Gotta love that General Tso's

Chapters 9-11 of Media & Minorities focuses on the views of African, Hispanic, and Asian Mass Publics in the News. I focused on the Asian chapter (11) since I was not sure about their involvement in the news what-so-ever. According to the chapter, I was justified in this lack of knowledge since Asian Americans are very excluded from the news. When they were mentioned in the news, very much like other minorities, they were labeled with their Asian text, not by their name ("Korean Grocer Receives Probation"). The chapter goes on and discusses the various "model minority" images that the mass news can attribute to Asian Americans. One of the biggest stereotypical images and ideas about Asian Americans were that they were foreigners and thats it. There was a great deal of emphasis on the racial hierarchy saying that Asians could never assimilate into American society. This is ironic because the chapter also mentions how another big aspect of the Model Minority is that Asians are high achievers. Hmmm, in America the strong survive.....yet, if they achieve too much they are deemed as cold and emotionless. This is definitely a Catch 22 for Asian Americans.
Recently, there was an episode of South Park (yeah I know, but I love it) in which the overtly racist Cartman joins in a crusade to eliminate the threat of Chinese in America (because of the Olympics). To do this, he and another character Butters, dress up like stereotypical Chinese and take over a P.F. Changs. To his dismay, all the people working for P.F. Changs are American. I thought that this was hilarious. As the chapter talked about how many Asians were most of the time viewed as foreigners, their conceptual ethnicity is a part of our food consumption. At the same time, I am reminded of a quote from Family Guy, "What do you want to have for dinner tonight? I dunno, maybe Caucasian?" While there has been assimilation with the food industry, Asian food is still stamped with their ethnicity.
all this talk of Chinese food is making me hungry.

Double Indemnity Review

Double Indemnity, to me was classic. It wasn't amazing, but it was something I could appreciate. Watching it, I started to see themes in film Noir and in cinema today. The perfect murder, the payoff, good guy tempted by woman, woman gold digger using man, the list goes on and on. One of the most notable things about Double Indemnity was how nearly everything focused around the night and the "moral" character. Keyes was this character to me. While he is not a perfect man (smoking, drinking, married to his job, etc), he still does the right thing. In a sense, he is the anchor to the main character. Besides that, Double Indemnity had a good plot and a good cast of actors that played their roles superbly. I am not wowed by the plot, but that is only because it is something that I personally have seen before. All in all, a good intro to noir.

This is the class that we say nothing...

George Lipsitz's article "The Greatest Story Ever Sold" is about the selling power of the O.J. Simpson trial. The trial, be it morbid murder trial, was something that combined multiple aspects of media commercialization into consumption for the average American citizen. Lipsitz mentioned how television is one of the big middle grounds of media, in which someone can have face time for nearly everything. The trial gave us not only ideas of consumption, but it was also popular because it felt like television show. "The athlete/actor/celebrity defendant charged with murder could have come out of Murder, She Wrote or Columbo while the details about his residence and vehicles might easily fit into segments of Dallas Dynasty, or Life Styles of the Rich and Famous" (pg. 178). Though, Lipsitz mentioned that the trial did feel more realistic, though not entirely.
Lipsitz went on to talk about how not only did the trial do a lot for television and newspapers, but they also did much for books, and even "fancy" attire just because of association with the people behind them (the leather gloves, Italian shoes, Cochran's suits, etc). It was also said that during and after the trial, O.J. copyrighted his name and known nicknames so he could produce a profit. (Doesn't this seem just slightly morbid, that is if he did do it.....)

I found that this article focused on the fact of O.J.'s fame instead of his skin color. You would also think that it would at least mention John Cochran not just because he is black, but because he was a big selling point in the trial. I mean, who ever is going to forget, "If the glove does not fit, you must acquit." Was the trial's attention in actuality a focus on the celebrity status of O.J., or is there more than meets the eye?

Thinking this trial, I could not think of any athletes that have come under fire like this. Honestly, the only thing that came to my mind was the Kobe Bryant trial, and even then I barely knew anything about that. The O.J. trial, I knew everything about. Media's marketing, or racial finger pointing?
I wanted to have a clip from Family Guy that I felt displayed this situation, but I couldn't find it. The scene shows Brian (the dog) and his black roommate looking in on the Kobe or O.J. trial (I cannot remember which). When Kobe/O.J. is not guilty, the roommate jumps up and says "yes," while Brian jumps up and complains. Then they both draw guns on each other and decide not to live with each other. Was the O.J. verdict something along the lines of this? I remember believing that he did it. Was this my racial outlook being skewed, or was it the truth. Maybe I was wrong. Well, the fact is that he was not guilty, and used his freedom to steal his Heisman back.

Thats like asking why pumpkin pie is good....

So, we were asked by our professor to make a bulleted list of things that are necessary for "truly great film." This is going to be hard. I feel like no matter what I write it is going to be refuted by at least 15 films I didn't think of. Guh. Though I do have to say that there are varying degrees o the necessities that go into making a truly great film. There is a lot of give and take.
Well, here it goes

To be truly great, a film must have/be.....

• A decent plot-Does not have to be amazing, though it helps. A great film does not have to blow you away with their plot. Casablanca doesn't have a AMAZING plot, but it does have an interesting plot.

• Unique-There should be at least one thing that makes this film stand out more than most films. Ran brought together Shakespeare and traditional Japanese theater. Daughters of the Dust envisioned African style theater in American film.

That is all I can think about for now. I will try to update it.

Ran Review

So, I wasn't completely sure what Ran was when I walked into class. Once I heard that it was an Akira Kurosawa film, I was really excited. I must say that personally I really liked Ran. It was an easy enough plot to follow (thank you Shakespeare), the action scenes were good, and I could understand most of the cultural things within it. I have spent a lot of time reading about not so much acting style of old Japan, but pretty much with everything else. So, most of the cultural things made sense.
When it comes to mise-en-scene, I felt like it really had a historical mise-en-scene with the very rustic appearance of the castles and the armor and such, but also had a theatrical mise-en-scene with the actor/ress's decisions and make-up.
I think what made this film really appealing to me was the melding of King Lear into Ran. It is a cross cultural movie that can show how little boundaries there are between cultures. However, at the same time, it also shows how many there are too.

"Men Are Terrible and They Will Hurt You Because This is Lifetime

The joined efforts of Minu Lee and Chong Heup Cho give a little look into the married life of Korean couples in their article "Women Watching Together." The article focuses primarily on the women in the relationships and how sometimes they struggle to find time to watch their shows. Some of the women interview mentioned how they will watch the shows after when their husbands are away, since they would not want to watch that "trash". Other women felt that since the house was basically more of a workplace then a relaxing environment (thank you Confucius), relaxing was looked down upon (as opposed to the men who go to work and relax when they get home). They also talked about how women get together to watch these shows sometimes, yet most of the time they do other things like gossip and such.
The article then went on to talk about a series called The Sand Castle which pointed out a husband who had an affair. The husband treated both women bad, and so the wife ended up leaving. According to the women in the article, the men called this series trash. However, the women felt empowered by the show and actually started questioning their spouses. Oddly enough, some of the husbands actually agreed that men can have affairs.
So, I felt a little weird reading this article. I am so used to soap operas being completely ridiculous. I find it odd how they can actually be empowering to another culture. Though I look at our soap operas and shows of that such and see a culture that has taken the idea of women empowerment and manages to cheapen it. This clip was from Family Guy. I must say that this pretty much sums up the idea behind Lifetime which is notorious for its abusive husband/overall male outlook.

I am sort of curious about how the women interviewed would say about Lifetime.

Daughters of the Dust review

Daughters of the Dust......umm.....not really much to say about it.
I usually like foreign films, but American films made to be like foreign films....meh. I understood before watching the film that it was supposed to be different from the average American plot line. Yet, I felt like there wasn't much difference except that it was just really drawn out. Actually my initial reaction to the film was that it felt like a Hallmark or Lifetime movie (not really sure how to explain my reasonings).
I was not crazy about the film, but there were some things that I could appreciate about it. After talking to a classmate (thanks Andy!) I came to appreciate the cultural significance of it. From watching this film, I could understand where a portion of the Black background came from. Also, little things like their language gave me an understanding where the accents today come from.
So, overall, not my cup of tea. Maybe after a talk I'll understand it a little more...

Casablanca Review

Ah, Casablanca. You really can't go wrong with this movie here. I watched it once in high school and appreciated it then. Now, 4 or so years later, I can appreciate it so much more. This time around, certain things just made more sense. Considering that Casablanca is one of those films that is at the base of Hollywood films makes it's historical background credible. I found myself seeing so many pop culture references in my head that I never understood until now.
I find Casablanca funny because it seems like this movie was made as a propaganda piece against the Nazis and against the Vichy government in France (especially when the bottle of Vichy water is tossed in the trash at the end of the film). It is amazing to see that a propaganda piece could capture the eyes of millions of viewers through the years.
To top it all off, the paradoxical acting of Humphrey Bogart (emotionless, yet full of emotion at the same time, and always amazing!) makes Casablanca an antique of film.

Don't Shoot Until You See.....

Stuart Hall's article The Whites of Their Eyes talks about the ideological formation of race. Hall starts off by giving talking about three things to remember about ideologies. Ideologies are not stand alone concepts, they are what we form our world around, and they influence our ideas (pretty much stuff that we have heard before). He goes from that to talking about the ideology of race. Hall makes sure to start off by saying that the idea that media is the lone "ruling class" that enforces these ideologies is wrong. However, media is one of the biggest producers of these ideologies. To explain this a little more, Hall defines overt and inferential racism, the first being blatant racism, while the latter being a "set of unquestioned assumptions."
From there, Hall introduces and explains a few of the base-images of the "grammar of race." The base-image's shown were the slave figure, the native, and the clown.
For my case-in-point I wanted to focus on the slave figure
I am pretty sure everyone knows who this famous actor is. Morgan Freeman is a phenomenal actor. He really is amazing. The parts he plays, in my opinion, can give him the base-image of a form (my own) of the slave figure that Hall portrays.
I actually disagree with Hall in the fact that the the slave image is really only "childlike." I think that the slave image should include the wise old man image within it giving a feel of an Uncle Tom or something along those lines. Now I am not also saying that Freeman is adhering to "Master" either. With Freeman, I think that the fact that he is always the wise supporting character give him the image of always less important than the main character (always seemingly white).
image from http://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/images/2005/01/25/image669004x.jpg