Post 4, Group B - The Look and Feel of Ready Player One, by Jared Islas

Over spring break, I went to see Ready Player One with my dad. I hadn’t heard really heard much about the film but my dad was a big fan of the book (he said he has read it multiple times). The movie is about a future where a VR-like technology captures the mind of the entire population. In Ready Player One, this comes in the form of a virtual reality world called The Oasis. The main character of the movie, Wade Watts, explains that, “People come to The Oasis for all the things they can do, but they stay for all the things they can be.” When in The Oasis, people can customize their avatar to be anything they want, any gender, any body form, any character, etc. When I was watching the movie, I found it a bit jarring of how different the in-game scenes (which were all CGI) were compared to the real world scenes (which were live action). They used two completely different styles and color pallets. This was until a scene in the middle of the movie, that this post will dive into, combined these two dueling styles in a meaningful and simple way.

Much of the beginning of the film follows Wade (as his in-game avatar Parzival), and his in-game friends Aech, Artemis, Sho and Daito trying to beat other players in the game at a challenge to find an “easter egg” left by the game’s creator. The group of friends, led by Wade are successful, and begin becoming popular among other players but also begin to be targeted by a private company who sends out armies of players into The Oasis to be the first to find the easter egg which grants the winner exclusive ownership over the entire Oasis.

Wade begins falling for Artemis due to the fact that they share similar interests and the desire to be the first to find the easter egg. This happens despite the fact that they have never met in real life and all Wade knows of her is her avatar. When Wade tells Artemis about his feelings in-game, she expresses her dismay explaining that he does not know her at all and he’s only falling in love with the idea of her, or only what she wants him to see/know.

Eventually after some more twists and turns, Wade finally meets Artemis (whose real name is Samantha) in the real world. This was one of my favorite parts of the movie because the look and feel of the scene is vastly different than anything from the film up to this point. Like I said, the majority of the beginning of the film was seen from the perspective of the in-game characters in The Oasis, so everything was bright, colorful, flashy, etc (as seen in the trailer above). Conversely, the live action portions of the film up to this point mostly followed Wade in and around the stacks (where the people live in this future) and the back of a van where he goes online to The Oasis. Both of these settings (pictured below) have a dark, dirty, industrial like feel to them.

Both of these look and feel completely different than what this scene looks and feels like. In the scene, Wade and Samantha are sitting on the top of a rooftop surrounded by greenery. The picture below is the best I can find of the scene, but you can still see the contrast between the other live-action scenes and the animated scenes. I think Steven Spielberg, the director of the movie might have chose to have this scene blend the two color palettes of the film together to depict the meeting of in-game friends in the real world.  

This scene is also incredibly slow, but in a good way. Compared to other action packed portions of the film, the scene focuses on the two characters and their conversation about their relationship and The Oasis. Another thing that is different about this scene compared to the rest of the movie was the absence of a score. The scene was silent and calm. Again, I think Spielberg did this to express how everyone in this world is so caught up in The Oasis, that they never just take a minute to live in the moment. 

It is with this scene that Wade’s opinion on The Oasis changes, with the help of Samantha. Rather than seeing it as a fun game where everyone spends every waking moment of their life doing anything they want, he begins to see that there is things, and people, in the real world that are worth experiencing. This sentiment is best described by Justin Nordstrom in his article about the book that the movie was based on written by Ernest Cline. Nordstrom says that, “Cline’s Oasis setting is simultaneously utopian and dystopian—as it enhances education and ignites a player’s imagination on one hand, and leads to abandonment of the world’s pressing needs on the other.” I understand the quote “abandonment of the world’s pressing needs” in a number of ways.  This refers to not only the world’s pressing needs, but also people’s pressing needs like real relationships, real experiences, or simply reality. 

Works Cited

Nordstrom, J. "“A Pleasant Place for the World to Hide”: Exploring Themes of Utopian Play in Ready Player One." Interdisciplinary Literary Studies, vol. 18 no. 2, 2016, pp. 238-256. Project MUSE, muse.jhu.edu/article/618474.

Bonus 9, Who Has The Right? by Jared Islas

This particular question is quite tricky. In fact, it is so much on my mind that there have been some instances that I personally feel uncomfortable responding to a prompt or even commenting on a subject because I don’t feel like I have any knowledge or connection to the issues being discussed. This probably has more to do with my personality but I think it is something that a lot of people might feel the same way about.

Looking at the concept outlined in the prompt for this bonus, I don’t think that it is or was okay for this woman to write a story about a child with physical deformities based off of her and her children’s brief experience with another child. However, I do wonder if the woman who wrote the story and ultimately sold the film rights to her story did so without ever talking to families, children or medical professionals that were directly affected by this disability or similar ones. I think that this is an extremely important question that would certainly make R.J. Palacio, the woman who wrote the book’s, story more credible and easier to accept her as an author of this story. 

I briefly searched the internet for any instance of Palacio mentioning if she had been in discussion with people directly associated with the disability and disappointingly couldn’t find any concrete answers. I want to believe she has because otherwise it would be a bit concerning considering this book is extremely popular and Palacio profited off of not only the original Wonder book, but also 3-4 more of her books which focus on the same characters and disabilities, AND the film based off of her book. In an interview with NPR, Palacio did say that after writing Wonder, she has become “an advocate for children born with craniofacial differences.”

Obviously not every single person who experiences something worth retelling in a book or movie is interested or “talented” enough to be able to write their story for a wider audience. Therefore, I see the necessity for proven authors and screenwriters to write these stories for these people. My only stipulation would be that these authors and screenwriters must have some connection to the story they wish to write about. I would hope that they would be able to speak to the person, people or people related to or close to the person whom the story is being based off of. This would give them not only a personal connection to the topic they’re writing about but also give them the opportunity to ask questions about the topic to a real living subject rather than information they found just from research.

In a piece for the New York Times, Anna Holmes discusses this topic by comparing empathy and exploitation but also says that, “Sometimes empathy and exploitation find expression in the same place.” I think that this perfectly sums up my views on this issue. Her books and movie may be telling an empathetic story but no matter what way you look at Palacio’s scenario, she has become who she is today, and profited, off of a child with disabilities.

Sources:

https://www.npr.org/2013/09/12/221005752/how-one-unkind-moment-gave-way-to-wonder

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/29/books/review/who-gets-to-tell-other-peoples-stories.html

Post 3, Group B - Interfamilial Relationships and Technology, by Jared Islas

The Veldt by Ray Bradbury tells the story of the Hadley family living in a futuristic world where technology and the home are deeply intertwined. Despite the story being written and published in the early 1950’s, the technology is neither outdated or beyond belief for today’s audience. What is really interesting about the story is the light it shines on the correlation between technology and interfamilial relationships. A negative affect is shown with both a husband-wife relationship and parent-child relationship, but this post will focus on the latter.

When George and Lydia (the parents) first enter into the nursery that their children (Peter and Wendy) continuously transform into the veldt, they are chased out by vicious lions. Lydia, being much more upset over the subject tells George that they need to keep their children out of the nursery so that they no longer go into the dangerous, and in her opinion, scary African veldt. George goes on to say, “You know how difficult Peter is about that. When I punished him a month ago by locking it for even a few hours — the way he lost his temper! And Wendy too. They live for the nursery.” The abnormal parent-child relationship between the Haldey’s is first made evident in the story during this quote. Not many parents would consider their children’s unhappiness due to a punishment, but in this instance, George does. 

Bradbury expands on the abnormal parent-child relationship in the next scene when he says “Wendy and Peter were at a special plastic fair across town. They had called home earlier to say they’d be late.” It is later revealed that after the two 10-year-old children arrive home via their helicopter, they have already eaten a dinner of strawberry ice-cream and hot dogs. Again, this expands on the idea that the children are running the family in this future, not the parents.

The interesting thing about this story is the similarities it shares to current parent-child relationships with the addition of new technologies in our lives. A quote in the Journal of Family Relations says that, “parent’s roles have diminished because children… are more adept at using communicative technologies than adults… As a result, parents may not be aware of the websites their children are visiting… Parents have to walk a line between trusting the blocking software and addressing the issue directly with their children.” This quote can easily be transformed into making sense in the context of The Veldt:

George and Lydia’s roles as parents have diminished because their children are content with living off of the various technologies in the home… As a result, their relationship with their children has become so insubstantial that they have no idea why their children keep imagining the veldt inside of the nursery, or why they treat them with such little respect… However, George and Lydia have to be careful because turning off the nursery completely and taking away the thing that their children love so dearly could have dire consequences.

Knowing what happens at the end of the story really puts the last part of the quote and matching transformation into context. George and Lydia tried to talk to their children directly throughout the middle of the story, but when nothing changed, they ultimately decided to lock the nursery, essentially using a “blocking software” to get their kids to stop returning to the veldt. Little did they know that kids, especially technologically savvy kids like Peter and Wendy, will always find away around a block, even if it involves arranging the murder of their own parents…

Works Cited

Hertlein, Katherine M. "Digital Dwelling: Technology in Couple and Family Relationships." Family Relations, vol. 61, no. 3, 2012, pp. 374-387.

Bonus #6 - The Oscars Issue of Ignoring Commercial Success by Jared Islas

The Oscars typically nominate and award movies that aren’t as culturally significant as other movies that come out each year. You can see it in this past year’s nominees and winners. Of the nine films nominated for best picture at this year’s ceremony, none were in the Top-10 of highest grossing films of 2017 domestically. The highest grossing domestic best picture nominee is Dunkirk, which came in at number 14 of the year ($188 million), followed by Get Out at number 15 ($176 million). The Shape of Water, which won best picture at the 2018 Oscars came in at number 47 on the year grossing just under $60 million dollars. I’m not saying that money is the only thing that determines a movie’s success. In fact, many terrible movies often make tons of money if they have a big name, whether it be an actor, director, brand or character associated with it. But, if “The Oscars” want people to tune in to their four-hour ceremony each year, they have got to be more aware of what the typical moviegoer wants, and whether you want to believe it or not, the typical moviegoer will never go to the movie theater to see the films that “The Oscars” love so dearly. This even reflects in the shows’ ratings; according to Deadline, this year’s ceremony “averaged 26.5 million viewers… down 19% from last year’s 32.9 million viewers, a nine-year low.”

The question now is, “How do we get the typical moviegoer to be interested in “The Oscars” and the films being nominated at the ceremony?” It’s a tough question. Obviously, you don’t want to abandon the categories, structure and prestige associated with the ceremony now. But it wouldn’t hurt to maybe add a new category or two that the most popular movies of the year have a shot at winning. Also, the Academy, has got to loosen up a bit. There were so many highly influential movies, actors and directors that could have been nominated this year but weren’t for whatever reason. Movies like, Wonder Woman and It, both were critically acclaimed, cultural phenomenons in 2017 but neither received any nominations. Both had incredible performances, stories or directors associated with them that really should have been recognized. Wonder Woman was the first female-led superhero film, was directed by a woman, and was the third highest grossing film of the year domestically. It could’ve been nominated for Best Picture, Best Actress (for Gal Gadot) or Best Director (for Patty Jenkins). It, which made $327 million domestically and $700 million worldwide on a $35 million budget introduced us to the Bill Skarsgård’s critically acclaimed performance of Pennywise, and was based on Stephen King’s 1986 novel by the same name. Nominations could’ve included Best Picture, Best Actor (for Skarsgård) or Best Adapted Screenplay.

In my opinion, The Oscars can learn a lot from The Grammys because they have found a healthy balance between nominating and awarding commercial and critical successes. This might be because these two overlap more in the music industry, but still I believe the comparison is valid. Think about the past few year’s Album of the Year nominees; Bruno Mars, Kendrick Lamar, Jay-Z, Lorde, Childish Gambino, Adele, Beyoncé, Drake, Justin Bieber, Sturgill Simpson, Taylor Swift, Alabama Shakes, Chris Stapelton, The Weeknd. All of these artists are not only being nominated as the “best” in music each year, but they are also putting out songs and albums that the entire country and world love to listen to. This cannot be said for The Oscars and is why I think something needs to change.

• Box Office Stats from: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?yr=2017
• 2018 Oscar Stats from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/90th_Academy_Awards#Box_office_performance_of_nominated_films
• Deadline quote: http://deadline.com/2018/03/oscar-ratings-down-all-time-low-viewership-1202310775/
• Grammy Stats from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammy_Award_for_Album_of_the_Year

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.

Post 1, Group B - Character arcs in The Incredibles, by Jared Islas

The movie I decided to watch for this assignment was Pixar’s 2004 film, The Incredibles, which was written and directed by Brad Bird. Not only did I want to rewatch it in preparation for the long awaited sequel coming out this summer, but also because this movie was a huge part of my childhood. I remember playing "The Incredibles" at recess with my friends and even dressing up in a Mr. Incredible muscle suit for a birthday party. Oh, and I even downloaded one of the songs from the film’s score because I like it so much.

After superheroes are forced to go into hiding and live their lives as normal citizens, Bob and Helen Parr (Mr. Incredible and Elastigirl) have three children and have reacted to their newly established “normal” lives completely differently. Throughout the movie, both Bob and Helen go through complex character arcs that see them switching perspectives in a way.

Bob is shown as extremely depressed, working at an insurance agency in a tiny cubicle. He is shown trying to help his clients (against his company’s best interests) by offering under-the-table services much to his bosses dismay. This reminds the audience of how important it is to Bob to be helping others. Helen, on the other hand is extremely happy as a stay at home mom. It helps that Holly Hunter, who voices Helen, has the most perfect, stereotypical suburban mom voice.

Both of these characteristics can be seen at the dinner scene at the beginning of the movie. The scene starts with silence as the whole family is gathered around the table eating. Helen breaks the silence by telling Bob that their son, Dash, got sent to the principal’s office. His initial response, “Really? That’s good,” shows just how out of it he is. This also shows how Helen is really trying to get Bob to engage with his family. Helen is most likely telling Bob this in hopes that he will be able to talk to Dash and get him to stop getting into trouble.

When Helen tells Bob what Dash did (use his super speed powers to put a tack on the teachers chair), Bob instantly lights up and is extremely proud of his son. Bob, wanting just a dose of “superhero-ness” from anything differs greatly from Helen who is trying to put the fact that the family has super powers in the past.

These dynamics continues through most of the film— 

• Bob and his friend Luscious (Frozone) jump into action to save people from a burning building
• Bob is eager to accept a mission from Mirage to defeat a giant robot
• Helen is in denial of Bob’s increasing disappearances believing that he at a business conference or bowling
• Helen seems reluctant to even say her superhero name, Elastigirl to Edna Mode
• Helen is mortified that Edna Mode had created new supersuits for Bob, herself and her three kids
• Helen instructs Violet (their daughter) on what to eat for dinner, what time to go to bed, etc. before setting out to go try and find Bob

It is at this point in the movie where Bob and Helen’s roles switch, or at least even out. After missiles sent by Syndrome (the bad guy) hit the plane that Helen is flying and that Dash and Violet have sneaked onto, Bob (who is under interrogation and locked up), is obviously devastated.  For the first time in the movie, it is evident that his actions and his desires to be a superhero again have lead to what he though was his family’s death.

Luckily, they survived the fall because Helen stretched out like a parachute and landed them safely in the water… and then stretched into a boat in which Dash acted as a propellor for… This isn’t really important, I just think this scene is funny and these images are funnier. Especially, Violet just chilling in the "boat."

Anyways, eventually Helen and the kids arrive at the island where Bob is and Helen sets out to find him. The following video shows a scene that I find particularly interesting. 

It is the first time in the movie where Helen has been shown exclusively as a superhero, rather than a mother or a mother who happens to be a superhero (as seen in the parachute/speedboat scene). The scene shows Helen (Elastigirl) using her powers, finding her way through a series of hallways and well, being a badass. 

The rest of the movie is pretty “normal” for a superhero movie, so I won’t bore you with describing it in depth, but they defeat the bad guy and save the day.. cool! 

One last important scene was right before the final battle of the film and after Helen, Dash and Violet save Bob from the island. Bob tells Helen and the kids to stay behind while he fights off the giant evil robot. It is at this point that Bob and Helen’s character arcs come full circle.

Helen is telling Bob that there is no way she is going to stay on the sidelines while he goes out to fight by himself. Similarly, the reason Bob wants to fight by himself is because he says that he doesn’t want to lose her. Here, Helen is seen as more eager to be a hero and Bob is seen as wanting to protect their family.

I feel like I barely scratched the surface with this movie as there are similarly complex character arcs in other characters in the film. There are also really complex storylines in the movie (especially for one aimed at kids), that I hadn’t noticed until I got older including suicide, murder and extramarital affairs.

In Class Assignment, Thunderstorms

When I was a kid I was afraid of thunderstorms. I remember that my fear was especially bad at night when I had to go to bed. I would not be able to fall asleep or even stay calm enough to not be thinking that I was about to die. This definitely was a bit dramatic as I now realize that a simple thunderstorm could probably never hurt me from inside my house. I remember coming out of my room and talking to my parents about how I was so scared and couldn't fall asleep. They would try to help me calm down by coming into my room and sitting beside my bed. This always seemed to make me be able to fall asleep right away. I'm not quite sure what this means about me, possibly something about anxiety, as still to this day I sometimes get nervous about normal-everyday things. The page that discusses the fear of thunderstorms, also known as Astraphobia, offers more information about what causes some people to fear thunderstorms and ever verifies my theory about why I might have been afraid.