After watching Up, I noticed that a big part of the storyline was the Carl and Ellie’s inability to start a family. So, I found an article that talks about the emotional effects of infertility on a couple, I found out that there are many effects. Actually way more than I expected. Prior to reading this article I thought that the women would take most of the emotional distress and the men would normally just feel helpless and like they can’t provide for their wife. But after reading I learned more facts than I thought I would. Apparently, women seem to take most of the responsibility on themselves for everyone’s bad feelings and all of the bad things that are going on. The article quotes that, ” emotions can become a monster about to swallow them whole.” When the author said this, it really described how the couples emotions are on such an edge that you never know what is going to happen next. As a couple, the men and women can react to infertility very differently. According to the article, the male in the relationship can react in two different ways. One way is that they start to feel threatened and overwhelmed by the intensity of their partner’s feelings and emotions. The other way is that they start to focus on something that they can control such as their workplace. The women in the relationship can react more openly and emotionally. In most cases, the women go into a state of depression, pain, and anger, also the women tend to take all of the responsibility onto themselves. Although it does seem like the writer just talks about the negative things, they also recommended some tips for the couples that may be going through infertility. These tips varied from communicating to asking partner if they needed anything to recognize emotional and psychological differences between you and your husband or wife.
Up above the Clouds November 5, 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkqzFUhGPJg
For my critical essay, I have decided to write about the movie Up. I just loved everything about this movie and found every scene charming and fun. All throughout the film, you just find yourself falling in love with the characters. In the film, there is an older man, Carl Fredreckson, that has a dull life and decided that he wanted to go on an adventure, and since he has dreamed about going to South America since he was young, that was the first place that came to his mind. But along the way he meets with a young boyscout named Russel that stowed away on his flying house, therefore, Carl is “stuck” with him throughout his adventure. But Russel captured the hearts of everyone on his first line. So, then Carl and Russel go through the rainforests battling vicious beasts, vicious dogs, and a villain. As the movie progresses, you get to find more and more about the characters and how they grow closer throughout the many tasks and issues that they go through together. By the end of the movie, Carl and Russel are so close that Russel then sees Carl more like a father-figure.
Typically, this film has a very deep meaning, but what I loved about it was that Pixar was able to make it appealing to all ages. There were tear-jerking moments and a good story line for the older audiences, but there was also alot of comedy and a sense of fun for the younger audience, so nobody could be bored with Up. I personally loved this movie because it was cute, charming, funny, and interesting. People can find entertainment in horror or suspense movies, but whats the point of just watching people be murdered? All you really need is a story line and a good execution of this idea, which Pixar exceeded all expectations and went above and beyond, like they do with all of their films.
Moore and the Sicko’s October 23, 2009
In the film Sicko, Michael Moore goes out and finds out the truth about American health care compared to other countries’ such as France, England, and Cuba. Moore’s main argument is that there is no place in America where there is free universal health care, but yet in other countries, you can stay in the hospital for little to no pay. Moore starts the documentary in America interviewing citizens that needed or knew someone that needed health care but were denied by their insurance company or they did not have any insurance to start with. It seems as simple as calling an insurance company and asking for some insurance, but apparently you can be denied the very right to have insurance. The main issue is that if you don’t have insurance then you can’t get any medical attention. So, if you are denied insurance due to a certain illness, then you are denied the right to live your life the way you want to.
In the making of this film, Michael uses certain techniques to capture the severity of this situation. For example, Moore would use certain camera angles and music to add to the intensity or the emotion of the scene. Such as when he is in a boat going to Cuba for medical attention he has heroic music in the background and different camera angles so it seems like the group of people are going into a fight, more of a fight for their lives. Other times Moore would have soft music during some interviews to add to the strong of the emotion telling their story. However, if Moore had written an essay about this instead of making a film, he wouldn’t have any of these special effects so it would be harder to have a strong effect on his audiences. So, not only would Moore not have the camera angles and the music in the background, but he wouldn’t have the same appeal as movies do. This film was seen as a ground-breaking movie that changed the public’s views of American health care. But if it was an essay, it wouldn’t be seen as “ground-breaking” but more of just another statistical essay about money and health care in other countries.
A Review of a Review: Antoinette Winstead and Robert Brent Toplin October 22, 2009
In the book review of Robert Brent Toplin’s “Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11: How One Film Divided a Nation”, Antionette Winstead reviews how Toplin managed to achieve what other critics were not able to. Not by just watching a movie and writing a book about it, but by asking four very strategic questions. These questions were, “Did Michael Moore interpret recent American History effectively and with sophistication? Did he violate unwritten but generally acknowledged rules concerning responsible communication through documentary cinema? Were the accusations true or false? Did his political cinema have an impact on public opinion?” This is how Toplin had made his book outrun all of the others. Toplin reviewed a movie, thought out his opinion on the film, asked very deep questions, and answered them with alot of thought put into it.
This book was divided into 6 chapters where each one answers the four questions that he had previously asked. In the first chapter, he mainly talks about the “Reel Politics of Michael Moore” which describes Moore’s film career and his life in politics. One thing that Toplin had noted was that those who agree with Moore’s message tend to praise him for “constructing an impressive film. On the other hand, thos who disagree “disparage the films on artistic grounds, concentrating on cinematic techniques rather than directly disputing the filmmaker’s arguments.”
The other chapters range from “The Anatomy of Fahrenheit 9/11”, which is about the review of Moore’s filmmaking techniques, to “A Sinister Exercise”, which explains what the overall message of the film is. In chapter 4, “The Partisan Documentary”, Toplin gives a short history of the documentary and also letting the audience see both sides of the story. Winstead then describes the last 2 chapters (Chapters 5 and 6) as working in tandem, so they both are connected and word together toward the examination of the debate over Fahrenheit 9/11 and the impact that Moore had made on the Presidential Election of 2004.
In the end, Antionette Winstead summarized Toplin’s conclusion and how he compared Fahrenheit 9/11 and two other books that were released at the same time of the film. Noted that the other books were, for the most part ignored because they had “limited audience due to the elitist language and the medium used.” Where as the film by its very nature is “capable of delivering a message to the multitudes,” also Fahrenheit was a “highly entertaining” albeit controversal movie. Winstead then described how Toplin exemplified the objectivity of the film and gives each side of the debate equal coverage so it is balanced as opposed to all of the other critics that attacked Moore’s film. Antionette Winstead closes out by then describing Toplin’s book as “fair and balanced.”
Youtube Commercial Blog: Contradictions are Yummy September 29, 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHgo4tPIjvk
Ever since I was a child, I have always loved Starbursts. But now, the only thing that I love more than this delicious fruity snack is their random, weird, and hilarious commercials. This company has been using comedy and awkwardness as the base of their commercials since as long as I remember. In their commercials, they have a weirdness to them but they just catch the eye of the audience and always keeps them thinking, “Wow, this is so weird, but in a good way.” This is probably key in advertising these days. Nowadays, to impress the public eye, you have to be able to make people laugh. If you try to get people to buy a product with a boring and not interesting commercial, your not gonna get any hits in the media. That’s why I think that the Starburst’s success in the advertising is so high, because they are interesting, and make people want to buy the product.
In the commercial that I chose, there is a boy eating a Starburst, then all of the sudden an older, Asian man comes out and yells at him, ” Look! One contradiction eating another!” In which this surprised me because you expect a little small voice. But then out comes a loud, booming Scottish accent. When the boy looked at him confused, the man sat next to him saying, ” You are Scotch-Korean, you make no sense, just like Starburst. They are chewy like a solid, yet juicy like a liquid!” then the boy simply says, “Contradictions taste good.” This is just a commercial that makes no sense and you never really know what is going to happen. Then all of the sudden, the man throws in a final punch line saying, ” There’s another contradiction! It’s Jimmy, the albino lifeguard!” For me, that last line was just the icing on the cake that just pulls you in, in which every commercial needs. Which is a final punch that adds flare to the whole commercial and gauruntees that the audience will not forget the commercial.
Angelikasheen's Blog 