Category Archives: Random

Summer 2009 Blockbuster Comparison

The following essay was for my Cultural Studies class, therefore it’s not of the same quality as my other material. Read it anyway lol.

Inglourious Transformers
I see a few newly released films each year and sadly most are of average quality. Last Summer, I saw two movies in particular that stood out; one was quite exceptional and the other was pure garbage with some mild entertainment. The former was Quentin Tarantino’s war film, Inglourious Basterds and the latter was Michael Bay’s Science Fiction film, Transformers: The Revenge of the Fallen. Both pictures are similar in some ways and at the same time, there is a world of difference between them. In terms of culture, Inglourious Basterds is of much higher art than it’s counterpart, Transformers because director Quentin Tarantino has far more “cultural capital” than his rival, Michael Bay.
Both Inglourious Basterds and Transformers are action films in their own unique ways, but Basterds does not rely solely on special effects and fun filled mayhem to dazzle it’s audience. There are various similarities between the two movies and it should be noted that each obtained well beyond it’s fair share of box office/commercial success. Both had gun shots, explosions, “good guys, “bad guys,” gorgeous females in leading roles, and a healthy chunk of humor. Without seeing both features, a cultural theorist may rush to rule both films as equally “mass art,” merely manufactured products to be gobbled up by millions of dumb Americans as Matthew Arnold would contend. Of course major corporations financed both films and as I previously mentioned each profited quite well at the box office, but it seems clear that there is much more to IB than simply “action” that makes up most of Transformers. IB focuses on World War II and particularly the fall of the Third Reich at the hands of the “Basterds,” a band of Jewish American soldiers. Of course this is not historically accurate at all, but it still gives the film more depth than a light hearted flick about robots. IB also features various references to older, spaghetti western films and obscure war films as well as other aspects of both American and European culture. Tarantino’s cultural capital certainly adds to the “higher quality” of the film.
As I previously explained, both movies can fall under the action genre, but the styles of action displayed in each film makes one high art/culture and the other low art/culture. In Inglourious Basterds, scenes are built up with suspense and clever dialogue. This suspense then erupts into bloody battles and shoot outs and so on. In contrast, in Transformers, the action is not stylized and is mostly non-stop, relying on special effects and very little suspense. The film utilizes most of the conventional techniques Hollywood blockbuster/popcorn movies usually employ, but no substance to balance out the mindless mess. The old phrase, ” a spoon full of sugar makes the medicine go down” comes to mind. In this case, there is no medicine and moviegoers are being inundated with pounds and pounds of sugar, mentally consuming as much junk as they purchase in movie snacks. Clearly, if Arnold was alive today he would use Transformers as a chief example of low/mass art.
In short, although both films, Inglourious Basterds and Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen can be seen as action movies and worthy of commercial success, Basterds definitely is of higher art/culture than Transformers. Writer/Director, Quentin Tarantino effectively used his cultural capital of historical and cinematic knowledge to make a greater film. The action was entertaining, but carefully balanced with extraordinary acting, memorable dialogue, and superb character development. Michael Bay, on the other hand, merely made a big special effects movie, he knew people would rush to the theaters to see, enjoy, and never ponder over anything meaningful to the human experience.

Chris

Porn Study Fails

NINEMSN.COM

A study hoping to compare men who watch porn with those who haven’t encountered it has been derailed — because researchers couldn’t find any men who hadn’t indulged in X-rated material.

Scientists at the University of Montreal had to change the focus of their project after failing to find a single male aged in his 20s who hadn’t been exposed to adult videos and images.

“We started our research seeking men in their 20s who had never consumed pornography,” the Telegraph reported Professor Simon Louis Lajeunesse as saying.

“[But] we couldn’t find any.”

Question of the Day

Should workers be allowed to work as much as they want OR should vacations and holidays be mandatory? Let’s think about it. At companies like Lincoln Electric and General Electric, systems are in place where workers are paid according to performance. Essentially, if you work your ass off and produce X units of a good, you will be highly rewarded in pay. It could even get to the point where you don’t have to do any performance and still get paid for doing nothing, which is something that’s been discussed among KLYAMers in the past. With a performance based system (Piece work, as it is called), it becomes almost unreasonable for workers to complain about their pay. Yes, I could see them complaining about getting no vacations, holidays, working conditions, etc but in terms of actual pay it’s YOU making it or breaking it. At any rate, giving the worker complete freedom over how he or she wants to work is an individualist concept. It’s an egalitarian concept if workers and upper management are treated the same way. In fact, if production workers really sweat their ass off, they could make more $$$ than upper level management. Sacrifices would have to be made in social and family life and some people just wouldn’t want to make those BUT maybe that option is attractive for some people. Who’s to decide? If you think the government should set limits on work, isn’t that a case of intruding on somebody’s liberty?

Boston Walking Distances

I’ve been making several jaunts around the city for the past 30 days since I got here. Generally speaking, you can easily cover a lot of distance around town if you know where you are going.

If you are walking from Northeastern towards Fenway Park, you must realize that there is a pretty decent sized green area called Fenway that could fuck you up along the way. Basically the big thing on one side of it is the Museum of Fine Arts and the big thing on the other side is Fenway Park. If you are near the Museum, keep walking until you get to the outer edge of park, make a turn, and keep walking straight ahead until you get to what is called Landmark Center (a big ass art deco building). Along the way you should pass Simmons College and Emmanuel College. Once you get to Landmark, keep heading straight down Brookline Avenue and you’ll end up very close to Fenway Park. You’ll have to take a right down Landsdowne or Yawkey…the choice is yours. The walk is about 20-25 minutes which is really nothing in the grand scheme of things.

If you are walking from Northeastern to Boston Common, you shouldn’t run into any problems. It’s about a 25-35 minute walk down Huntington, Columbus, or Tremont. If you walk down Huntington, you are going to have to change direction a little bit and travel up Boylston because Huntington stops near the Convention Center. I think Columbus is faster and more convenient than Tremont, but Tremont is a pretty fun walk because it’s a bit less “urban” in the sense that there are more antiquated small housing residences. Once you get to the Common you can keep walking straight past the Financial District and Faneuil Hall until you get to the North End.

There’s really not much going on Northwest of the Common. There’s hospitals and old little housing units. If you head past Northeastern to the West, you’ll end up in Allston, Brookline, Newton, or some other place like that. If you keep walking past Boston University that is.

This may be of no interest to you, but if it is then cool!