The MUSEUM OF THE MOVING IMAGE...
...is pretty rad. Especially in concept, and almost nails it in the execution. First off, let me just say that i really liked our tour guide. She was very personable which made for a lively tour; it was obvious she enjoyed her job. Sadly, and this is just my problem and is by no means a mark against her, but I felt I knew as much or at least more than her. All of a sudden I began to wonder about working their and becoming a guide myself.
However, and this is one of her positives, is that she constantly engaged us through out the tour with nice factoid and questions that always pulled me back in and made for a fun experience. First off we went to the sound booth to mess with what is called ADR (or Automated dialogue replacement). I already knew some about the process and why it is used, (it's used in animated movies, foreign films dubbed over into the home language, and re-doing lines that werent caught right the first time for whatever reason.) but the real fun was trying it out for ourselves. We did a scene from BABE (which I've never seen) and then COMING TO AMERICA; it was a great way to start the tour off.
Next we moved to sound production, using Titanic as an example. First we watched a scene with only the main characters voices being heard, then with just the sound effects, next was just background crowd noise (the screaming, etc.), and finally we heard it all put together. Again, I knew most of it and even brought up some facts of my own for the group but it was still a great back and forth between us and the guide. The real fascinating part for me wass discussing what "Foley work" was; which is basically people in a sound studio trying to find the best way to make sound effects. For example: when Rose crashes onto the deck face first, the foley artists dropped a sandbag and a chair onto a wooden floor. I did learn something new, actually: when one of the exaust tubes break apart and fall into the water, they used stock sound of an elephant call for that. I thought that was so interesting.
The rest of the tour never reached the same height of information, and cool facts (for me), but it was never boring. The only thing I wish we got to see more of was, of course, the video game exzibit. They had a Sega Genesis hooked up with Sonic The Hedgehog to play! How cool is that? Easily one of my favorite consoles ever. Easily.
So yeah, wished it were longer, but certainly not a waste of time at all.
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Monday, May 2, 2011
Blog 13: Draft of Archives Project Essay
When suffering a death in the family it becomes difficult to focus on important tasks. I've had to encounter this phenomenon twice first hand. Once, after the death of my older brother which, in the end, forced me to leave my first college of choice. And now, with the death of a sister in my fiancee's family, I never found the time to go into the archives and look at what I need to look at. So, no, this wont be my actual first draft. However, I will attempt to talk about what I already know about the concept of "Planned Shrinkage" and, maybe, use that as a jumping off point once I get it together and write my real paper. At least, this way, this blog wont be a sad, blank, mess.
Of course we spoke about it during the tour of the actual archives; "Planned Shrinkage" (hereafter P.S.) was a wild idea by Roger Starr. In fact, the term itself first originated in NYC, and with Mr. Starr. In the mid-70's Mr. Starr gave a speech at some sort of real estate convention that introduced his idea as a way to help the struggling NYC economy stay afloat. The best way to think about the entire "idea" is to imagine all of the services you come to expect from the city you live in suddenly being taken away from you. Try calling the Police and Fire department, but they never arrive. Look for a place to send your kid to school, only to realize all the schools are closed down. That, in a nutshell, is P.S.
So, how does this help the economy, exactly? Well, to Mr. Starr, certain people pay taxes; and it wasn't those losers in the South Bronx (probably his words, but this isn't a real paper so pardon me for not fact checking). Cutting off their services will force them out, which in turn will alow him to renovate the area in order to attract real tax payers (aka non minorities.) The saddest part of all this is that his idea caught on and was implemented in various places, most recent being Detroit (Detroit really is a shit hole though, and they should probably just level it. But what do I know?).
A key question in this, aside from the one just asked, is why the South Bronx? First of all, in the early 70's a study was conducted that stated the obvious: if police and fire services are taken away, the population will decrease. They also suggested the idea, without any proof mind you, that most fires in poor neighborhoods were because of arson. Now in the South Bronx, fire was thought to be a huge problem. In fact widespread arson was the main assumption held by the people in charge of the city at the time. This lead to the bright idea that since most of the fires were the result of arson, it made little sense in improving the Fire department to deal with the problem. Essentially, the thought was that if they're burning themselves down, then they don't want our help.
Of course, sad as it is to say, P.S. worked and then some. The Bronx practically burned to the ground; health services were cut and AID's spread like wildfire (no pun intended); and the population plummeted. However, for me to say that it "worked" is a bit of a misnomer. It "worked" in the sense that it drove people out, however it took almost two decades for the City to invest in the area again and make it somewhat livable for us normal human beings.
I'm sure there is an untold death toll that is in the millions, and it really was for nothing. Two decades is how long you expect things to be done if at first they do nothing, but after all that? P.S. in my eyes was nothing but a huge, and disgusting, failure.
Of course, this is off the top of my head, I can't wait to actually get at the archives and really take a crack at this. That being said, however, I seriously think this is a good start.
Of course we spoke about it during the tour of the actual archives; "Planned Shrinkage" (hereafter P.S.) was a wild idea by Roger Starr. In fact, the term itself first originated in NYC, and with Mr. Starr. In the mid-70's Mr. Starr gave a speech at some sort of real estate convention that introduced his idea as a way to help the struggling NYC economy stay afloat. The best way to think about the entire "idea" is to imagine all of the services you come to expect from the city you live in suddenly being taken away from you. Try calling the Police and Fire department, but they never arrive. Look for a place to send your kid to school, only to realize all the schools are closed down. That, in a nutshell, is P.S.
So, how does this help the economy, exactly? Well, to Mr. Starr, certain people pay taxes; and it wasn't those losers in the South Bronx (probably his words, but this isn't a real paper so pardon me for not fact checking). Cutting off their services will force them out, which in turn will alow him to renovate the area in order to attract real tax payers (aka non minorities.) The saddest part of all this is that his idea caught on and was implemented in various places, most recent being Detroit (Detroit really is a shit hole though, and they should probably just level it. But what do I know?).
A key question in this, aside from the one just asked, is why the South Bronx? First of all, in the early 70's a study was conducted that stated the obvious: if police and fire services are taken away, the population will decrease. They also suggested the idea, without any proof mind you, that most fires in poor neighborhoods were because of arson. Now in the South Bronx, fire was thought to be a huge problem. In fact widespread arson was the main assumption held by the people in charge of the city at the time. This lead to the bright idea that since most of the fires were the result of arson, it made little sense in improving the Fire department to deal with the problem. Essentially, the thought was that if they're burning themselves down, then they don't want our help.
Of course, sad as it is to say, P.S. worked and then some. The Bronx practically burned to the ground; health services were cut and AID's spread like wildfire (no pun intended); and the population plummeted. However, for me to say that it "worked" is a bit of a misnomer. It "worked" in the sense that it drove people out, however it took almost two decades for the City to invest in the area again and make it somewhat livable for us normal human beings.
I'm sure there is an untold death toll that is in the millions, and it really was for nothing. Two decades is how long you expect things to be done if at first they do nothing, but after all that? P.S. in my eyes was nothing but a huge, and disgusting, failure.
Of course, this is off the top of my head, I can't wait to actually get at the archives and really take a crack at this. That being said, however, I seriously think this is a good start.
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Blog 12-Gattacarazay
Throughout human history, it's been in our nature to discriminate or to label a certain group of other humans as "less than". If history was a top hat, I need only to reach in blindfolded and I could pull out an example easily. From the Crusades to World War 2 and The Holocaust, human history is rife with people telling other people I'm better than you because I hate things about your life. Or the much more dignified, "This is how one should be, and if you don't want to be taught, then you must want to die".
While watching Gattaca, one can't help but be moved at how accurate they depict the actions of a society that finds itself essentially split down the middle. Essentially, in the film, people are split into two groups: In-valids and valids; people who have genetically altered since conception to be "better" and those who are "natural births", or "god child" (the films term). In Nazi Germany it was the Aryans and the Jews; in radical islam it is Muslims and the infidels; and even right here in America it's become Red vs. Blue.
All through out known history there has been cases of society after society segregating themselves, because of percieved flaws one side has over the other. Certainly, it is no surprise the author George Annas said: "...If history is a guide, either the normal humans will view the ‘better’ humans as the other and seek to control or destroy them, or vice versa” (The Man on the Moon), when theorizing on what affect the appearance of genetically altered humans would have on society.
And this is the hidden beauty of the film Gattaca. Simply browsing human history tells us that no doubt, should a world like the one depicted in the film ever become reality, what is portrayed is what would happen; George Annas would be right. And too the film historians of the Future, Gattaca changes from a mere glimpse into what could be, to a movie ahead of it's time in prediction human events.
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Blog ten of the tenth to the power of ten, word.
I've always liked writing in some form since, well since I was little. I wrote short stories in a little spiral notebook, or I did crappy little comics on lined paper. This carried over into my adults years, but I can't say if the quality has improved; I'd like to think so. I take this trip down memory lane because, I welcomed the idea of blogging in lieu of paper. If there's one thing I enjoy more than anything is informal writing.
Through the years, as far as advice goes, there's always been one constant: if you want to be a writer, then write write write. So as far as I'm concerned, I find the entire concept of in-class blogging a sound one and, for the most part I look forward to just sitting by a keyboard and writing. I feel no pressure because, even if it's something I have zero idea about, it doesn't mean I can't try to write about it and--hopefully--make it interesting along the way.
I feel that's one of my strengths when it comes to informal writing, that ability to make it so undeniably me; which, in turn, I hope makes what I write about interesting. It's actually one of the main things I had trouble getting around when I first started academic writing. I always tried to make it personable, and fun, and I was told "don't do that". So thanks, teachers of my life, I've become an academic essay robot.
Anyway. Not important.
To pick what I think is my best piece of the blog is actually pretty easy. Blog 4.
It's well researched, a good length, and I had a blast writing it. Seeing it also helps me point out what I feel my biggest issue with my blog work; lack of length and content for a lot of my work. I'm just of the mind that I don't write just to write. If I have nothing interesting to say, I just...stop. I despise padding. Blog 4, in retrospect, was easy for me. Mainly because I've found that I'm fascinated by the aspect of mass illusions. In fact, it's the most interesting aspect of the course we've explored so far. All that other stuff, especially seeing philosophy and other works in The Matrix is just old hat and corny to me. I went through that phase myself when the films came out, and hearing people talk about it ten years later as if it's still relevant drives me nuts.
It's so hack. As far as I'm concerned, The Matrix is important because of the techniques it brought to film making, and for bringing Hong Kong style martial arts to the masses, not it's philosophical leanings. yes, it's nice that it tried and, yes, it's smarter than your average sci fi action flick, but it's not what made the movie a cornerstone for cinema.
Another problem I have is that I don't end my posts well; as you're about to find out.
Through the years, as far as advice goes, there's always been one constant: if you want to be a writer, then write write write. So as far as I'm concerned, I find the entire concept of in-class blogging a sound one and, for the most part I look forward to just sitting by a keyboard and writing. I feel no pressure because, even if it's something I have zero idea about, it doesn't mean I can't try to write about it and--hopefully--make it interesting along the way.
I feel that's one of my strengths when it comes to informal writing, that ability to make it so undeniably me; which, in turn, I hope makes what I write about interesting. It's actually one of the main things I had trouble getting around when I first started academic writing. I always tried to make it personable, and fun, and I was told "don't do that". So thanks, teachers of my life, I've become an academic essay robot.
Anyway. Not important.
To pick what I think is my best piece of the blog is actually pretty easy. Blog 4.
It's well researched, a good length, and I had a blast writing it. Seeing it also helps me point out what I feel my biggest issue with my blog work; lack of length and content for a lot of my work. I'm just of the mind that I don't write just to write. If I have nothing interesting to say, I just...stop. I despise padding. Blog 4, in retrospect, was easy for me. Mainly because I've found that I'm fascinated by the aspect of mass illusions. In fact, it's the most interesting aspect of the course we've explored so far. All that other stuff, especially seeing philosophy and other works in The Matrix is just old hat and corny to me. I went through that phase myself when the films came out, and hearing people talk about it ten years later as if it's still relevant drives me nuts.
It's so hack. As far as I'm concerned, The Matrix is important because of the techniques it brought to film making, and for bringing Hong Kong style martial arts to the masses, not it's philosophical leanings. yes, it's nice that it tried and, yes, it's smarter than your average sci fi action flick, but it's not what made the movie a cornerstone for cinema.
Another problem I have is that I don't end my posts well; as you're about to find out.
Blog 9 media paper draft aint happening.
Sorry but, I don't really want a peer review of my paper. Rather keep my ideas to myself. I have other reasons, reasons that I'm sure people would find mean so I'm going to keep them to myself. Or maybe not; there's people here who I can't stand and whose opinion I wouldn't respect or take seriously. It's not everyone, but I consider the odds I'd hear from one of them to be very low.
So I'd just rather not.
So I'd just rather not.
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Attempting to write fiction...
Okay, so for the past year or so I've been trying to write a story, or at the very least a novel. I've had bouts of writers block here and there, and months have gone by with little activity; but I do intend to finish it one day, come hell or high water.
Anyway, I thought I'd share it for the hell of it. Just click the link at the bottom. It's a work in progress, so any feedback is always welcomed.
Acid From The Ashes
Anyway, I thought I'd share it for the hell of it. Just click the link at the bottom. It's a work in progress, so any feedback is always welcomed.
Acid From The Ashes
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Eight: The Oedipus Matrix
Here's where I fake it, because I know The Matrix like the back of my hand, but barely glanced past the "thee"s and "thou"s that populate Oedipus. Hey, unless it's Marvel Comics' Thor, i don't like that type of writing. it drives me nuts. But I tried, I swear I did.
Anyway. So I'm going to talk about how the two are similar, or different, right? Sure, Oedipus appears to try and ask the reader, "Is ignorance bliss?". And characters, although not quite actually saying it outloud (mostly), all try to live by that phrase. Weather it's the main character itself running from his foretold future, or his wife/mother killing herself rather than deal with the consequences of the truth. While The Matrix has a character, Cypher, say the phrase and believe in it; does this make them similar? I'm not so sure.
However, as I write this I find myself connecting the dots between the two thematically. The key thing that seems to run through them both is knowledge, and what it does to these characters. Cypher in the movie remarks what a "mind job" it must be to Neo to be told he is the savior of humanity. On the other side of that, the Oracle does NOT tell him he is the one, because that is not what he needed to hear. Because Cypher is right.
Similarly, what happens to all the characters in Oedipus who have incredible knowledge? Knowledge of things they shouldn't, that they may have the power to change? Tragedy. Almost nothing but. In a way it's almost like the flip side to the ideas presented in The Matrix.
Anyway. So I'm going to talk about how the two are similar, or different, right? Sure, Oedipus appears to try and ask the reader, "Is ignorance bliss?". And characters, although not quite actually saying it outloud (mostly), all try to live by that phrase. Weather it's the main character itself running from his foretold future, or his wife/mother killing herself rather than deal with the consequences of the truth. While The Matrix has a character, Cypher, say the phrase and believe in it; does this make them similar? I'm not so sure.
However, as I write this I find myself connecting the dots between the two thematically. The key thing that seems to run through them both is knowledge, and what it does to these characters. Cypher in the movie remarks what a "mind job" it must be to Neo to be told he is the savior of humanity. On the other side of that, the Oracle does NOT tell him he is the one, because that is not what he needed to hear. Because Cypher is right.
Similarly, what happens to all the characters in Oedipus who have incredible knowledge? Knowledge of things they shouldn't, that they may have the power to change? Tragedy. Almost nothing but. In a way it's almost like the flip side to the ideas presented in The Matrix.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)