole's thoughts and ideologies. I see some changes that are good, but overall it needs to change bit more quickly.

Serendipity

Serendipity

- Directed by Peter Chelsom (Who made Hannah Montana: The Movie - which I have not watched, by the way)

- Written by Marc Klein (Who wrote Suburban Girl and A Good Year - I have not seen any of them either)

- Starring John Cusack and Katherin Beckinsale

So what is the definition of the word serendipity? Well according to the movie, it is an unexpected fortunate event. Well, after the main character Sara says this word about five minutes into the movie, the mood and the structure of the movie is set on this one word (and all the word related to serendipity such as faith and destiny).

Just a side note, surprisingly this movie itself was my serendipitous find! Recently, whenever I tell people that I am a movie fanatic and that I love slow paced movies with deep meanings placed in the life at the city, people have been recommending me Serendipity. And, whenever I looked up people's "favorite movie" list on their facebook, I kept running into this movie. Slightly off track from the review, but I thought it is quiet interesting how I ran into Serendipity in first place.

Anyhow, the movie is just all about feng shui and destiny. Is it likely that anything like that - from finding a perfect person while buying a cashmere gloves to finding out that your mysterious lover's wedding is cancelled the day that you go half across the country to find him- will happen to a normal person? Well NO. But I think the movie is really trying to tell all the sappy, hopeful girls and guys out there that we are just not searching enough for our passionate love. Sometimes, to truly fall in love, we have to trust our insane but sometimes accurate instincts and follow "the signs", whatever it maybe or how stupid it will look.

So, here's the deal with this movie: if you are looking for a sappy romantic movie for the fall, so you can get some motivation to find that perfect love for Christmas, then yes, definitely go for it. However, this movie does not contain any deeper meaning than go out there and search for the one is destined to be with you. It definitely does not contain deeper meanings about love like in Love Actually or Howl's Moving Castle (yes, two very different movies, I know). However, this movie will linger in your mind just because whenever something odd happens once or twice with someone- whether it be meeting your high school buddy in New York City one spring break or constantly running into a same guy at the gym - you will think of this movie and ask youself if this is the serendipitous moment in your life that you're supposed to hold on to.

The Social Network

The Social Network

 - directed by David Fincher, the prominent director of The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and Fight Club

 - script written by Aaron Sorkin, who wrote Zuckerberg's favorite TV show, The West Wing (according to The New Yoker)

The movie had too much media play even before it came out, it was like "wait, that movie came out only few weeks ago?" I've been anticipating for this movie for so long - as well as millions of facebook users out there in this WORLD. When I finally got to watch it, of course the movie was good because the director and the script writers were awesome, I felt like I had way too much to say about the movie.
Three things I have noticed while watching this movie:

1. This movie is biased
2. Organization of the movie was terrible
3. Movie was made purely to attract the millions of facebook users

First off, on the article about Mark Zuckerberg on The New Yorker, the writer of The Social Network confesses that he never even talked to the inventor of facebook. All of his lines and stories are mostly from the people who SUED Mark Zuckerberg for his invention of Facebook, although I can't say for sure that facebook was purely Mark Zuckerberg's idea. However, if the story came purely from a group of people who wants to haunt him down, they are probably not the right people to base the storyline of a movie about a man. I mean even from the casting of the movie, having the hottest guys play the people who are suing Mark Zuckerberg, to making Zuckerberg look socially awkward and obsessed with the final club at Harvard, proves how biased this movie is. Although I don't know the guy, just from the his video on facebook, he doesn't look that weird.
Secondly, personally I do not like the organization of the movie, as it goes back and forth from the court room to what happened prior to the lawsuits. In the beginning, it almost felt like the movie expected the audiences to know what facebook is about, and how it started. Yes, it is the famous "legend" of the 21st century, but when this movie goes to the foreign countries - where facebook is not widely spread - then people will definitely be lost. I think I got what's happening at the court case towards the middle of the movie, and the fact that I read a lot about the movie beforehand, really helped me to follow the story line. I really don't know how I could have understood it without all the info that I had.

So, this leads me to another idea: was this movie created mostly based on those Harvard kids rubbing it in Zuckerberg's face? There was too much money put into the media play - whether it be internal commercialization with magazine articles about the movie or having the trailer play EVERYWHERE. (Quiet ironically, the only place that the movie did not advertise is the facebook.) Anyway, because there was way too much money put into advertising this movie rather than the quality of the content, the only thing that I can assume from it is that people, who were really mad at Zuckerberg for making so much money, decided to pay a lot of money for a really well known director and a writer to make what "seems" like a legitimately good movie. Or am I just being really skeptical?

Lastly, it makes me wonder if this movie could have been placed # 1 in the box office if it wasn't about facebook. Let's think about 21, the movie. It had a similar story line of a really smart kid going through troubles to get rich. Well, the only difference that made a huge difference in their revenue is that one is about an online website that has greatest number of members in the world, which happened to be made by the youngest billionaire of the century. This idea of "hey let's watch a movie about what I am doing almost 24/7" is such a commercialism at its best. Again, another great way to step on Mark Zuckerberg's face to make more money.

The worst part about the movie is that this guy named Mark Zuckerberg is still alive and only 23 years old. Yes, he maybe the youngest billionaire in the world right now, and it could be the only reason to hate the guy, but he doesn't deserve this horrific movie where he is portrayed as an asshole and a socially awkward Harvard drop-out.

If we think about it, facebook truly changed the way people interact with each other. There were websites like myspace and friendster, but not everyone - from grandma to a sixth grader- uses those trashy websites. The idea of clean, legitimate way of communicating online, by making personal qualities so public is truly using human psychology at its best. Whether he really did steal the idea or not, we need to give credits to Mark Zuckerberg for making the idea a possibility and continuing to grow the website, making awesome additions everyday - like "like" buttons to "status updates" - to help everyone grow their social network a little faster everyday.

Reviews and Opinions

In the era where consumers of media become the producers, I feel compelled to become a part of this new generation of communication. Everyone has his/her own opinions, and I believe everyone has his/her right to express that freely.

I mean, let's face it: at least if someone is writing about something, then at least that person knows a little bit about the subject - at least enough to have an opinion about it.

So here goes a blog of a college student who is continually forming and shaping her thoughts about everything in this world.