http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/29/egyptian-court-orders-death-sentences-over-anti-islam-film/
Seven Egyptians living abroad have been given the death sentence by a Cairo court. They have been charged for their alleged connection to the anti-Islamic film from America that led to riots in the extremely Islamic Middle East. However, the sentence cannot be enforced unless the seven return home to Egypt.
This instantly piqued my interest because I was surprised the anti-Islam film is still making headlines. It's fascinating to see how much of a lasting impact a film so controversial can have on the world. The fact that aggressive action is still being taken against the film is mind-boggling to me.
As a student, this teaches me the lasting effects of a historical event. This outbreak of terrorism due to the film will most likely end up in future history books. As a consumer, it is crazy to know that something I can watch has such an impact on the world. As a filmmaker, it teaches me to stay away from creating a film that is so controversial it causes violence.
Some questions I have about this article are: Will the men ever be able to return home? How much longer will the hysteria continue? Will there be more sentencings? Is the verdict correct or false? These will hopefully be answered in the future.
Thursday, November 29, 2012
Thursday, November 15, 2012
Three Scenes, One Movie
Sorkin's Steve Jobs Bio Pic to Consist of Only Three Scenes
Director the untitled Steve Jobs Bio Pic movie has revealed a shocking piece of information about the movie: there will only be three scenes. Each scene will last about a half hour of "real-time". They will all depict the launch of 3 different major Apple products in Jobs' career: the original Macintosh computer, the NeXT Cube, and the first iPod.
This caught my attention due to the headline advertising an extremely creative use of only 3 scenes for an hour and a half movie. I am intrigued by the idea of a film that is limited to that parameter. I did not know that anyone of this generation would attempt something so bold on a film that will be so mainstream.
As a student, this makes me want to look back into the history of Apple and find out how the movie will still captivate audiences' attention in only 3 scenes. Maybe looking back at the release day of these 3 products will give me some insight. As a future filmmaker, the idea of a movie with 3 scenes inspires me to continue to be as creative as I can be once I get into the industry. As a consumer, I am now excited to see this movie, whereas before I was planning on blowing it off. I cannot wait to see how this movie plays out.
This leaves me with a few questions for Sorkin. Is this method of storytelling actually effective? How will it continue to captivate audiences that are used to action-heavy, fast-paced Hollywood films? How long would this take to film? These questions will hopefully be answered in the future by the ingenious director.
Director the untitled Steve Jobs Bio Pic movie has revealed a shocking piece of information about the movie: there will only be three scenes. Each scene will last about a half hour of "real-time". They will all depict the launch of 3 different major Apple products in Jobs' career: the original Macintosh computer, the NeXT Cube, and the first iPod.
This caught my attention due to the headline advertising an extremely creative use of only 3 scenes for an hour and a half movie. I am intrigued by the idea of a film that is limited to that parameter. I did not know that anyone of this generation would attempt something so bold on a film that will be so mainstream.
As a student, this makes me want to look back into the history of Apple and find out how the movie will still captivate audiences' attention in only 3 scenes. Maybe looking back at the release day of these 3 products will give me some insight. As a future filmmaker, the idea of a movie with 3 scenes inspires me to continue to be as creative as I can be once I get into the industry. As a consumer, I am now excited to see this movie, whereas before I was planning on blowing it off. I cannot wait to see how this movie plays out.
This leaves me with a few questions for Sorkin. Is this method of storytelling actually effective? How will it continue to captivate audiences that are used to action-heavy, fast-paced Hollywood films? How long would this take to film? These questions will hopefully be answered in the future by the ingenious director.
Monday, November 5, 2012
Disney: At It Again
http://www.examiner.com/article/disney-to-buy-hasbro-magic-the-gathering-movie-and-theme-park-on-its-way
There are now rumors that Disney plans to buy Hasbro, the company in charge of many toy staples, such as G.I. Joe, Transformers, and, of course, Star Wars. This adds to the numerous acquisitions Disney has been eating up lately.
This caught my attention since Disney has been so active in acquiring various companies. It may lead to the government filing a monopoly lawsuit against the giant corporation which would be huge economically. This is just another fascinating display of Disney's power and strength.
As a student, this teaches me something important about economics: monopoly. Disney is using a form of vertical integration that I have studied in my history classes. As a future filmmaker, this tells me that there are going to be huge job opportunities in the Disney corporation soon. As a consumer, this may affect the way these toys are made or released to me and the quality of the toys.
Some questions this article raises are if this rumor is true or if it is false and if it does occur, what the consequences for Disney will be. Will the government retaliate? Will other companies suffer? These are all things to consider when looking at a future in the entertainment business.
There are now rumors that Disney plans to buy Hasbro, the company in charge of many toy staples, such as G.I. Joe, Transformers, and, of course, Star Wars. This adds to the numerous acquisitions Disney has been eating up lately.
This caught my attention since Disney has been so active in acquiring various companies. It may lead to the government filing a monopoly lawsuit against the giant corporation which would be huge economically. This is just another fascinating display of Disney's power and strength.
As a student, this teaches me something important about economics: monopoly. Disney is using a form of vertical integration that I have studied in my history classes. As a future filmmaker, this tells me that there are going to be huge job opportunities in the Disney corporation soon. As a consumer, this may affect the way these toys are made or released to me and the quality of the toys.
Some questions this article raises are if this rumor is true or if it is false and if it does occur, what the consequences for Disney will be. Will the government retaliate? Will other companies suffer? These are all things to consider when looking at a future in the entertainment business.
Thursday, November 1, 2012
Star Wars Episode VII
Disney Buys Lucasfilm for $4 Billion
In a rather unexpected move, Disney has proceeded to buy Lucasfilm, Skywalker Sound, Industrial Light and Magic, and LucasArts from George Lucas for $4 billion. They are paying Lucas half the price in cash and half in stocks. This makes Lucas the 2nd biggest owner of Disney stocks (other than the late Steve Jobs). Disney plans to release Star Wars Episode VII in 2015. Disney is also looking into starting a Star Wars TV show on their cable-satellite channel Disney XD.
This is probably the most important entertainment news I've heard for the past couple months. It is so amazing that Star Wars movies still have the potential to be created, especially since most thought that the franchise was done putting out new movies. It is a huge shift in the movie business and a major power move for Disney.
As a student, this piques my interest in how a business deal like this works. How does a shift in power this large happen? As a filmmaker, it is a great thing to know that there are many parts of the Star Wars franchise that will be renewed or started. It creates jobs in the industry that could potentially last a long time. As a consumer, nothing could please me more than to see my favorite movie franchise ever come out with another movie (especially one not written with Lucas's awful dialogue). I could not be more excited for 2015!!
I have many questions after reading this article. First, how good will this new Star Wars film be? Who is going to direct it? Write it? Act in it? What will the storyline be? Will it follow the books? How does the addition of all these companies affect Disney? What about George Lucas? I cannot wait to find out the answers to all these questions. For now, I will be waiting to hear any tiny tidbit of news about this fantastic deal between Disney and Lucasfilm.
In a rather unexpected move, Disney has proceeded to buy Lucasfilm, Skywalker Sound, Industrial Light and Magic, and LucasArts from George Lucas for $4 billion. They are paying Lucas half the price in cash and half in stocks. This makes Lucas the 2nd biggest owner of Disney stocks (other than the late Steve Jobs). Disney plans to release Star Wars Episode VII in 2015. Disney is also looking into starting a Star Wars TV show on their cable-satellite channel Disney XD.
This is probably the most important entertainment news I've heard for the past couple months. It is so amazing that Star Wars movies still have the potential to be created, especially since most thought that the franchise was done putting out new movies. It is a huge shift in the movie business and a major power move for Disney.
As a student, this piques my interest in how a business deal like this works. How does a shift in power this large happen? As a filmmaker, it is a great thing to know that there are many parts of the Star Wars franchise that will be renewed or started. It creates jobs in the industry that could potentially last a long time. As a consumer, nothing could please me more than to see my favorite movie franchise ever come out with another movie (especially one not written with Lucas's awful dialogue). I could not be more excited for 2015!!
I have many questions after reading this article. First, how good will this new Star Wars film be? Who is going to direct it? Write it? Act in it? What will the storyline be? Will it follow the books? How does the addition of all these companies affect Disney? What about George Lucas? I cannot wait to find out the answers to all these questions. For now, I will be waiting to hear any tiny tidbit of news about this fantastic deal between Disney and Lucasfilm.
Thursday, October 25, 2012
To the Left
http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/25/pro-obama-movie-to-get-anti-obama-ads/
Anti-Barack Obama ads will be played during a pro-Obama movie airing on National Geographic. The movie, which is a Weinstein production, is an overexaggeration of Obama's role in the murder of Osama bin Laden. The movie team was forced to cut part of the movie that showed Mitt Romney against the murder of this heinous criminal.
This caught my attention because it is more political lies on the left-wing side. Many are aware of what goes on on the right, but the same people are nearly oblivious to the fact that all the same things that happen on the right also happen on the left. It fascinates me how much politicians skewer the truth.
As a student, this helps me understand that neither political party is very satisfactory, and that I should be aware of corruption on both sides of the spectrum. As a filmmaker, this article tells me that biased work can still be made even if I personally disagree with it. As a consumer, it alerts me to the fact that I have to be wary of all the lies flung at me from both political parties.
A disconcerting question this article raises for me are how much integrity the movie business has. Are all films slightly biased, whether political, social, or otherwise? Another question I have is how involved Obama was in the creation of this film. Was it his intention to exaggerate the truth? Hopefully this last one gets answered soon.
Anti-Barack Obama ads will be played during a pro-Obama movie airing on National Geographic. The movie, which is a Weinstein production, is an overexaggeration of Obama's role in the murder of Osama bin Laden. The movie team was forced to cut part of the movie that showed Mitt Romney against the murder of this heinous criminal.
This caught my attention because it is more political lies on the left-wing side. Many are aware of what goes on on the right, but the same people are nearly oblivious to the fact that all the same things that happen on the right also happen on the left. It fascinates me how much politicians skewer the truth.
As a student, this helps me understand that neither political party is very satisfactory, and that I should be aware of corruption on both sides of the spectrum. As a filmmaker, this article tells me that biased work can still be made even if I personally disagree with it. As a consumer, it alerts me to the fact that I have to be wary of all the lies flung at me from both political parties.
A disconcerting question this article raises for me are how much integrity the movie business has. Are all films slightly biased, whether political, social, or otherwise? Another question I have is how involved Obama was in the creation of this film. Was it his intention to exaggerate the truth? Hopefully this last one gets answered soon.
Thursday, October 18, 2012
Carrie Remake?
First Teaser Trailer for Carrie Remake: Watch Now
The teaser trailer for the remake of the infamous Stephen King based movie Carrie has been released. In the trailer, burning buildings are shown along with a blood-covered Chloe Grace Moretz, the star of the remake. The film is about a troubled young teen who realizes she has telekinetic powers. A series of events leads to inevitable bloodshed and destruction. The movie is set to premiere in 2013.
This is big news because the original book and the first film, which premiered in 1976, were both highly successful. This resurgence of a classic horror film will draw people young and old to witness the reinvention of the movie. It also shows the tendency for production companies to lean toward remakes of films.
I am thrilled as a filmmaker to see how director Kimberly Peirce recreates this epic horror film. Will she keep faithful to the old, or will she go out of her way to make it unique and different? As a consumer, I am also ecstatic to see a remake of one of my favorite horror movies of all time (and no, it's not just because they filmed a lot of it at my elementary/middle school). I want to see Chloe Grace Moretz shine once again. As a student, I look for things that enable me to do more things with new people, and going to see Carrie with some friends is a perfect way to socialize.
This article makes me wonder if it can live up to the standards of the first movie. Is it a mistake to make a remake of such an iconic horror movie? Are remakes in general mistakes? Just some things to ponder.
Even though I have some doubts, nothing will stop me from seeing this reinvention of Carrie!
The teaser trailer for the remake of the infamous Stephen King based movie Carrie has been released. In the trailer, burning buildings are shown along with a blood-covered Chloe Grace Moretz, the star of the remake. The film is about a troubled young teen who realizes she has telekinetic powers. A series of events leads to inevitable bloodshed and destruction. The movie is set to premiere in 2013.
This is big news because the original book and the first film, which premiered in 1976, were both highly successful. This resurgence of a classic horror film will draw people young and old to witness the reinvention of the movie. It also shows the tendency for production companies to lean toward remakes of films.
I am thrilled as a filmmaker to see how director Kimberly Peirce recreates this epic horror film. Will she keep faithful to the old, or will she go out of her way to make it unique and different? As a consumer, I am also ecstatic to see a remake of one of my favorite horror movies of all time (and no, it's not just because they filmed a lot of it at my elementary/middle school). I want to see Chloe Grace Moretz shine once again. As a student, I look for things that enable me to do more things with new people, and going to see Carrie with some friends is a perfect way to socialize.
This article makes me wonder if it can live up to the standards of the first movie. Is it a mistake to make a remake of such an iconic horror movie? Are remakes in general mistakes? Just some things to ponder.
Even though I have some doubts, nothing will stop me from seeing this reinvention of Carrie!
Monday, October 8, 2012
"'The Dog Ate My Homework' Just Doesn't Cut It When You're Running For President"
Mitt Romney Declines to Participate in Nickelodeon's 'Kids Pick the President' Special
Is this really happening? Mitt Romney has once again offended the younger generation of Americans by declining the invitation to participate in the traditional Nickelodeon "Kids Pick the President" special. This is the second time a candidate has refused to answer the questions that were written by the kids of America, with the other candidate being John Kerry in 2004. This announcement came just mere days after Romney's pledge to cut PBS spending at the 1st Presidential Debate on Thursday, October 4th. On the other hand, the Obama campaign eagerly invited the Nickelodeon crew to the White House in order to have President Obama to answer the kid-written questions. When asked about their opinion on Romney's decision to skip over the special, the Obama campaign said, "It’s no surprise Romney decided to play hookey. Kids demand details, and I’m sure they want some answers on why Romney could increase their class sizes, eliminate their teacher’s jobs, raise taxes on their families and slash funding for Big Bird. Unfortunately for Mitt Romney, ‘The dog ate my homework’ just doesn't cut it when you’re running for president."
This is significant because it influences the way the American public perceives Mitt Romney. If he had taken half an hour to answer these questions, he would not have gotten more criticism for his campaign. However, he did skip it, and now he is taking more heat for his poor choices in judgment despite his obvious win at the debate.
As a student and fellow kid invested in politics, I do not see why this was such a big deal for Romney to do, and I find it disappointing that he declined to do such a standard part of the presidential campaign. I look forward to the Nickelodeon special, and it's going to be hard for him to get the kids' usually spot on vote when he doesn't even participate in the special. As a filmmaker, I would want every part of each member's campaign on screen so I can see the facts for myself instead of hearing them from other people. As a consumer, I want to see as much as I can of each candidate's standpoint, even through something as simple as a Nickelodeon TV kids special. This was an important opportunity missed by former Governor Romney, and I think that it is something he will truly regret when he looks back on his campaign whether he wins or not.
This makes me ask the question of whether Romney takes the kids of America seriously. Does he believe that this TV special was not as important as other parts of his campaign? If so, why does he feel this way? I do not understand why he would skip something as simple as this. Hopefully, we will hear a statement from the Romney campaign soon about the reasoning behind this.
Is this really happening? Mitt Romney has once again offended the younger generation of Americans by declining the invitation to participate in the traditional Nickelodeon "Kids Pick the President" special. This is the second time a candidate has refused to answer the questions that were written by the kids of America, with the other candidate being John Kerry in 2004. This announcement came just mere days after Romney's pledge to cut PBS spending at the 1st Presidential Debate on Thursday, October 4th. On the other hand, the Obama campaign eagerly invited the Nickelodeon crew to the White House in order to have President Obama to answer the kid-written questions. When asked about their opinion on Romney's decision to skip over the special, the Obama campaign said, "It’s no surprise Romney decided to play hookey. Kids demand details, and I’m sure they want some answers on why Romney could increase their class sizes, eliminate their teacher’s jobs, raise taxes on their families and slash funding for Big Bird. Unfortunately for Mitt Romney, ‘The dog ate my homework’ just doesn't cut it when you’re running for president."
This is significant because it influences the way the American public perceives Mitt Romney. If he had taken half an hour to answer these questions, he would not have gotten more criticism for his campaign. However, he did skip it, and now he is taking more heat for his poor choices in judgment despite his obvious win at the debate.
As a student and fellow kid invested in politics, I do not see why this was such a big deal for Romney to do, and I find it disappointing that he declined to do such a standard part of the presidential campaign. I look forward to the Nickelodeon special, and it's going to be hard for him to get the kids' usually spot on vote when he doesn't even participate in the special. As a filmmaker, I would want every part of each member's campaign on screen so I can see the facts for myself instead of hearing them from other people. As a consumer, I want to see as much as I can of each candidate's standpoint, even through something as simple as a Nickelodeon TV kids special. This was an important opportunity missed by former Governor Romney, and I think that it is something he will truly regret when he looks back on his campaign whether he wins or not.
This makes me ask the question of whether Romney takes the kids of America seriously. Does he believe that this TV special was not as important as other parts of his campaign? If so, why does he feel this way? I do not understand why he would skip something as simple as this. Hopefully, we will hear a statement from the Romney campaign soon about the reasoning behind this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)