Come and See

Come and See (1985)
Directed by: Elem Klimov

Russian film that takes place in Belarus during WWII.
Psychedelic film that portrays realism of war, not through realistic graphics, but evoking viewer's emotions through sound, use of color, and mise en scene.

Unlike the typical Hollywood war films, Come and See was covert in its complex message.
The music in the background, with minimal dialogue, emphasized silent, but terrifying horrors of the war.
Without the excessive amount of gun shot noises, the movie used imagery that invoke just as disgusting feelings towards war itself. For example, when the main character is going mad, trying to find his family in a thick, reddish swamp, the mud becomes a symbol of all the blood that is spilled from the war.

Throughout the entire movie, scene after another keeps viewers on edge of their seats with dynamic environments the main character ventures to, from deep forest with the Red Army to an unknown town in Belarus that is under an attack by the German army.

Nationalism is branded very strongly in this film. I mean, personally, I think history is written according to the bias of a country. So, it is true that the death of Soviets are often overlooked in the American history when WWII is mentioned. However, Come and See reminds all of us, everyone around the globe - because it caught international attention through numerous awards - that Russians and Eastern Europeans, were brutally affected by an indescribably horrifying total war. Often in the movie, the main character holds his mouth shut, and gasp at horrifying reality. This portrays the emotions of how Russians and Eastern Europeans must have felt. What happened was so horrifying that people have lost words to describe it. So, we should understand that sometimes, there are silenced reality in the midst of loud and dominant voices.

Sergeant York

Sergeant York (1941)
Directed by Howard Hawk



What a classic "American hero" film.
- the fact that the biggest star of the time - Gary Cooper - starred in the film
- the main character, Alvin York, was not the perfect, but hard working man, who just wanted to provide for a happy family.
- war movie with semi-happy ending with least amount of killing, and peaceful surrender by the enemies

Apparently, this movie encouraged a lot of men to enlist in the military during WWII.

However, I found different, somewhat conflicting, ideologies portrayed in this film.
The complex problem intertwined with war that fights for our freedom versus our inherently religious beliefs.
In the movie, Alvin is torn between fighting for his country versus Bible verses that specifically points out not to kill anyone. In the end, he is convinced - not very clear of the reasons, but somehow he is - that he should be ready to die for his country, but not necessarily kill. Alvin is portrayed as a guy who is genuine, but not very clever, so I guess that's where the incoherent idea still flows in the film. On the surface, it seems that York is a great American hero, who fight for what is right and the love of God and his country. However, thinking about the characteristics of York, he is almost pushed into the beginning and end of the war without really thinking, only doing what he is told to do by the people around him.

Aside from watching the film as a piece of propaganda during the war time, it is a great film of the era. Fantastic cinematography and clever shots, edited to constantly to catch audiences' attention.

No Strings Attached

Director: Ivan Reitman (My Super Ex-Girlfriend; was producer for I Love You, Man & Up In the Air)
Screen Play Writer: Elizabeth Meriwether
Actors: Natalie Portman and Ashton Kutcher

As a premed nerd, one scene that made me smile was " you give me premature ventricular contraction", which is a problem when your heart skips a beat. I love lines that have science or math references. So intelligently romantic.

Anyhow, the movie is about two "friends with benefits". However, the movie hints that they were each other's "love at first sight". Thus, in a way, the movie contains somewhat cliche theme that there are soul-mates in the world that are attracted to each other no matter how different they are. So again we learn that there are just certain people in this world that you just cannot forget, because of circumstances that make the relationship seem like a destiny.

Carrying on with the theme, the movie was actually very well made for a "chick-flick". I really thought every transitions were smooth, the acting was very well done, shots were just pretty enough for a romantic comedy. I knew that the director was experienced at least. So, luckily, there was nothing about the movie that I frowned upon. Just a good homored romantic comedy.

I really liked the personalities of the characters and how they were played. Natalie Portman did a fabulous job of a smart, cold hearted doctor who is way too serious about her career that she has no time for love. I think those "workaholic" women are somewhat trendy in the movies these days. I think there are definitely elements in those characters that working women these days can really relate to. Like, there's this "new" contrasting goal in life for women, like getting a great career and finding the right person to love. It's a difficult dilemma that maybe all women in 21st century face.

Then, for these women, there are always the prince charming who follows these beautiful but busy women around. Especially for Ashton Kutcher, he always plays the guy who falls in love with girls who are workaholics, wrapped up in their career that they have no room in their minds for love. Like, he loves Jessica
Alba in Valentine's Day. Kutcher has this charming image that he can make anyone fall in love with him, and besides, he has the best "I am hurt by love" look, that makes all the audience to feel so bad for him. Oh man, I have to stop watching his movies.

Overall, the movie was a pretty well made romantic comedy, made with an experienced eye.

The King's Speech

If you have seen this year’s Oscar, then you would probably know how well The King’s Speech was made. From acting to screen play to directing, the highly praised movie was one of the best films made in 2010. It’s quite interesting to learn that the movie was produced by an independent film production company based in London, England - See-Saw Films, instead of a big companies like BBC Films. In addition, Tom Hooper is a rising director from London, who has focused mostly on television series. Thus, it maybe both element of the independent films that made The King’s Speech more aesthetically pleasing in the aspect of cinematography and the screen play.

            The King’s Speech is based on a true story. King George VI – played by Colin Firth – suffers from a speech impediment. With the rising use of the radio in the 1930s, a speech impediment was detrimental to the loyal family. As a duke, George VI had to give public announcements through the radio or even at a public event. However, because of his speech problems, Prince George VI was losing his confidence to contribute to the national politics. In finding a remedy for his problem, he seeks every speech therapist in England. Sick and tired of going through crazy therapies ranging from speaking while stuffing the mouth with marbles to smoking cigarette to alleviate nervousness, Prince George VI puts his last bet on a shabby actor – whom calls himself a therapist, not a doctor – Lionel Logue (played by Geoffrey Rush).

Although Lionel is not a licensed professional, he takes the duke through special trainings that fixes the innate problem to his speech impediment – to provide an opportunity to regain confidence about speaking. Through trial and error, tears and smiles, the gap between the loyal heir and an aged actor became nonexistent towards the end of the movie.

Although this piece of history from England maybe a very interesting historical fact, without the artistic directing and cinematography, the movie could have been very dry with merely the historical element. Every scene seemed to be very thought out; especially the proportions with the space in the room and the actors were very different from the conventional scenes. For example, the character’s face was often concentrated on one side of the screen, providing more negative space. On top of the unusual proportions on the screen, the color palette – gray and brown – in the movie fit right into the theme, giving a very neutral but a hint of gloomy mood to the film. All these components put together created every scene a piece of artwork.

Of course, the superb acting needs to be recognized. Colin Firth has acted the role of royalty in several movies. What shocked the audience was his ability to act a dignifying duke with a speech impediment. He exemplified the frustration with the disorder as well as with his country perfectly, delivering every sense of what the character feels. In addition, Helena Bonham Carter showed that she is a superb actress who can succeed in any genre, from someone bizarre as Bellatrix Lestrange in the Harry Potter movie to someone as sweet and elegant as the Queen Elizabeth in The King’s Speech. Definitely two thumbs up for the actors as well as the casting director.

Overall, the movie is one of the best made films of 2010 with a great history lesson, artistic scenes, and a lesson of friendship across the social status. 

Sideways

c

I think there is something beautiful and amazing about being so oblivious to the techniques of cinema and fully understanding the deep meaning. I don’t understand how some awards are given out for a movie, I mean; I don’t fully understand the standard of aesthetics. See, this is the beauty that I am talking about, this wonder, a mixture of fear of being wrong with little bit of hope that everyone has different opinions. Sideways received tons of awards and praises, including an Oscar for the best screenplay.Honestly, the movie was deep but boring. From reading the reviews and critiques, I began to truly wonder what is the standard for a "good movie".

But Sideways really made me think about the mix of coding made by the writer, and the acting that supports the written words, which can ultimately even change the encoding of the meaning of the story for the viewers.

Sideway is such a sadistic comedy. It’s a dry comedy with a mix of life lessons intertwined with finding love, which can be defined in multiple ways. There is just constant flux that takes place in the movie, whether it be the constantly changing mood the feelings of the main character, or thoughts about love, that the only solid thing that grips the audience in place is simply wine.

So the movie is about a week of freedom for a groom-to-be with his best man. They go on a trip to go around bunch of vineyards in California  (even this part made me wonder, WHY? More about that later) But of course, the groom-to-be, Jack, wants more than just wine tasting and talking about pinot. While Jack goes crazy trying to find a girl to enjoy his last minute freedom, the main character, Miles, have way too much going on in his mind, from his ex-wife to his book that’s not getting published for years now. Along the way, he meets a wonderful lady named Maya, who he shares a similar interest in life with. Because of his sour situation in life, Miles is afraid of starting a relationship with Maya. Mile’s complicated and frustrating actions toward love and life makes the entire movie gloomy and hopeless. Actually, even Jack’s dumbfounded way of weighing love so lightly adds to the theme of the movie.

The juxtaposition of wine and life, the forced metaphor, was great. Wine ages and eventually reaches its peak, like people. How beautiful. But except for that, the whole movie is just so sour and really gives off that “deep-purple” mood like the actual wine.

You got to be in one of “those mood” to enjoy this movie. If you were looking for a comedy, DO NOT REACH FOR THIS MOVIE. It’s really one of those movies you ought to watch by yourself with a glass of dark wine, on one of those “I am just a little depressed” days. 

Tangled

Zachary Levi, the one who played Flynn Rider – the “prince charming”, said in an interview, “everything you love about Disney, you will find it in Tangled”. After watching the new highly praised animated film from Disney, I see why Levi described the movie in such a simple sentence, but this princess movie is a lot more than just beautiful blond princess being saved from a tower far away from her kingdom.

The story is a spin-off of a well-known Grimm Brothers’ fairy tale, “Rapunzel”. An evil enchantress takes baby Rapunzel away from her royal family, and raises her at a faraway tower, secluded from the world. However, Tangled only took the basic frame from the Grimm’s Brothers’ fairy tale. Rapunzel in Tangled is more adventurous and free-spirited than the original one. In addition, instead of being saved by a prince-charming, the modern Rapunzel is not saved, but rather finds herself out of the castle after negotiating with a thief with a kind heart. As the thief, Flynn Rider, guides Rapunzel to venture out into the real world, they find true love for each other. As with many Disney princess movies, the ending is predictably similar to the original with the “happily ever after”.

The new modern spin to the original “Rapunzel” is a great adjustment to all the criticism that Disney has been getting about their subliminal messages. Some people might argue that Disney princess movies are merely cartoons to entertain children and suit their imagination about castles and prince charming. However, many studies have shown that these animated movies may influence some basic ideals of the society to children. The most criticized theme of Disney has been “a helpless beautiful woman, just waiting to be saved by a strong gorgeous prince charming”. Thus, Rapunzel in the modern version was everything what a current society wants a woman to be: adventurous, strong, smart, and courageous. For example, in several dangerous situations, Rapunzel is the one to save Flynn Rider. Plus, it wasn’t Rapunzel’s pretty charms that had Flynn Rider fall in love with her, but rather it was her outgoing personality. This idea will help the little viewers to understand the meaning of true love.  Actually, there was a very positive main theme to the movie: go live your dream. The idea is based from Rapunzel’s wish to go out to the real world away from her tower, but the idea is further built with extra characters’ dreams that are not quite fitting to their thug characters. Thus, the story collaborates to show that anyone can achieve their dream when pursued with persistence. 

In addition to a great message, another reason why this movie can be loved by the adult viewers is because of the amazing music. Disney is known to have great soundtrack, from Beauty and the Beast to Mulan, and Disney has done it again with the modern Rapunzel! Music was written by Alan Menken, an eight-time Oscar composer/song writer who wrote music for The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, etc. The theme song, “I See the Light” has been nominated as Best Original Song for Golden Globes as well as the Academy Awards. Of course, adding to the wonderfully composed music was the melodious singing of the cast, Mandy Moore as Rapunzel, Zachary Levi as Flynn Rider, and Donna Murphy. Many Moore has a sweet girl-next-door voice that fitted to her role as a lovely 18 years old, Zachary Levi was a pleasant surprise with his witty prince charming voice with a right tone for the soothing song, and Donna Murphy blew the listener away with her experiences from the Broadway.

Overall, Disney movies are quickly evolving to fit the social changes of the current society while keeping some room for young viewers’ imaginations about true love. Tangled is a high quality animated film with strong story, beautiful images, high end casts, topped with sweet melodies from the most re-known soundtrack composer of this century. 

Love and Other Drugs

After watching Love and Other Drugs, I thought, maybe Love is the best drug for our lives. The movie starts in Jamie Randall’s house – played by Jake Gyllenhaal – showing how unsuccessful his life is compared to his father who is a professor at a medical school, his sister who is a doctor, and his brother who has just sold his medical computer program for 35 million dollars. Then he heads off to become a pharmaceutical rep at Ohio River Valley, where he tries to persuade doctors to prescribe Zoloft, a new competitor of Prozac – drug that supposedly makes people happy and suppress anger. There, he meets Maggie Murdock – played by Anne Hathaway – who is a 27 year old with Parkinson’s disease. What started off as “friends with benefits”, Jamie begins to truly fall in love with Maggie while she is afraid of any serious relationships because of her incurable disease. Without giving too much away, rest of the movie builds up conflicts between the two lovers, questioning the audience “how much can you give up for love?”

            The director Edward Zwick who is known for directing Blood Diamond and The Last Samurai excelled in adding humor to a deep love story. The movie uses comic relief very affectively to lighten the mood, making the movie multi-dimensional and more dynamic. The way Zwick put the setting of the movie to the late 80s set the tone for romantic movies of that time, like When Harry Met Sally, which contains realistic subtle love that makes audiences smile. In combination of these factors, Love and Other Drugs will make audiences flip-flop between different emotions.

            However, like with all the movies, Love and Other Drugs can be credited to be a well-made romantic comedy, because of the excellent cast. For both Jake Gyllenhaal and Anne Hathaway, their roles in the movie were somewhat unconventional to the characters they usually pick.  Gyllenhaal has been seen as a great actor in more of serious films like Donnie Darko or The Brokeback Mountain. To see him as a witty everyday character added another dimension to his acting career. For Anne Hathaway, who took greater variety of roles even before the movie, playing seductive yet very vulnerable character of Maggie Murdock showed the audience that she can move on to the next level, to become an actress who is never afraid to try anything adventurous.

           

Although the movie might seem like a light romantic comedy full of two characters making love at the most random moments, the movie definitely contains a lot more meaning about love than what is initially perceived. All the provocative sex scenes were there to add to Jamie’s confession, “You meet thousands of people and none of them really touch you and then you meet one person and your life is changed forever.” Seeing Jamie – the pharmaceutical representative – find his cure of his life through his true love for Maggie shows that love is as powerful but also addictive as any drug, which even comes with some unexpected side effects.

Black Swan

Directed by: Darren Aronofsky
Written by: Mark Heyman, Andres Heinz (UCLA and NYU graduate, who used to work for SNL), and John McLaughlin
Starring: Natalie Portman

This movie will leave you in awe, making you gaze at the poster while you try to soak in what has happened to last 108 minutes of your life. All the dillusions in the movie will blur the line between the reality and the made up world. The disturbing scenes will not leave you disturbed, but rather will smack you in the head for you to understand the deeper meaning within the twisted, yet simple plot.

Simply put, this psychedelic movie will give your mind a set of scrambled puzzle pieces that will confuse you and excite you for the completion at the end. When you figure out - if anyone does for sure - the complete truth and the meaning, then the exact feeling of accomplishment and immediate love for the completed meaning will arouse you to love the movie even more.

Any movie with such a high reputation from film festivals often divide the viewers with two opinions, whether the movie was up to the hype made by the professional critics, or it seems like it does not have the merits to deserve the hype. This movie, deserved the hype. It plays with people's minds, bluring the line between the reality and the made up situations by Nina (Natalie Portman). Then, the cinematography was in line with the plot, as it had a lot of close-up shots of Natalie Portman's amazing expressions sprouting from her face. The music - the music from Swan Lake - played a huge part of creating the atmosphere of the entire movie, as if the audience is watching a ballet show.  Then the colors of the movie, the white and black (originally Yin and Yang), clearly represented the good and evil. The right amount of complete computer graphic, from the talking portraits in Nina's mom's room or the sprouting of the wings. The director really pulled a lot of different elements into one coherent form, which is so difficult, yet so important.

Last but certainly not the least, the casting of Natalie Portman for Nina character was probably the best decision. I knew she was a brilliant actress, who has the most innovative ideas and pure form of love for films, but this movie really put her to the title of "the best actress of the century". The way she portrayed some of the twisted emotions of the character Nina is truly unbelievable. I specifically remember one scene where she was so excited that she got the swan queen role, and was calling her mother about the happy news. The way she portrayed the happiness with the mix of relief and confusion was simply brilliant. Also, when she was crying in front of a mirror after the first white swan part, was full of emotions that just grabbed every sense of the audience. Black Swan is simply Natalie Portman's best, and the movie's success can be credited to Natalie Portman's passion for acting.

Black Swan will become one of the classics of the 21st century. However, to understand it, will require a lot of gasping, applauding, and thinking.

Eat Pray Love

Director: Ryan Murphy
(Director/ writer of Glee, Nip/Tuck, and Running With Scissors. Thus, he is a pretty successful director in terms of writing to create new trend in media)
Writer: Ryan Murphy & Jennifer Salt (the fellow Nip/Tuck writer)
Based on the book by: Elizabeth Gilbert
Starring: Julia Roberts as Liz Gilbert

Before any type of a review about the movie, isn't the title itself just beautiful? Those three things - done right, of course - are truly the most magnificient words that make people happy. When I heard about the movie, and the book of course, I just fell in love with the phrase first. However, until you watch the movie, you have no idea what the phrase actually means.

Okay, so I feel a little guilty that I didn't read the book. Usually, I am not the type of a person to have read the book first, and anxiously wait for the movie to come out. I am one of those people who lack the patience to read the entire book, so end up watching the movie instead. But, at least I read the book later, if I liked the movie. I know, this is probably the worst idea ever for those literature folks, but to defend those people like me out there, movies are just visually and audibly stimulating; it stays me awake....

Anyway, enough of the book talk. Eat Pray Love goes through a journey of a mid-aged woman who is just sick and tired of her life, especially her relationship. So she takes a year off of her schedule to just leave, and find little pieces of herself at three different countries: Italy, India, and Bali. At each location, she learns how to truly enjoy each things, to eat, to pray, and to love. It's really the way that each of these are beautifully portrayed in each country. I really liked the "how to enjoy eating" part. The idea was all about, eat to enjoy the taste and setting (usually with loved ones or even enjoying a quiet time alone). Don't think about what will happen after eating this piece of pizza, just enjoy it and be happy, because when you are content, then your body is content. period.

There was this beautiful phrase in the movie: il dolce far niente! (the sweetness of doing nothing!)
I love that phrae! Sometimes we are so busy with work or thinking about work, that there is no time to just sit on a nice compfy sofa with a cup of tea and just not think about anything. We equate doing nothing with being lazy, and we try to substitute relaxing with more activities, but sweetness of doing nothing means to literally do nothing and to just sit and not think. Literally, take a break, starting with your mind first.

Also, for those who loves to travel, this movie will take you to the most beautiful places, and the most authentic places of those three countries. The cinematography is wonderful. One another thing that I really liked was that each country was not overly beautified. I think audience these days are open enough that they want to see the real side, poverty-striken side of each country. And, people know that those places are so rich with their own unique culture than the westernized city parts. For a commercialized movie like this one to pick up on those beauty is quite an improvement for the movie industry.

The true beauty of the film ultimately is that this is a true story. I am sure that all the people these days only dream about taking a year off to just travel. It's a dream that keeps everyone alive and working/studying relantlessly. For someone to have actually gone through such a wonderful experience, and to have come up with such a beautiful lesson, that's something that everyone dreams of doing, or even should dream of doing.

I've been telling few of my close friends to watch this movie when their life seems like it's just stuck in a nasty stalemate. Eat Pray Love will make anyone want to just try to enjoy life, starting with the most basic: to eat, to pray, and to love.

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.