“Time waits for no one”

I continually have a great appreciation for how film-makers condense such a baffling concept in less than three hours, whether it’s in action, comedy or even romance. Although science fiction is embedded within most of these films, time travel tales have become so abundant and complex over the years that they challenge us to follow along. Furthermore, the fact there’s no evidence that time travel is plausible, it situates film-makers in this oxy-moronic sounding position of creating a “believable” time travel movie. Below is a list of some of my favourites (so far):

Predestination (2014)

Director: The Spierig Brothers
Starring: Sarah Snook, Ethan Hawke, Noah Taylor
-Australian made film that leaves you guessing until the end (or even after the end).
-Temporal frequency is used throughout in order to provide a different perspective of the repeated scenarios.
-Temporal duration of ninety-seven minutes portraying a story that takes place within forty years.

Source Code (2011)

Director: Duncan Jones
Starring: Jake Gyllenhaal, Michelle Monaghan
-Subtle changes in lighting aids with the progression of the narrative and repetition of the eight minute sequence.
-Much like Predestination, Source Code extensively uses temporal frequency to present the theory of time travel

Donnie Darko (2001)

Director: Richard Kelly
Starring: Jake Gyllenhaal, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Daveigh Chase
-One of the best plot twists.
-Explores the theory of the Tangible Universe in a not-so complicated way.

About Time (2013)

Director: Richard Curtis
Starring: Rachel McAdams, Domhnall Gleeson
-A not-so cheesy romantic comedy with a twist of time travel
-Use of motifs such as the closet allows the main character’s transportation
-Uses the theory to lead onto a great life lesson at the end

Midnight in Paris (2011)

Director: Woody Allen
Starring: Owen Wilson, Marion Cotillard, Rachel McAdams
-A homage to the thriving 1920s.
-Main character taking a trip to nostalgia lane while also making us fall in love with Paris.

Back to the Future I & II (1985 & 1989)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4QLKKqjk7A
Director: Robert Zemeckis
Starring: Michael J. Fox, Christopher Lloyd
-Explores the linear time line where altering the past can result to Marty McFly’s extinction.
-Who doesn’t love those pop culture references?
-Their ambitious predictions for 2015.

Meet the Robinsons (2007)

Director: Stephen J. Anderson
-The contrast between a dystopian and utopian future.
-An underrated Disney movie featuring relatable and charismatic characters that you either love or love to hate.

The Girl who leapt Through Time (2006)

Director: Mamoru Hosoda
-A teenage girl accidentally has the ability to leap through time. She tries to use this power to her advantage, but soon discovers that tampering with time can lead to some rather unexpected results.
-Analysing the mise en scene foreshadows the progression of the film.
-The plot twist will melt your heart.

So as you can see, there’s isn’t this certain structure that must be followed when it comes to the time travel sub-genre. When a concept like this is still mysterious and ambiguous, let your imagination and creative loins go wild! Are any time travel movies you’d recommend I NEED watch next? Comment below, and I’ll add it to my list.

Yes, Nick Moore’s video essay on video essays is quite meta and as entertaining as it sounds. Video essays are a different approach to the traditional written essay, and quite honestly, a lot more engaging and beneficial for people with hyper attention (I can attest to that). The one thing that Moore emphasises is that there’s no formula when it comes to creating a video essay. Indeed, no need of the TEEL structure that we’re constantly bombarded with in high school.

According to Moore, “supercuts are the easiest to make” while also providing a montage of anything. In this case, we would have to use copyright material sparingly for educational purposes such as providing evidence or an example to the topic. Throughout the entire video, Moore was conversational and kept a witty tone that provided the entertainment factor. Upon meeting with my group, this entertainment factor became our aim through witty dialogue and constantly referring to recent and popular examples. Moreover, our focus was on the script and establishing humour both visually and aurally.

Another thing that Moore brought to my attention, was the way we were to present our references. As a group, we came to the consensus that we were to feature Desktop screenshot and use subtitles for the video snippets. In order to carry the essay along, we have decided to combine voice narration with a host to camera rather than just relying on voice narration alone. Right after viewing this tutorial, we’ve all become comfortable to what we were to tackle this essay and now have a vision to what we want to achieve as a group. A big thank you to you Nick Moore!

“Media institutions are enduring. They regulate and structure activities”

Many institutions fall under the media institution umbrella. Facebook and Community radio are just two examples that share the same characteristics that would be defined as an institution; values, mode of address and professionalism. But then again, they differ within these characteristics.

Facebook is the primary social media that values connections, sharing, data information and social relations. In terms of its mode of address, Facebook is converses casually with an interface and involves personalised choices. Over the years, Facebook has converted into a social conglomerate for having purchased Instagram and Whatsapp.

Courtesy of: http://specials-images.forbesimg.com/imageserve/467500666/640×0.jpg?fit=scale&background=000000

On the contrary, community radio values diversity, education, a smaller scale, a broader range of views and is exclusive. Although it values being exclusive, its mode of address involves being inclusive, showcasing to smaller audiences, aims for a local community and has a narrow casting. In terms of professionalism, community radio is a training ground and stepping stone for those who are starting out in the industry.

Courtesy of: http://www.3cr.org.au/sites/default/files/images/news/KCR-ForDigitalStationWebsites-ShowYourSupport-1.jpg

The National Broadband Network promised by the Labour government was to provide fibre connections directly to our households with speeds of up to 1 gigabyte per second.

On the contrary, The Liberal party proposed the Multi-technology mix National Broadband Network (MTM NBN). This entails fibre to the node where fibre is attached through a box on the street and delivers a speed of 25 to 50 megabits per second on copper wire to the household.

With this whole “complex assemblage of infrastructure networks, communication devices, software, location, user subjectivity and political input”, Australia’s ranking in the global ranking for internet speed has lowered from the 30^th to the 60^th position. Thanks to today’s workshop, I’ve discovered that we Australians are paying for how much data we are given as supposed to other countries who pay for the speed of their internet, again it relates back to politics.

Since the privatisation of Telstra, competitors struggle to attract consumers. For example, TPG offers $69.99 worth of unlimited data and calls to Australian mobiles and landlines. But the problem is, landlines have become almost obsolete in every household. Again, what we as the consumers are most interested in is SPEED. As a media practitioner, I constantly hear the familiar screeches of “why is the internet so slow?” for every single time I’ve had to upload a video or re-upload just in case the first and second time didn’t work out.  Check out Waleed Aly’s response to this whole political debacle.

Reference: M. Dias, M.Arnold, M.Gibbs, B. Nansen & R. Wilken, ‘Asynchronous speeds: Disentangling the discourse of ‘high-speed broadband in relation to Australia’s national broadband network’, Media International Australia, Incorporating Culture & Policy, Jun 2014, Issue 151, p.117-126

Werner Herzog’s 2005 documentary Grizzly Man encapsulates the life of Timothy Treadwell, from his immense devotion to protecting grizzly bears, to his untimely death in 2003. Herzog’s decision to portray Treadwell through a rhetorical form appeals the audience to empathise with him. In particular, the entire documentary features, and is directed and narrated by Herzog himself.

His use of a mix of archival footage and interviews presents a synthetic approach to the portrait film. The various interviewees combine both subjectivity and objectivity. Subjective in the interviews with Treadwell’s loved ones, while being objective in investigating the death of both him and his girlfriend when interviewing the coroner and other professionals. This combination of his narration with Treadwell’s video footage enables the audience to empathise with Treadwell and provide a philosophical element to the narrative of the film. Beginning the film with video footage of Treadwell without any narration, allows the viewers to make up their own assumptions on Treadwell with Herzog’s aim to change or maintain that perception until its conclusion.

Although documentaries feature real-life events and subjects, it can still be subjectively one-sided in its portrayal. Treadwell became the basis to presenting what Herzog analyses and firmly believes in. He recognises Treadwell’s belief that the universe is balanced with harmony, but then Herzog contradicts this by saying that he “believe(s) the common denominator of the universe is not harmony, but chaos, hostility, and murder”. Herzog ultimately portrayed Treadwell’s persona as a man who was misunderstood and, thus, to an extent, who lost his faith in humanity.

Below is an extract from my Rhetorics & Politics in the Contemporary World essay in analysing how power is presented within the education system.

According to Foucault, “power is not an asset… [but] flows through relationships” (Gauntlett, 2008, p. 181) and is particularly exemplified through the education system. Through the utilisation of the institute of the classroom, authorities are able to govern the mental health of the Australian youth through non-coercion and “soft” power. However, as the values within families and students are developing and are progressively mismatching with the values that are held by religious and government authorities through an outdated curriculum, the “many opportunities” to mobilise rather than dominate students can only be achieved to a certain extent.

Ultimately, the institution of the classroom itself allows teachers and parents to regulate and govern the students even before the implementation of the Safe Schools Program. Often the public affairs of domestic governing can overshadow the importance of private affairs in ensuring the mental health of young people. A variety of pupils derive from “single parent families, blended families and, above all, same-sex parented families” (Anderson, 2016), thus develop values of acceptance and tolerance. On the contrary, parents can mobilise their child from participating in Safe School activities. Furthermore, the students themselves can “self-regulate” themselves or be influenced by their fellow peers due to being “caught in those stages of their emotional development where they want to make decisions based on information” and their own experiences (Anderson, 2016).

Although the Coalition government and religious authorities do “frequently (find) themselves in powerful positions” and invest in such “opportunities”, it is the fluidity of power that is exhibited through “interactions (and) relationships” that highlight the significance of private affairs over legislation. Thus, the mobilising of a vulnerable demographic through the education system only constitutes towards a range of non-one dimensional resistances that reflects in the contemporary political world.

References:  Gauntlett, D. (2008) “Foucault on Power” and “Power and Resistance”, in Media, Gender and Identity: An Introduction, London and New York, Routledge, p. 129, 131, 132, 181

Anderson, S. (2016) “Tony Abbott calls for Safe Schools ‘social engineering program’ to be axed”, ABC News, Date accessed 20 March 2016
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-01/abbott-calls-for-end-to-safe-schools/7209766

Week eleven seemed to have crept in out of nowhere, and so was the due date for our audio essay drafts. So far, I’ve been impressed by the quality and structure that had been compiled so far by Bradley as the main editor for the audio essay and host. Our biggest worry so far, is that the time frame of the essay was way over five minutes even without all of our required interviews.

The benefit of the rough cut allowed fresh ears to listen and provide us with any reassurance, improvements and criticism in general. Not only did Louise provided us with feedback that guided us into the right direction, but also observing her reactions to certain moments that we would expect a listener to react to.

Louise commended our concept on sequels and originality and really liked how we decided to base our analysis on journalist, academic and public opinions. Her reactions on certain moments in the essay proved that we needed to source sound effects and background music in order to break up the narration, to texturize, to build a faster pace and prevent the analysis from being boring.  Furthermore, Louise suggested to record and organise all of our material before cutting down to just over the five minutes.

Overall, we need to focus on the media item of texts and narratives at the fear of diverting towards our focus on audiences, complete our remaining interviews and source out sound effects. Since we’re way ahead of schedule, we’re absolutely sure to complete these tasks even a week before the due date (fingers crossed).

Is blogging dead? (ha ha) Is vlogging the new thing now?

No blogging isn’t dead and vlogging must be the “new thing” because even Microsoft Word still has it underlined in red, so it’s not even an established / common word yet. Vlogging is essentially video blogging and is quite prominent in various platforms such as YouTube, Vimeo and even blogs (woah meta).

This media form and convergence has attracted a young demographic for both viewing and creating. According to a 2015 GlobalWebIndex study, 42% of internet users have watched a vlog within the previous month with 16-24 year-olds and 25-34 year-olds being the prominent demographic by 50%. Out of all the platforms, YouTube gathers about 93% of the vlogging views.

We are inundated with vlogs that are made for marketing and entertainment purposes. According to a Variety survey in 2014, 1,500 13-17 year olds in the US claimed that YouTube stars Smosh, The Fine Bros, PewDiePie, KSI and Ryan Higa were more influential for this age group than any traditional film, music or TV stars. An influence that has shifted what we perceive as the “traditional” celebrities. As opposed to a blog, a vlog can be more intimate and personal through a face to camera scenario. Vlogs haven’t been around for too long, but there has been an expansion on the content and the vlogger that likewise, the audience demographic is increasing as well.

So did the video kill the blogging star? No, not at all. It’s only provided the blogging star a new way of to expand their own blog (as I write this on my blog).

There’s a new balance of power between you and us.

I’d describe this as a “love letter” to the “Big Media”. Jay Rosen expresses this shift in what we define as the role of the audience in the media sphere. Back in the pre-new media era, audiences were believed to be passive and were bound by a variety of theories. For instance, The Hypodermic Needle Theory proposed how audiences are passive and respond to moral panic, thus are controlled by the media itself. It was this concept that the message between the sender and receiver was linear and would never be reiterated, a concept that is soooo “former”.

Ironically enough, Rupert Murdoch was quoted by American newspaper editors that that people “want control over their media, instead of being controlled by it”. Suddenly, what was once a distinguished power of the media over The People, is now a fluidity of power between the two where The People have the ability to respond and control what the media presents to them.

Through a condescending yet inclusive tone, Rosen expresses how the power is favouring into the hands of The People. Interestingly, this 2006 blog post exhibits this shift right before any “huge” or “drastic” convergences have occurred such as the smartphone, vlogging, streaming services etc. Fast track ten years later and what Rosen fails to mention is that this superiority over the media isn’t fixed, but is rather shifting.

Even though there are various platforms and ways for The People as active audiences, there are still ways where the media can control The People to an extent. Censorship and classifications are huge controlling factors in what can be consumed or released. But once again, to what extent are these factors “powerful”? Thanks to the internet, all these regulations are practically non-existent where everything that is posted on the web is a permanent footprint. Yes, The People have come a long way in establishing “their voices” and becoming active, but that doesn’t make them THAT powerful (yet).

Reference: Jay Rosen (2006),’The People Formerly Known as the Audience’, PressThink blog, June 27.

A warning that is presented at the beginning of a text or video in order for the audience to be aware of the potentially distressing material that it may contain.

One of the group’s in this Wednesday’s workshop was going to analyse the effectiveness of trigger warnings for their Project Brief Four video essay. I’ve never come across this term until that time, but the concept itself hadn’t been foreign to me.

I definitely agree that trigger warnings are essential in order for the viewer to anticipate or withhold themselves from any distressing and dramatized content that may have effected them in their own personal lives. However, the term trigger warning has transformed into something that’s completely far from its actual meaning. They’ve been used as censorship to stop people from talking about something that doesn’t want to be mentioned. The internet or even life in general isn’t something that can be controlled in terms of what we depict or come across.

Sometimes (actually most of the time) it’s where simple things like common sense must be used, if you know that there’s content that you don’t like, then don’t click or go through with it. So don’t use the term trigger warning to define it as a filter or in some superficial way! It defeats the purpose of what a trigger warning is and actually benefits people who’ve dealt with such traumatic situations.

I’ve come across some articles on this debate. So are trigger warnings really useful in protecting people from potentially traumatic and harmful material? To what extent? Or are they just a figment in the rise of the Nanny State? Let me know!