Bonus 5- The Olympics: Why it's important?

The truth is, I never question myself why Olympics are the essential sports in real life and I’m not much of a sports person, plus I don’t watch any sports shows such as baseball, basketball, football, or any other sports. As a kid, I’ve always found these Olympic shows entertaining, probably is because you get to see more professional athletes who got trained well and they’ve been working extremely hard when they wanted to be part of the Olympic program. I remember watching the skating part, and I’ve been questioning myself of how skating could be part of sports. Plus, there were other different kinds of unusual games that I don’t know. According to Why are Olympics important? They state, “However sports have been a source of entertainment with a wide range of followers through the ages, and that's why we had Ancient Olympics from as long as 776 BC. Sports have been a test of man's physical prowess, setting limits and conquering them”. It means sports helps men build up strength and power to achieve their confidence. It was before they allow women to get involved in games.  

When I was in middle school, I learn that Olympic started in Ancient Greek where events were mainly athletic, but also included combat and chariot racing. But they were not the same as the Olympics we have today. The things I like about Olympic is you could get to see athletes coming from all over the world from Europe to Africa to Asia to South America and the athletes from the Caribbean.

I would say Olympics are the most important sports in the world because events that have that type of longevity are culturally significant traditions with timelines that predate most modern nations. They want to see countries competing for disputes militarily, economically, or socially. All around the world fights against one another on the same stage. The whole competing athletes and their teams forming a bond that often lasts a lifetime, and the audience see them to have a chance to learn about other cultures, as many profiles aired about the host city or area during the game.

Olympic was about the amount of pride winning a specific Olympic event brings to one’s country that considers the most nations on our planet are representative. This honor proves that one's country gets distinguished in any particular game or activity, and it is for these reasons why the Olympics are essential in our global culture and society. According to Why are Olympic Games important for participating nations? They state, “Olympics have come to signify a stage for political statements.” It means if a country performs excellently at the Olympics, it's an assertion of capability to achievement on a global stage.

In my opinion, Olympic wasn’t about sports; it’s about how every country with international athletes wanting to prove themselves that they can make their country proud. It’s like a competition to see which country has the most active people on the planet.    

Post 2, Group B "Fall of the House of Usher" by Dianesa Sanon

The Fall of the House of Usher written by Edgar Allen Poe is a short story that starts off with the narrator going to visit his old friend who is expecting the death of his twin sister. Upon arriving the mansion the narrator describes it as a "mere house" with a "simple landscape" and goes on about how the ambience of the house chills him to his bones. Alongside the house, which is really important later, is a fissure crack that creeps up the siding and the ground as well. Within the house is Roderick Usher who is beside himself with anxiety due to superstitious thought. The heavy curtains are drawn, the rooms are poorly lit and somewhere inside the mansion is Roderick's twin sister who was dying a slow death. The master of the Usher Mansion, in his haste, lays to rest his sister, Madeline, down to rest because her pallor had made it seem as if she had passed. Plot-twist! She wasn't dead yet. She ends up coming up out of her burial place, causes the narrator and Roderick to essentially poop themselves in terror and she essentially takes her brother to death along with her. The house is swallowed into a fissure in the ground that seals once the mansion goes under.



The short story encompasses the fear of anxiety of looming death of a physical life and a more importantly, a name."Roderick's ambivalence toward death... his individual consciousness fears." (Stahlberg) The narrator makes it a point that the remaining siblings are the last of the Ushers. Madeline falls sick and Roderick is pacing around making himself sick when he realizes that her days are numbered and he'll be the only one left. The narrator stays with his friend after being called out there. Roderick Usher is so scared to be alone after having to live in the same house with what he believed to be the corpse of his sister was really wracking his nerves. The narrator talks about how his friend muttered to himself mournfully "I feel that the period will sooner or later arrive when I must abandon life and reason together, in some struggle with the grim phantasm, FEAR." (Poe, Fall of the House of Usher) Poe smartly foreshadows the death of Roderick without letting on exactly how it will take place.

Before Madeline seemingly raises up from the dead to take her brother into death with her the suspense of her coming is present from her ghoulish figure in the doorway to her pounding on the door that was sealed to keep her from leaving her death room. In Fall of the Shouse of Usher, Poe uses words to build the suspense from the very beginning when he describes the outside and inside of the Usher's home caused the narrator "an utter depression of soul" which could not be "compared to no earthly sensation." (Poe, Fall of the House of Usher)
Again Madeline represents death when she raises from the dead to find her brother who had prematurely buried her. To Roderick, all of his anxious ponderings since his sister fell ill, all the pacing and staring into nothingness, all of the "FEAR" he feared would kill him was symbolized through his sister literally taking him to hell with her.

Coincidentally, maybe not- we're discussing Edgar Allan Poe here, the two siblings were the last of the Ushers so that with there death there really is a fall of the house of Usher- hence the name. At the end of the story, the mansion is swallowed up into a hole in the ground after crumbling into nothing. If you aren't careful enough to catch the double meaning and if you just read without understanding you'll miss that the physical crumbling to the ground of the house of Usher isn't all there is to it. Roderick Usher's family previously had all fallen sick with some disease that caused their deaths and when things boiled down to just him and his sister. For the narrator, the suspense began when he arrived at his friend's home but for Roderick Usher, it began with the first death of an Usher that dominoed the last two standing. With his sister's death, he was sure he would follow soon after. The crack on the side of the mansion is symbolic of the near crumbling of the foundation and in the end, the mansion is split by that fissure and the ground opens up by it as well to swallow up the remaining Ushers.







References
Stahlberg, L. (1981). The Source of Usher's Fear. Interpretations: A Journal Of Ideas, Analysis, And Criticism, 13(1), 10-17

Post 2, Group B - Deadly Affairs; The Boy Next Door by Kendra ZeMenye

The Boy Next Door is a 2015 erotic thriller film that tells a story of an older woman name Claire Peterson played by Jennifer Lopez separated from her unfaithful husband who has been cheating on her when he was caught sleeping with his secretary in his office. She falls for a 19-year old boy named Noah played by Ryan Guzman who moved next door and became friends with her son Kevin, but by the time Claire had an affair with a younger man, it soon turned into a dangerous game that Claire had to face as her biggest mistake. I found the movie exciting but scary at the same time because it was an amusing experience when you are attracted to somebody who caught your attention, and you feel the temptation rising your soul but the person you like, turns out to be a complete psychopath. Nowadays it’s about falling for someone based on their looks, their charm, and their body. The director Rob Cohen wanted to make a film in both romance and thriller because he wanted to show the audience, including girls, that love could do all kinds of crazy things when it comes to sexual intention. 

Rob Cohen wanted to create a film mixed with romance and thriller that could make the audience look terrified and shocked. He turns a feminine character-driven dramatic story into a roller-coaster ride of a movie that’s equal parts scary, disturbing, exciting and erotic in his new psychological thriller. He wanted to film an insane guy that leads to regular romance, to deadly affairs because there are girls out there who aren’t aware of that not all guys have the same level of love. 

When I watched the movie, it makes me feel like I want to go back into the old-fashioned romance, where guys are buying girls some flowers, candy, jewelry, and writing a love poem, and love letters. I miss those old times when guys take their girls out to eat, taking them to a theater, or another romance place. It’s even better than a psycho man taking you out of force, and that compares to Noah because he was on a mission to make Claire his and he doesn’t care what he does, he will do anything to keep her. During the film, you see movie scenes full of violence, the temptation that you cannot let it go, and doing what you’re doing that wasn’t right which leads you into deep trouble. Of course, it’s tough to go back after what you’ve done. Deadly affairs could be the worst mistake you would ever make, and that’s what happens when you play with fire until you burn down to the ground.  

I find it very disgusting when somebody's spouse has been cheating. I mean, what happened to those old times when spouses loved each other so much and staying faithful for so long until they grew old and died? Let's compare to Claire. She had a cheating husband, and she was feeling heartbroken. Ever since she got separated from her husband, she was feeling vulnerable, insecure, and she’s having trust issues. When she meets a younger man name, Noah, he made her feel desire, happy, joyful, excited, and alive until one day; she ends up seeing his true colors. It turns out Noah can be a psychotic killer or a criminal. Sleeping around with a crazy person, that could lead to deadly affairs. 

According to At Home with Jennifer Lopez, Jennifer states, “Honesty is essential. I am looking for someone who is like-minded and very respectful, conscious of someone else’s feelings and love themselves enough to have a healthy relationship; someone who will allow me to be myself 100 percent completely and will love me for that person” (46). It means it’s essential to have a healthy relationship with someone who loves and accepts you for who you are not because of your looks and body. Having a relationship with someone such as Noah who is a control freak and has a very sick-twisted mind is not healthy, and it can have negative consequences as Claire learns in the movie.

The scene that terrifies me was the last scene where Noah was forcing Claire to make her choice whether she wants to live with him or dies with her family, but she wants nothing from him. Noah was so pissed off and angry that he told Claire that if he can’t have her, no one will. So he ends up pouring kerosene around the barn, causing it to ignite in flames but Claire pulls a lever that drops an engine on Noah’s head, killing him. This scene is an example of how you cannot force somebody to love you, and those deadly affairs could make you pay the price for your action. 

Work Cited

Leonard, Elizabeth. "At Home with Jennifer Lopez. (Cover Story)." People, vol. 83, no. 5, 02 Feb. 2015, p. 46. EBSCOhost, proxy.library.umkc.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=f5h&AN=100559426&site=ehost-live&scope=site.

Post 2, Group B - Big Justifications for Global Policing by JJ Leath

           In class, we have discussed how historical context can be used to elucidate underlying meanings within film. Insignificant, silly movies can be significant when messages and context are considered. In the 80s, Kurt Russell starred in the movie Big Trouble in Little China. Is it ridiculous? Yes. A villain dies by breathing so intensely that he literally blows up. Is it a little racist? For sure. The Chinese character is amazing at Kung Fu, but this is never actually addressed and is just assumed by the virtue of his Asian heritage. In spite of all of this, Big Trouble in Little China makes important commentary on race relations, the use of stereotypes, and how America viewed its role and how it wanted its role portrayed in interfering with Asian countries who were under communist rule. If you take the main character, a white over-the-road-trucker named Jack Burton, and ask “why did he get mixed up with all that big trouble in Little China?”, you can find the answer for “why did America get mixed up in global problems that had nothing to do with them?”

            So, as a concerned citizen, you ask yourself: why should America get involved in global problems that aren’t our problem? Well, Big Trouble in Little China is here to tell you. First, you are going to get paid, and you are going to be a hero. This movie, like the world, revolves around money and respect. The main driver of this movie is debt, both abstract and literal. One of the first lines in the movie is “Leave Jack Burton alone, we are forever in his debt!” This is not a monetary debt, but rather one of gratitude. Further, the only reason Jack gets mixed up in all that trouble going on in Little China is because he is trying to collect a debt owed to him that he won in a night of gambling. In the end, after Jack helps save Little China, Jack is paid three times what he was owed for the gambling debt because “he earned it.” Why did he earn it? Because of his heroism in a situation that really wasn’t his problem. It all seems silly, but consider that this movie was made roughly 10 years after the Vietnam War ended. America was trying to spread freedom, and freedom comes with capitalism. Communism was (and still is) huge in Asia. But, the more capitalist these countries become, the more opportunity there is for foreign investment. This isn’t just theory, this is a fact. America gets rich when other countries become more capitalistic. Just consider the billions that are being made here in The States as China becomes more capitalistic. So, if we get involved, we get rich. We are speaking paper, so we are speaking America’s language. But what about the morality of it all?

            Big Trouble in Little China will conveniently explain the morality of this intervention as well! It really is the Swiss Army Knife of movies explaining global intervention. We should get involved because there are people suffering from lack of freedom, and it is our duty to free them. Jack is a hero in this movie. He frees captives locked in the underbelly of Little China and he destroys an ancient evil. He was there for the money, but he stayed because it was his duty to help those who couldn’t help themselves. This is an interesting concept, because if you can convince the American people that there are good people who are being oppressed, they will probably support the intervention. But, why should the American people care about people who live across the planet? Further, America doesn’t have the best history with racism, so how can you convince Americans to look past their racist tendencies? Big Trouble in Little China tries to do this by using comedy to break down stereotypes and racial barriers.

            Racial comedy is used extensively in this film. Every character is reduced to a caricature of racial stereotypes, and this includes the white character. Jack is a loud-mouthed moron. He is dressed like a redneck, and he drives a semi-truck that has a naked woman decal on the grill. Chinese culture is mystified extensively, and Asian women are highly sexualized. Every Asian character is a master of martial arts. Many Asian characters are “sorcerers.” Both Chinese and American culture is made fun of. While making fun of cultures and race seems wrong and strange, it is actually a documented way to bring people of different races together. In “Naturalizing Racial Differences Through Comedy: Asian, Black, and White Views on Racial Stereotypes in Rush Hour 2,” it is stated that in Rush Hour 2 “racial jokes in film cross color lines, creating an impression that all races are subject to stereotypes.”  In other words, since all races are made fun of in Rush Hour 2, it doesn’t come across as offensive, and it causes everyone to take themselves less seriously. It is theorized that this causes racial barriers to be broken down as everyone’s guard is let down. In Big Trouble in Little Trouble, both white and Asian characters are made fun of. The white character is absolutely ridiculous, but if it weren’t for this portrayal of the white character, this movie would probably be extremely offensive. By playing on both Asian and white stereotypes, the film tries to get you to see past racial differences. While making fun of racial stereotypes to move past stereotypes seems counter-intuitive, I think it honestly makes sense. The only way to get through stereotypes is to address them, comment on how ridiculous the stereotypes are, and then move on.  Big Trouble in Little China addresses stereotypes about race with comedy, and then throughout the movie uses common goals between characters of different races to get the audience to look past race. And, once the audience looks past race, it becomes obvious that it is our duty to help the Asian community.

            So, back to the original question: why should we get involved in global conflicts that have really nothing to do with us? It is easy, just consult Big Trouble in Little China. Everyone deserves freedom and dignity. Even though those being oppressed look and act different than us, they are still humans, and it is our duty to help them. And, if the moral call to help the less fortunate isn’t enough for you, if we help, we are going to get paid big time. While this all seems silly (mostly because this is a silly movie), the debate whether America should interfere globally remains an important issue to this date, and it is a question that we all must address as citizens.

Citations:

Park, Ji Hoon et al. "Naturalizing Racial Differences Through Comedy: Asian Black, and White
        Views on Racial Stereotypes in Rush Hour 2" Wiley Online Library, Journal of Communication,
        10 Mar. 2006, onlinelibrary.wiley.com.proxy.library.umkc.edu/doi/

Group B, Post 2, Lolita: "light of my life, fire on my loins. My sin, my soul" by Kathleen Paxtor

Lolita is about a man, in his 40’s, named Humbert and 12 year old Delores (or Lo) and their intimate affair with each other. Just by the first sentence it is quite easy to judge that this book is immediately wrong and sick, and I too was once quick to judge but it is so much more than that, Lolita opens a pathway to question love, life, and fate.

In the beginning of the book/movie a memoir is sent to John Ray titled “Lolita”, this came from Humbert who had recently died in prison. The memoir explains all of Humbert’s losses, experiences and regrets. He explains that ever since his childhood love died, Annabel, little girls infatuated him. One day he is looking for a place to stay when he stumbles upon the house of Charlotte (Lo’s mom) and Delores. He quickly is possessed by his need for being around Lo that he marries Charlotte just to be near Lo. One day Charlotte finds out the intention behind Humbert and storms off angry and gets run over by a car; just like that Humbert and Lo are finally together. Humbert takes Lo far away and they become very intimate (sexually and emotionally); their relationship develops as what you could say is a dominant and submissive. In this case Lo became the dominant because she realized the powers she had over Humbert, she knew that whenever she needed something Humbert would give in. After a while passes, Lo runaway with another older gentlemen named Quilty who insists she does child pornography but Lo refuses. Many years later after Humbert searched for Lo years and years he receives a letter from her saying she is pregnant and need money. Humbert drops everything and goes to find her. He sees Lo (now about 17) pregnant and now married, he begs her to come back with him but she says no. Humbert gives her all his money and goes to find Quilty and kills him. Humbert ends up in jail and dies there from heart failure, while Lo dies during childbirth; that is how the book ends, no happy ending, no recovery, no salvation, just death and harsh real life.

Like I had previously said if anyone else had read/hear the summary with no context it could be perceived as being just sick and in a way it is, but in another way it is beautiful (not the act of pedophilia) but the meaning behind the way Lo’s life developed. As a firm believer that everything happens for a reason, I never truly understood what that reason was for everything that happened to Lo. When I first read the book my mind was all over the place, I wanted to hate Humbert yet I his persuasive writing made me think of him as not a pedophile but as a regular love driven guy. In the film/book, Lo is perceived as being “unvirginal long before Humbert came upon the scene, so knowing, so jaded, so unchildlike” (Vickers). This is not to say that Humbert had every right to do what he did because he didn’t, but to him every little thing Lo did just made him weaker and relentless to have her. For a teenage child, Lo lived an unexpected life, from being orphaned, kidnapped, raped, and sexualized, to just end up dead sounds horrid but unfortunately that is every day life for some. I think the meaning behind Lolita is to show the normalness of two people living their lives (in a way that we may not agree with) just to end up the same like all us, dead. It was an emotional, confusing rollercoaster but and the end of the day you realize that “the desperate truth of Lolita’s story is not the rape of a twelve-year-old by a dirty old man, but the confiscation of one individual’s life by another. Although we cannot know what Lolita’s life might have been like had Humbert not hijacked it, “the novel, the finished work, is hopeful, beautiful even, a defense not just of beauty but of life, ordinary everyday life, all the normal pleasures that Lolita, was deprived of” (Vickers). And much like Lo felt conflicted with the way her life took a turn, I felt conflicted with her life and how it compared to mine.

*Side Note: If you watch ever watch the movie or (especially) read the book I thought it was interesting how Nabokov made Humbert so literate and beautifully spoken. His writing was poetic yet the acts he wrote about were not. 

References:

Vickers, Graham. Chasing Lolita : How Popular Culture Corrupted Nabokov's Little Girl All Over Again, Chicago Review Press, 2008. ProQuest Ebook Central,

Post 2, Group B - Adolf how it works by Jacob Bothell

             Recently I had the amazing opportunity to work with a man named Pip Utton. He is a ‘fringe’ actor that tours around the world doing productions that involve impersonating a historical figure. When he visited Kansas City at the Metropolitan Ensemble Theater under the Central Standard Theater Company he performed three different pieces: ‘Maggie,’ ‘Bacon,’ and ‘Adolf.’ The last of these productions was not only awe inspiring and beautiful, because of his talent, but also quite terrifying.

The show opens with Pip dressed as Adolf Hitler speaking to the ‘higher ups’ of the German government telling them that the invasion of the Ally powers is imminent and they should probably go into hiding so they can continue their work elsewhere. The next portion Hitler is speaking to the ‘lay man’ of Germany informing them of the invasion and telling them that they should stick together but we understand if you cannot. Then the play takes on an odd turn; Pip takes off his costume (wig, moustache, and jacket); gets a beer from a plant, someone who he put there to perform the task, in the audience; acquires a cigarette from me; and has the tech, me, turn off the light on the Nazi banner. Aside from the audience being very confused, trying to determine if the show is over or not, they are put into a state of comfort with Pip being himself. At this point Pip begins to talk about current affairs and politics and the ‘current state of things.’ From my perspective I see the script say “IMPROMPTU” and the next line saying “Kill the Jews, kill the blacks […]” and I have no idea how he is going to get to that nor what its purpose in the production is… His point is to show that the confusion/comfort paradigm that the audience is now experiencing is much like Germany was feeling in the 1930’s and the current events/fears of the time are somewhat similar (unknown future, seemingly poor living, unhappiness with current government) and they can be bent and shaped, very easily, into the same thoughts as Hitler much to the horror of the watching audience.

I think this play is an interesting look from multiple perspectives but the one of manipulation and how can it be achieved to such extreme ends. I think a different view from the conventional of Hitler’s rise to power is in order first. It is enumerated by Graham Darby in “Hitler’s Rise and Weimar’s Demise” that the government of Germany at the time, the Weimar Republic, was not really in danger of collapse at the point of the Nazi ‘revolution’ though it was vulnerable and that the publications of the Nazis had little to do with their rise. Their rise according to Darby, and I agree with this, is that Hitler was telling people what they wanted to hear but more than that they were not a part of the Republic that the public felt had failed them on multiple occasions. And to tie this to Pip’s production he did not really do anything extraordinary, other than impromptu the shit out the performance, but he took the current thoughts and told people that he wanted to do something and he was going to do something that was NOT what was currently being done. And that seems to be the interesting way that he was able to manipulate the entire audience. And here in lies the HOROR of the situation. From the infiniteness of things that can be done about a situation an extremist must simply not be what the current course of action is…

Darby, Graham. "Hitler's Rise and Weimar's Demise." History Review, no. 67, Sept. 2010, pp. 42-48. EBSCOhost, proxy.library.umkc.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=53995851&site=ehost-live&scope=site.

Post 2, Group B - The Dangerous Politics of Isolationism; Black Panther by Kenneth Butcher

I had the opportunity to watch Black Panther over the weekend and since it was still pretty fresh on my mind I figured I could use this opportunity to talk about the films portrayal of Wakanda. Wakanda is a fictional city in Africa in the film that boasts a technological prowess and innovation far beyond and of those in any country in the world today because of it's monopoly on a substance called vibranium. Which is an alien metal, with radioactive properties that allow it to absorb kinetic energy on impact. The story of Blank Panther sees a young T'Challa taking the position of king of Wakanda in the wake of his father's passing in Captain America Civil war due to a terrorist attack and trying to fend of the "colonizers" (*the films terms) from trying to steal the vibranium their country has to do with what they want (which in this case is to create powerful weapons). The main colonizers of which are Ulysses Klaue a black market arms dealer and  N'Jadaka / Erik "Killmonger" Stevens son of T'Challa's, Father's, brother and a U.S. black-ops soldier who seeks to overthrow T'Challa for the express purpose of arming black people all over the world with vibrabium weapons so they can stand up to their oppressors. What I want to focus on is how the city of Wakanda's politics are portrayed (and are not portrayed a some instances) And how those politics lead to the creation of people like Killmonger and Klaue. As well as how their political stances and social framework are bad for a countries overall longevity.

First of all I would like to establish that Wakanda is a Afro-Centric, Ethno-State; which is a political unit that is populated by and run in the interest of an ethnic group. In this case the group is the entire country of Wakanda and the ethnic group is the Africans whom reside their. Wakanda is also the only place in the world with access to vibranium, the most valuable mineral in the world. This alone puts them in a very interesting situation especially in the increasingly globalist world of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Because they are the only ones who have access to a material that has a variable cornucopia of uses they facilitate the creation of an even greater market demand for a product that would have been in high demand even if it weren't walled off exclusively by one country. And If there's anything that history teaches us time and time again (both in the real world and in the MCU) it's: Limiting access to a highly sought after resource almost ensures that less that reputable points of contact for access to that resource will increase because there would be a huge market for it. Limiting access to a sought after resource doesn't diminish the demand for that resource generally as much as it just makes the acquisition of that resource require more work. Which in turn allows people who are in the business of acquiring that resource to up the cost the consumers have to pay for the resource to see any sort of substantial return because the cot of accusation goes up. This is how and why black markets spring up and see a huge clientele base in both the real world and the world of Black Panther. The affects of this can be particularly greater in capitalistic or globalized nations. In the film these are the conditions that lead to creation of someone like Ulysses Klaue who sees a small fortune to be made in the business of acquiring and selling the most valuable material in the world (vibranium) even though it poses a huge personal risk because it involves stealing from the most technological advanced countries in the world. Real world equivalents of this are the gangs and speakeasy's that popped up during the Prohibition era in the 1920s and the nuclear arms black market the rose to prominence after the first Vietnam war. This is one example of how having an isolationist mentality when it comes to sought after resources can be potentially damaging to your country. Or in this case was actually damaging to Wakanda because it directly resulted millions in property damage and collateral as a result of T'Challa and his subordinates trying to get their vibranium off of the black market. A cost I can only assume Wakanda is stuck in a perpetual loop of having to constantly pay because of this practice, that I can't imagine being good for their economy.

The second example I want to look at is a little bit more subjective and that's Wakanda's social hierarchy and the rules that govern it. Namely their reliance on the primitive "might is right" philosophies when it comes to choosing a king/ someone to uphold the moniker of "Black Panther". And how its is so heavily contradicted by the fact that their is oligarchy in place. I think this creates a weird social dissonance because what it implies is that one can become king if they best the old king in combat but they are initiated as king to a royal council of T'Challa's relatives. It helps to foster a perception of a leadership group that is only self contained and interested, particularly when they aren't seeing the specific needs of their people. Having a sort of royal family in charge almost insures that in the wake of any socio economic crisis the blame will fall on the entire house of leadership and allegations of inner family conspirators will be brought to the table. Which is why I think T'Challa's friend W'Kabi is so quick to side with Killmonger after he "kills" T'Challa and takes over as king after Killmonger brings him the body of the man who killed his parents, Klaue. This is purely speculator but I think communication with the outside world would lead to them getting more ideas on how to run their governmental hierarchy in a way that doesn't create social dissonance or facility an almost arbitrary form of dissent so easily.

Looking at the broader social impact the film has had in our society and amoungst black Americans specifically; I'm reminded of a quote I read in Elizabeth Reich's essay entitled A Broader Nationalism: Reconstructing Memory, National Narratives and Spectatorship in World War II Black Audience propaganda. Which was: "Along with these mainstream movies, the government also called for propaganda films celebrating black soldiers. The result was three films (two of which were produced outside of Hollywood) developed through intensive collaboration between black and white artists and marketed solely to black audiences. These unusual films – Marching On! (Spencer Williams, 1943), We’ve Come a Long, Long Way (Jack Goldberg, 1943) and The Negro Soldier (Stuart Heisler, 1944) – directly addressed black anxieties about the war by employing the figure of the black soldier to deliver a pro-war message and redress the absence of black representation in nationalist narratives. As propaganda films, aiming to persuade a particular historical demographic, the films demonstrate powerfully how black artists imagined black viewing audiences during World War II, and how they used the figure of the black soldier to reach the minds of black America." (Reich 2) I believe were starting to see some remnants of that in today society except instead of soldiers it's happening with the Black/African Diaspora and Black identity politics. And Black Panther's meta narrative about isolationism is one of the factors that is playing into it.

Source: 

A broader nationalism: reconstructing memory, national narratives and spectatorship in World War II black audience propaganda

Elizabeth Reich

Screen, Volume 54, Issue 2, 1 June 2013, Pages 174–193,https://doi.org/10.1093/screen/hjt001

Published:

 

01 June 2013

Post 2, Group B - Building Suspense From Minute One, by Jared Islas

Jurassic Park is a 1993 film that tells the story of an amusement park filled with genetically engineered dinosaur clones. There’s blood, guns and giant dinosaurs eating men in one bite. The movie is dark, it’s quiet, but loud at the same time. It’s set on a remote island that resembles a jungle that also happens to be at the heart of a tropical storm. The characters scream and the dinosaurs roar. Despite all of these horror film tropes, Jurassic Park is not considered a horror film but rather a sci-fi adventure film.

The director, Stephen Spielberg relies heavily on building suspense as well as these common horror tropes to heighten his audience’s fear. All of this comes together to create thrilling experiences throughout the film’s second half. In my opinion, the most recognizable scene from the film (and maybe the entire franchise) shows this technique off the best. This of course the T-Rex attack scene.

Interestingly enough, Spielberg is building up to this scene from the beginning of the movie as it is the first scene in which the dinosaur vs. human action that audiences had been waiting for comes into play. So far up until this point in the movie, there have been no clear sight of dinosaurs except for a sick herbivorous Triceratops lying on the ground (which comes 50 minutes into the film). The T-Rex attack is also one of the most prolonged sequences in the film. Spielberg takes at least ten minutes from start to finish.

The scene’s immediate build up begins when the main characters, including two young children, board self-driving tour vehicles that will drive around the park’s grounds showing them different dinosaurs. Tension begins to rise when nothing is being spotted. During a quick scene back at the park’s command center, the audience learns the impending tropical storm is nearing and the park’s security system has been disabled by a man working to steal genetic data from the park. 

When we cut back to the tour vehicles, it has become night, began down pouring and the cars have come to a stop. Three men, and two children have been stranded in their tour vehicles in the middle of a dinosaur infested jungle.

The young girl says to her brother, “Don’t scare me,” not knowing that what’s about to come next will be so much worse. A full hour and two minutes into the movie, loud booming steps are heard, glasses of water in the cars begin to ripple, and a goat that was placed into the pen in order to attract dinosaurs goes mysteriously missing. 

A minute later, the goat’s bloody severed leg drops from the sky onto one of the cars and the T-Rex appears. Another minute later, the T-Rex tears out of its pen and onto the path where the parked cars are, before letting out a few loud roars. These roars break the scene’s eery silence and constant sound of raindrops in a way to let the audience feel just as terrified as the characters in the car. 

When the T-Rex comes face to face with the two children who are alone in their car and roars once more, the kids scream. The T-Rex then demolishes the car trying to get to them. Spielberg carries this portion of the scene out for a good minute or so before Alan (a man in the other car), comes to the rescue and attracts the dinosaur away from the kids. I think that all of this comes together to really emphasize the fear that the two kids and even the adults in the scene are facing. 

In Robert Baird’s article, Animalizing Jurassic Park’s Dinosaurs: Blockbuster Schemata and Cross-Cultural Cognition in the Threat Scene, he states that “…threatening dinosaurs were explicitly depicted for only 8 minutes and 36 seconds, while they were offscreen or significantly occluded through masking or metonymy for 26 minutes and 48 seconds” (Baird 95). This statistic is crazy to me. In a two-hour movie about a dinosaur amusement park gone wrong, threatening dinosaurs are only on screen for eight and a half minutes? Spielberg was able to make this work exceptionally well by using suspense from the start of the movie and then “cashing it in” when the dinosaurs finally arrive on screen. The shock and fear of these moments is therefore extremely complex, fun and well deserved.

Works Cited

Baird, Hobart. "Animalizing Jurassic Park's Dinosaurs: Blockbuster Schemata and Cross-Cultural Cognition in the Threat Scene." Cinema Journal, vol. 37, no. 4, Summer98, p.82. EBSCOhost, proxy.library.umkc.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=f3h&AN=1060017&site=ehost-live&scope=site.

Culture Appropriation, Montaya McCloud Bonus 4

Culture Appropriation is a big discussion in America within this 21st century. There is always a movie, song, TV show, or book being created that shows how ignorant we are to various cultures. There is a reoccurring controversy over if things are representing culture appropriation or representing culture appreciation. In society, the media has a big influence on culture appropriation. As stated by Amandla Stenberg “What would America be like if we loved black people as much as we love black culture?”.

 For instance, A woman named Martina big, A Germen woman decided that she was tired of being white and that she wanted to turn herself black. Martina decided to take supplements that darkened her skin, lip implants, a nose job, multiple lipo procedures and a coarse weave. After, seeing Martina I was really shocked by the things that she was saying and her outlook on the African American culture. My mind became blown that in her eyes she believed that she could be black by having bigger lips, a wider nose, darker skin, and weave. I did not think it was appropriated for Martina to do such a thing with the reasoning’s she had behind it. Martina believed that by changing simple things about her outer appearance that it was appropriate to publicize herself as another race.  Martina, was not showing culture appreciation by doing these things, because none of these defined being black. None of the routes Martina decided to take in order to become “Black”, Honored or symbolized the African American, or African culture in a good way. There shouldn’t even had been a way for Martina to decide to change herself in such a Ludacris way and it be legal.   

In the African American culture there are different shade, tones, and body forms. The changes that Martina decided to make fulfilled all the stereotypes about African americans. Martina only took from the African American culture the things that are idolized within the Media. In the media, Martina was interviewed several times, publicized, and gained a lot of attention. The reaction the world had to her changes shows that we have a long way to go. The transformed glamour model will never be able to understand the injustices African Americans go through that are actually born the way that she paid to become. She will never understand the culture, back ground, or history of the culture. As Gerald Sider Stated, “We can have no significant understanding of any culture unless we also know the silences that were intentionally created and guaranteed along with it”. It is very important that there is a understanding that certain cultures are the minority’s and not the majority and certain precautions should be taken before people make such drastic decisions like Martina big.                         Martina is not the only one to blame, there are several issues where several cultures are appropriated and there is no one problem that is bigger, or more important than the other. We as a whole need to become more educated and more sensitive to appreciating cultures that contain ritual, religions, and practices that are different from our own.