Movie 43: The Bomb

Bomb. That's the one word that keeps popping up when discussing the bizarre comedy film, Movie 43. Let me start off by saying that this article is not going to critically examine the movie. I'm not writing this because I want to persuade you to like it or hate it.Why I am writing this pertains to the notion that Movie 43, in theory, should be a hit. All the parts are moving correctly. Like a well oiled machine, the film has parts that, when put together, should produce a massive hit. However, that does not seem to be the case. Let's examine these parts from a social point of view and try to figure out why the makeup of the movie has failed thus far. The first concept you should understand about Movie 43 its its narrative structure. The film is comprised of 12 shorts. Most films that contain multiple shorts connect them together. Known as an anthology, these films tell their story through small segments. Sometimes, the anthology is connected not by a continual story, but by theme. One such example is New York Stories (1989), an anthology about (you guessed it): New York. These types of films are not new and date back to as early as 1932 (Grand Hotel and If I Had a Million. The narrative outline that connects the stories in this particular film is a crazy man (played by Dennis Quaid), who is trying to pitch his nonsensical movie to a Hollywood producer. Now, since this film does consist of 12 shorts, doesn't it make sense that audiences should like it in this day and age? Research has already shown that our attention spans have shortened dramatically over the last 15 years. Youtube is a prime example of this. The link dealing with attention span calls to our attention (pun intended) that we can't concentrate for a sustained amount of time. According to the article, a tad over 50% of people click out of a video after the first minute. That's half the audience! Half of the audience is gone after the first minute. So, when applied to movies (which last an average of 90 minutes), shouldn't it make sense that anthologies would keep people's attention more than one long narrative? Movie 43 acts just like Youtube. A bunch of random skits played back-to-back-to-back. In theory, the movie should keep our attention better than a film that focuses soley on one narrative. We are used to the jumps from skit to skit via YouTube. Secondly, the humor associated with Movie 43 is that of shock humor and slapstick. Let's be honest with ourselves: Most of the videos we watch online are stupid people doing something stupid. This is exactly what Movie 43 entails. Actors acting stupid and silly. The shock humor can be likened to that of the popular website Reddit. My friend and I even joked that Movie 43 is a film version of Reddit. Though Reddit may not be for everyone, it is ranked among the top 100 sites in the U.S. (currently ranked #65) and is slowly rising. While shock videos have always been around, they are prevalent and extremely popular today (via YouTube and many other sites). Take, for instance, the monumental popularity of 2 Girls 1 Cup. While being extremely disgusting, the video has been seen millions of times by people all over the world. Now, mix this type of shock value and humor with short segments starring Hollywood's biggest stars, and you should have success. However, this has yet to be the case. So, I now turn to you. Why hasn't this formula worked? Or, did it work for you personally?

Video Games Matter!!!!

Hello all! Tonight, I wanted to hit on a topic that needs some attention and love. Mainly, the idea that video games MATTER. Sometimes, I sit and play Call of Duty and think to myself, "What am I doing? Why am I wasting my time playing some game when I could be out "bettering myself"? I hate when I feel this way, but it happens from time to time. I mean, I love video games, but this thought still creeps into my mind. That's when I remind myself why I do what I do. Video games aren't just a time waster. They do mean something. Personally, I think video games matter becasue they let us ESCAPE from the normal world we all live in. Let's face it: Normal life sucks. If bills aren't getting you down, it's that girl or guy you asked out that said no. If it's not that, then it's the fact that you're unemployed (just as I am shortly about to be). Life's stresses can get into your head and mess with you. DO NOT LET THEM IN. Playing video games can help you destress. Don't believe me? Here you go. Games let you jump into somebody else's shoes and, for that small span of time, your mind gets a break from reality. You forget about the relationship problems and focus your attention on problem solving (or killing noobs, whichever you prefer). Also, video games run on a much deeper level than most people think. Just like movies, books, music, etc., some video games contain multiple layers to them. The superficial story might be about a military-generated super soldier who battles aliens. However, for those who know what to look for, the story also serves as a vehicle to discuss religion, military/political commentary, etc. How is this a bad thing? Video games aren't just these things little kids play. That's a major stereotype of videogames and people who play them. No difference exists between reading a book and being "high brow" versus playing video games and being "low brow". Both get the person thinking in different ways. Among the positives of playing video games? Multitasking skills,improved skiils in vision, and even quicker reaction times. These games may have had origins in simply providing entertainment. However, a major contrast is evident between a side-scrolling Super Mario title and a complex character study like the Mass Effect series. These games matter. Don't ever feel like you're wasting your time. Quite the opposite. You're probably learning a lot more than you know. So, in conclusion, don't ever quit and don't ever stop playing. Video games matter. So do you.

It's in Our Nature

Have you ever read The Dark Tower series of novels by Stephen King? If you haven't, the story revolves around a man on an epic quest to reach a lone standing tower. The story spans seven novels (and now an eighth, which acts as a prequel), and keeps the readers on the edge of their seats. (You'd better hold on to your butts, to quote screen legend Samuel Jackson). Without giving away too much, the final novel essentially ends where the first one begins. It is a circle. The reader goes through this journey with the characters, only to end up back at the beginning events. Normally, you would think this wouldn't go over well with readers. Seven novels, and it's a circle?! Believe it or not, this series has sold roughly 30 to 40 million books. How is this possible? Don't we like progression in storytelling? After all, to get scientific and lifey here, humans do evolve. It's in our nature. However, it's also in our nature to repeat and conquer. Perfect example? Call of Duty. Call of Duty's multiplayer is known for its addictivness and awesomeness. It boasts a fun and engaging online experience, complete with customizable gear and interconnectivity like none other. But, one of the features of the newest installment, Black Ops II, gives the player the power to completely reset their stats. That's right. All of that progression you've achieved, all of those countless hours you spent running around with a pistol to get headshots and earn a special medal, all of that can mean nothing. You have the power to zap all of those achievements away. You can wipe the slate clean. Why would someone do that? Isn't the point to earn the medals and emblems and jack up your K/D? The answer lies in the idea that gamers love to PLAY. We love to play, no matter the stats. We love to play the game. I have some friends who have reached the 10th prestiege (the highest you can go) on Modern Warfare 2. While playing with them, they have said numerous times that they would love to reset their stats. Why? To put it simply, they get bored. They want to regain that feeling of accomplishment when you unlock a challenge. They want to feel that rush when you make the long trip back from level 70 to Level 1 when they prestiege. They want constant challenge, reward, and progression. That is why Black Ops II has added this feature. Gamers love to accomplish challenges. That's why we play games. Why do we play multiplayer more instead of single player? Why is multiplayer more popular? The answer? Multiplayer offers you a completely differnet challenge in every match you play. In single player mode, you can memorize the levels.You can get to the point of speedrunning through the levels and game. Multiplayer does't afford you this opportunity. Everything is constantly changing. The opponents you face are different. Maybe one match you play, you face a team of noob tubers. The next match might pit you against a healthy mixture of snipers, campers, and fraggers. Constant adaptation and constant challenges are what fuel gamers. This is why we do what we do.

Media Interactivity and You

Ever wish you could interact with your favorite television show? I'm sure we've all yelled at the screen, screaming at the woman with the blonde hair to run OUT of the hosue, and not just lock the door and play hide and seek with the serial killer. People from all cultures do this, and it still never changes the outcome (as hard as we might wish). However, all that may be beginning to change. On January 14th, 2013, the television show Hawaii 5-O gave viewers an unprecedented experience. Viewers could interact with the show like never before. The audience was able to influence the outcome of the episode. The plot revolved around a "whodunit" storyline and the audience could follow along and choose who they think committed the crime. Towards the end of the show, they could vote online for who they thought did it. Then, the person with the most votes got their ending aired. If the majority thought the student did it, the ending showing the student's guilt would be aired. How cool is that? This isn't the only tool the media has used to get the audience actuvely involvde in the medium. Recently, WWE's Raw has begun to broadcast a segment using audience interactivity, called "Raw Active". This segment lets the audience do everything from vote for participants in a match to even naming tag teams. The WWE Superstars also "Tout", which is a small recording device. They are like mini-podcasts from the wrestlers. They air from time to time during Raw and Smackdown, as well as being published online on WWE.com. The XBox continues to lead the way in the realm of interactivity. The XBox has come up with Kinect, applications such as Skype on your console, and even the ability to watch movies and television with your friends online (which has since been disbanded). Technology is rapidly changing, and we are all in for a great treat. As time wears on, we will get more involved in television and games. We are going to be the one's to make a difference. In fact, I think it's pretty evident that we already are. Since interactivity is found almost everywhere, I have decided to add examples to this post so you can see just how prevelant (and fun) media interactivity can be. Tonight, I found a website that contains an interactive script from the indie hit Moonrise Kingdom (2012). The interactive script lets you read the script while viewing production photos, looking at maps of the country, and so forth. What a cool concept and piece or technology to enjoy. If you're interested, take a peek!