Sunday, November 8, 2009
=D
It's finally over...! Thank you so much all the wonderful people of the world for commenting on my long and content-heavy blog posts however unbearable it was! (= love you all!
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Week 8 Entry: The Media Creeps
News Article Site: : http://www.todayonline.com/Singapore/EDC091024-0000053/?To-jab-or-not-to-jab-...-
Print Edition Page: http://www.todayonline.com/PrintEdition/NF
I’m sure many of you have seen over the weekend, the huge picture on the cover of Today’s newspaper: A doctor or nurse holding an injection needle probably containing the H1N1 vaccine. The big story is entitled: “Should you get the jab?” A survey was held to find out how many people would actually go and get vaccinated when the vaccine was to arrive in Singapore.
How in the first place would the world find out about H1N1 if not for the media coverage that has been so “in your face” for the past couple of months? For this pandemic, we see most effectively the surveillance (information) and cultural transmission (education and socialization of receivers) functions of the media.
Through the agenda setting function, repeated news coverage of the H1N1 epidemic has raised the importance of the issue in the public’s mind. While this article does not aim to influence or tell us what to think, it is able to make us think about it for ourselves.
Based on the people who were surveyed, most of them have indicated that they were not worried about the virus. Here is a short snip of the article which I find is most amusing:
“Of the 50 Singaporeans surveyed, 68 per cent said they weren't worried about H1N1. Of these 34 "non-worriers", 11 said they would nonetheless take the H1N1 vaccine once it became available.
What piqued my amusement was that men were far more likely to say they weren't worried - 81.5 per cent, versus 52.2 per cent of the women polled. However, almost all the professed non-worriers plumping for the vaccine were men (nine out of 11).
Was male bravado involved?
"The vaccine is for protection, even though I'm not worried," explained a 42-year-old male respondent.”
(Today 24th October 2009)
Indeed, was the male bravado involved? =P
We could see here that the powerful effects theory, where mass media is influential and the audience is passive, hardly or does not exist in modern day society. Everyone is way too educated as compared to the past. Rather, the limited and the moderate effects theory are more likely to show themselves in audience’s reactions to the mass media. Most people are waiting to see how the H1N1 pandemic evolves before they think about getting themselves vaccinated.
Apart from this small poll, a high-risk group of people were also interviewed, namely, the pregnant women. Most of them said they would not take something the vaccine for the fear of side effects, which have not yet been stated. They generally demand for more information on the dubious product that the government is intending to bring in, but haven’t yet told the public enough about it. Fair enough arguments.
Who runs the media? Why the powerful elite of course. Media hegemony is obviously existent in the H1N1 coverage. In this case, the people with the biggest say would be the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). They control what we read or hear about in the news. How much they actually tell us is something people hardly question. People can usually accept answers like, “We are confident they are safe…” Sure. They’re the professionals, what could go wrong?
The media surrounds us all and is always out to creep into our heads; the dirtiest of methods would probably be via sublimal messaging. As humans, we are no doubt easily influenced indirectly by the powerful elite through the different media vehicles.
Let’s have a short poll here too. Would you bother to get vaccinated? Why or why not?
Print Edition Page: http://www.todayonline.com/PrintEdition/NF
I’m sure many of you have seen over the weekend, the huge picture on the cover of Today’s newspaper: A doctor or nurse holding an injection needle probably containing the H1N1 vaccine. The big story is entitled: “Should you get the jab?” A survey was held to find out how many people would actually go and get vaccinated when the vaccine was to arrive in Singapore.
How in the first place would the world find out about H1N1 if not for the media coverage that has been so “in your face” for the past couple of months? For this pandemic, we see most effectively the surveillance (information) and cultural transmission (education and socialization of receivers) functions of the media.
Through the agenda setting function, repeated news coverage of the H1N1 epidemic has raised the importance of the issue in the public’s mind. While this article does not aim to influence or tell us what to think, it is able to make us think about it for ourselves.
Based on the people who were surveyed, most of them have indicated that they were not worried about the virus. Here is a short snip of the article which I find is most amusing:
“Of the 50 Singaporeans surveyed, 68 per cent said they weren't worried about H1N1. Of these 34 "non-worriers", 11 said they would nonetheless take the H1N1 vaccine once it became available.
What piqued my amusement was that men were far more likely to say they weren't worried - 81.5 per cent, versus 52.2 per cent of the women polled. However, almost all the professed non-worriers plumping for the vaccine were men (nine out of 11).
Was male bravado involved?
"The vaccine is for protection, even though I'm not worried," explained a 42-year-old male respondent.”
(Today 24th October 2009)
Indeed, was the male bravado involved? =P
We could see here that the powerful effects theory, where mass media is influential and the audience is passive, hardly or does not exist in modern day society. Everyone is way too educated as compared to the past. Rather, the limited and the moderate effects theory are more likely to show themselves in audience’s reactions to the mass media. Most people are waiting to see how the H1N1 pandemic evolves before they think about getting themselves vaccinated.
Apart from this small poll, a high-risk group of people were also interviewed, namely, the pregnant women. Most of them said they would not take something the vaccine for the fear of side effects, which have not yet been stated. They generally demand for more information on the dubious product that the government is intending to bring in, but haven’t yet told the public enough about it. Fair enough arguments.
Who runs the media? Why the powerful elite of course. Media hegemony is obviously existent in the H1N1 coverage. In this case, the people with the biggest say would be the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). They control what we read or hear about in the news. How much they actually tell us is something people hardly question. People can usually accept answers like, “We are confident they are safe…” Sure. They’re the professionals, what could go wrong?
The media surrounds us all and is always out to creep into our heads; the dirtiest of methods would probably be via sublimal messaging. As humans, we are no doubt easily influenced indirectly by the powerful elite through the different media vehicles.
Let’s have a short poll here too. Would you bother to get vaccinated? Why or why not?
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Week 7 Entry: To try again, or to escape…? That is the question.
Music Video Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yditeQ6lDYU&feature=related
Let’s see now: In the video, first we have got two well-dressed men in black, wearing sunglasses and walking through the school like they own it. Towards the end of the video, we see a short rewind to the time the men enter the school, to when they get somewhat “beaten up”, and then come out of the school again looking like they had a rough night after clubbing.
The girls shown in this video are an aggressive bunch; ultimately proud of their sexuality, which we can seen by how they dress and carry themselves. This sort of culture would definitely not be seen in Asian or Eastern cultures, where people are far more conservative (high context culture). The older Asian folk would certainly have a harder time appreciating such music videos.
Music videos are a great way to see and experience the high and low context cultures that exist in the various countries. In countries like America, low context culture is shown through their freedom of expression and freedom of speech. Words hold a higher meaning and the masses are able to relate better it. “New perspective” is a song which has quite thought-provoking lyrics. It is individualistic and rather honest. The idea of wanting to gain some kind of freedom is evident throughout the song as shown in the lines, “ I wanna live a life from a new perspective…” as the singer most passionately belts out. The singer certainly made this song “his own”.
The male character is portrayed as strong, “And I as I respire because I know they’ll never win…”, itching to prove himself to be someone different, “I wanna be praised from a new perspective…”, and just urging to find himself again after having lived life in a way he can’t comprehend anymore, “I’ll lose the traits that worry me...” It’s amazing how the number of “I”s are actually written into the song, which once again stresses on how the song was made to be personal. In case you guys didn’t already figure it out, this song is meant to relate to the singer’s romantic, dyadic relationship.
Time is an entity and various cultures have different ways of structuring it. I would say that this song has some interesting time orientation to it, thus showing a free and an open culture. It deals with both polychronic (synchronic) and monochronic (sequential) views of time. While in the sequential view, there is a clear indication to the process of relationship degradation in the song. There is a synchronic suggestion of time where it is flexible and can be stopped, rewound and fast-forward, as shown by the diction used in the song writing.
How many times have your plans fallen through and you find yourself lurking in the dark? Would you try again, or would you escape?
I seriously don’t think most songs today could get as personal or individualistic as this. But then again, I have been wrong before.
Let’s see now: In the video, first we have got two well-dressed men in black, wearing sunglasses and walking through the school like they own it. Towards the end of the video, we see a short rewind to the time the men enter the school, to when they get somewhat “beaten up”, and then come out of the school again looking like they had a rough night after clubbing.
The girls shown in this video are an aggressive bunch; ultimately proud of their sexuality, which we can seen by how they dress and carry themselves. This sort of culture would definitely not be seen in Asian or Eastern cultures, where people are far more conservative (high context culture). The older Asian folk would certainly have a harder time appreciating such music videos.
Music videos are a great way to see and experience the high and low context cultures that exist in the various countries. In countries like America, low context culture is shown through their freedom of expression and freedom of speech. Words hold a higher meaning and the masses are able to relate better it. “New perspective” is a song which has quite thought-provoking lyrics. It is individualistic and rather honest. The idea of wanting to gain some kind of freedom is evident throughout the song as shown in the lines, “ I wanna live a life from a new perspective…” as the singer most passionately belts out. The singer certainly made this song “his own”.
The male character is portrayed as strong, “And I as I respire because I know they’ll never win…”, itching to prove himself to be someone different, “I wanna be praised from a new perspective…”, and just urging to find himself again after having lived life in a way he can’t comprehend anymore, “I’ll lose the traits that worry me...” It’s amazing how the number of “I”s are actually written into the song, which once again stresses on how the song was made to be personal. In case you guys didn’t already figure it out, this song is meant to relate to the singer’s romantic, dyadic relationship.
Time is an entity and various cultures have different ways of structuring it. I would say that this song has some interesting time orientation to it, thus showing a free and an open culture. It deals with both polychronic (synchronic) and monochronic (sequential) views of time. While in the sequential view, there is a clear indication to the process of relationship degradation in the song. There is a synchronic suggestion of time where it is flexible and can be stopped, rewound and fast-forward, as shown by the diction used in the song writing.
How many times have your plans fallen through and you find yourself lurking in the dark? Would you try again, or would you escape?
I seriously don’t think most songs today could get as personal or individualistic as this. But then again, I have been wrong before.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Week 6 Entry: The correct puzzle piece – Squeezing in to belong
Group communication (A personal experience bit)
If there’s one thing I know, it’s that a group cannot be run by too many people, and too many egos. Groups are everywhere no matter how big or small the sizes vary. Small groups or subgroups that form are generally known as “cliques”. Cliques are known to give social stability and provide an individual with a status, usually to indicate some kind of self-importance and distinction from all others. These groups are “closed” and would seldom allow new people to join the group unless they are deemed “the same” or “cool” or “hot” or “popular” enough to join the clique. Even when most of us know that the most important thing is to be yourself (an individual who does not need a group for social security), naturally, we would still crave to be part of an “in” group.
Although some groups may seem all glamorous and powerful on the outside, one doesn’t usually take note of the group politics that exist within every single group. No one group is completely harmonious and agreeable to one another all the time. Power struggles between members who are characteristically dominant are always prevalent. You can’t avoid it.
The media is always portraying the importance of being a member of a group. Not just any group, but a group that is popular. The “A” crowd in a school is a place, a status that people would dream of. Seriously, is it all it’s cracked up to be? Is it even realistic to want to always be a part of the “popular bunch”? Belonging to such groups would also subject you to group pressure (the balance between group and individual needs), like any other group would. Maintaining your status in a group would mean you would have to keep participating in group activities and chipping in wherever you’re needed to. I think many kids go on through their schooling stages of life pretending to be someone they’re not because they want to fit in.
On the other hand, I’m not saying that belonging to a group is a bad thing. Groups give you the support you need: You’re included, you’re in control, and you’re loved! But most importantly, a person needs to retain his or her individual identity. Not act to get in the good books with the other puzzle pieces.
If you don’t fit, then something’s telling you to move on. No matter how you turn a piece of a puzzle to fit into a small space, if it doesn’t complement in the first place, wouldn’t the next natural reaction be to move on to the next piece?
If there’s one thing I know, it’s that a group cannot be run by too many people, and too many egos. Groups are everywhere no matter how big or small the sizes vary. Small groups or subgroups that form are generally known as “cliques”. Cliques are known to give social stability and provide an individual with a status, usually to indicate some kind of self-importance and distinction from all others. These groups are “closed” and would seldom allow new people to join the group unless they are deemed “the same” or “cool” or “hot” or “popular” enough to join the clique. Even when most of us know that the most important thing is to be yourself (an individual who does not need a group for social security), naturally, we would still crave to be part of an “in” group.
Although some groups may seem all glamorous and powerful on the outside, one doesn’t usually take note of the group politics that exist within every single group. No one group is completely harmonious and agreeable to one another all the time. Power struggles between members who are characteristically dominant are always prevalent. You can’t avoid it.
The media is always portraying the importance of being a member of a group. Not just any group, but a group that is popular. The “A” crowd in a school is a place, a status that people would dream of. Seriously, is it all it’s cracked up to be? Is it even realistic to want to always be a part of the “popular bunch”? Belonging to such groups would also subject you to group pressure (the balance between group and individual needs), like any other group would. Maintaining your status in a group would mean you would have to keep participating in group activities and chipping in wherever you’re needed to. I think many kids go on through their schooling stages of life pretending to be someone they’re not because they want to fit in.
On the other hand, I’m not saying that belonging to a group is a bad thing. Groups give you the support you need: You’re included, you’re in control, and you’re loved! But most importantly, a person needs to retain his or her individual identity. Not act to get in the good books with the other puzzle pieces.
If you don’t fit, then something’s telling you to move on. No matter how you turn a piece of a puzzle to fit into a small space, if it doesn’t complement in the first place, wouldn’t the next natural reaction be to move on to the next piece?
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Week 5 Entry: Two Is Better Than None. I mean ... One.
Video site: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnsauWgTMBs&feature=related
Two is better than one.
I know what you’re thinking: … It’s another love song.
No doubt. The title is just screaming out to you.
The title “Two is better than one” immediately tells listeners that a dyadic, interpersonal relationship is involved in the song. The song starts off with a guy singing “I remember what you wore on the first day”. This sort of shows the importance that physical appearance plays in the initiation and formation of a relationship. Of course the first thing anybody would notice about you is what you wear and how you carry yourself. That determines whether you would be significantly remembered or easily forgotten.
The physical appearance aspect is dominant in the song, like when they talk about how wonderful the other party’s face and eyes are and so forth. I would say that the song does not go deeply into the formation of the dynamics between the couple. It concentrates mainly on the initiation phase, and very quickly skips through the experimenting and intensifying phase, on to the integrating and bonding phase, where you get the idea that they would die without one another. It is rather shallow, and uses common phrases from every other cliché love song that has already been produced. But hey, it’s catchy so what’s not to like? We can’t expect much in a song after all. If we wanted to see the whole “coming together” stages of relational development bit, it might as well be an opera.
Exchange is all about getting what you want out of a relationship, like the costs and rewards. In this case, the obvious exchange is that: one party can’t live without the other, “…I can’t live without you”. I’m sure you all know that it’s nothing literal. Rather, that their lives would not be the same without each other present. Certainly they meet each other’s tangible and emotional expectations. This is where the saying, “They complete one another” comes about. Meeting each other’s relational need is imperative in relationship maintenance.
In sweet songs like these, you hardly or never see conflict arising in the middle of the song. The song writers know better than to spoil a perfectly romantic song. It throws people out of the “mood”, and chart ratings and popularity would thus not be so high.
By the way, I really like this song. I’m just sarcastic today. I can’t help it really. But I think that a lot of songs today can really warp a person’s idea of what a relationship should be like. It’s always about how “hot” this guy looks or how gorgeous that girl looks. We all know we can’t be that superficial all the time.
But here we are.
Two is better than one.
I know what you’re thinking: … It’s another love song.
No doubt. The title is just screaming out to you.
The title “Two is better than one” immediately tells listeners that a dyadic, interpersonal relationship is involved in the song. The song starts off with a guy singing “I remember what you wore on the first day”. This sort of shows the importance that physical appearance plays in the initiation and formation of a relationship. Of course the first thing anybody would notice about you is what you wear and how you carry yourself. That determines whether you would be significantly remembered or easily forgotten.
The physical appearance aspect is dominant in the song, like when they talk about how wonderful the other party’s face and eyes are and so forth. I would say that the song does not go deeply into the formation of the dynamics between the couple. It concentrates mainly on the initiation phase, and very quickly skips through the experimenting and intensifying phase, on to the integrating and bonding phase, where you get the idea that they would die without one another. It is rather shallow, and uses common phrases from every other cliché love song that has already been produced. But hey, it’s catchy so what’s not to like? We can’t expect much in a song after all. If we wanted to see the whole “coming together” stages of relational development bit, it might as well be an opera.
Exchange is all about getting what you want out of a relationship, like the costs and rewards. In this case, the obvious exchange is that: one party can’t live without the other, “…I can’t live without you”. I’m sure you all know that it’s nothing literal. Rather, that their lives would not be the same without each other present. Certainly they meet each other’s tangible and emotional expectations. This is where the saying, “They complete one another” comes about. Meeting each other’s relational need is imperative in relationship maintenance.
In sweet songs like these, you hardly or never see conflict arising in the middle of the song. The song writers know better than to spoil a perfectly romantic song. It throws people out of the “mood”, and chart ratings and popularity would thus not be so high.
By the way, I really like this song. I’m just sarcastic today. I can’t help it really. But I think that a lot of songs today can really warp a person’s idea of what a relationship should be like. It’s always about how “hot” this guy looks or how gorgeous that girl looks. We all know we can’t be that superficial all the time.
But here we are.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Week 4 Entry: IT’S TIGER TIME for Smart, and … Dirty Play
Advertisement site: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MC630QFEM0&feature=related
“The Last Tiger. Worth playing for.” This beer advertisement is one of the few that I particularly enjoy. It shows a fight going on between two men over a last bottle of beer.
It’s a battle alright. However smart or … dirty they play.
No words, just a change in suits and character. Each time the character changes to become one that is more powerful than the previous, viewers see the changes in kinesics (body language) as the characters try to act more menacing. The use of oculesics (eye contact) is important in pulling off the entire video, being that looking into the enemy’s eyes is meant to intimidate the other party. In the end however, apparently, the wiles of a woman still cannot be resisted … even by a robot. This unexpected twist in the end certainly made this advertisement fully entertaining. The first time I was watching it, I was really wondering how it would end as the characters were becoming more bizarre by the second.
Apart from the two main characters in the video, there are bystanders within the casual and social proxemics that observe curiously the happenings going on around them, mainly the eccentric display by the two main characters.
The message in this advertisement that the last bottle of beer is worth every last bit of trouble, is quite well conveyed through nonverbal communication. The characters involved in the arm-wrestling “fight”, were able to put across their “fight” message very easily as they were on the same channel preference. But seriously, a fight isn’t THAT hard to miss, given that our human nature is to be competitive.
Nonverbal cues are not all that simple and are not always that direct. Most of the time, it is easy to misunderstand what message another party is actually conveying. Other than that, this is a fun advertisement showing how people would go to such great lengths in order to win a competition.
Well, it’s not always brawn, but brains that matter too.
* HERE'S A LITTLE SOMETHING I'M ADDING IN, ALL THANKS TO THE WONDERFUL CHENG WHO POINTED IT OUT. (4 Oct 09)
Over-drinking is another story altogether. It is up to an individual to know when they have reached their limit and know not to overdo it because of some peer pressure or other factors. The human body can only take SO much. But the funny thing is, that people would still binge drink even though they know it is not at all good for them. It's the same with smoking. Smokers know the harmful effects, yet they stupidly indulge in it and don't go for medical checkups for the fear of finding something they wouldn't want to find. Hey, ignorance is bliss, but how long can you keep running from truth?
When kids see such ads, they would definitely be curious about this drink which macho "lumpy matresses" (men) fight over. It is up to parents then, to educate their children on alcohol and its effects. There are bound to be times where kids see the need to be the "big kid in the playground" in order to win something. It's all part and parcel of growing up, and as mentioned before, sensible education is needed to let kids see that being the strongest or the best isn't everything.
“The Last Tiger. Worth playing for.” This beer advertisement is one of the few that I particularly enjoy. It shows a fight going on between two men over a last bottle of beer.
It’s a battle alright. However smart or … dirty they play.
No words, just a change in suits and character. Each time the character changes to become one that is more powerful than the previous, viewers see the changes in kinesics (body language) as the characters try to act more menacing. The use of oculesics (eye contact) is important in pulling off the entire video, being that looking into the enemy’s eyes is meant to intimidate the other party. In the end however, apparently, the wiles of a woman still cannot be resisted … even by a robot. This unexpected twist in the end certainly made this advertisement fully entertaining. The first time I was watching it, I was really wondering how it would end as the characters were becoming more bizarre by the second.
Apart from the two main characters in the video, there are bystanders within the casual and social proxemics that observe curiously the happenings going on around them, mainly the eccentric display by the two main characters.
The message in this advertisement that the last bottle of beer is worth every last bit of trouble, is quite well conveyed through nonverbal communication. The characters involved in the arm-wrestling “fight”, were able to put across their “fight” message very easily as they were on the same channel preference. But seriously, a fight isn’t THAT hard to miss, given that our human nature is to be competitive.
Nonverbal cues are not all that simple and are not always that direct. Most of the time, it is easy to misunderstand what message another party is actually conveying. Other than that, this is a fun advertisement showing how people would go to such great lengths in order to win a competition.
Well, it’s not always brawn, but brains that matter too.
* HERE'S A LITTLE SOMETHING I'M ADDING IN, ALL THANKS TO THE WONDERFUL CHENG WHO POINTED IT OUT. (4 Oct 09)
Over-drinking is another story altogether. It is up to an individual to know when they have reached their limit and know not to overdo it because of some peer pressure or other factors. The human body can only take SO much. But the funny thing is, that people would still binge drink even though they know it is not at all good for them. It's the same with smoking. Smokers know the harmful effects, yet they stupidly indulge in it and don't go for medical checkups for the fear of finding something they wouldn't want to find. Hey, ignorance is bliss, but how long can you keep running from truth?
When kids see such ads, they would definitely be curious about this drink which macho "lumpy matresses" (men) fight over. It is up to parents then, to educate their children on alcohol and its effects. There are bound to be times where kids see the need to be the "big kid in the playground" in order to win something. It's all part and parcel of growing up, and as mentioned before, sensible education is needed to let kids see that being the strongest or the best isn't everything.
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Week 3 Entry: (500) days of Impending Winter Gloom
Movie: (500) days of Summer (Release Date: 8 October 2009)
Obviously, I managed to catch a sneak preview =)
Movie trailer site: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsD0NpFSADM&feature=fvst
This was not exactly a typical romantic comedy. It was a tragic romance. Don’t get me wrong, nobody died or anything, it’s just that I had a different expectation to how this movie would turn out. It was however, very funny. For girls, this movie gives a brief insight into how clueless the male species can be. Like when the adult male protagonist always looks to his kid sister for advice. For boys: You would be thinking, “That’s so true! Why are women so oblivious?” As the story unfolds, you’ll find that not only the verbal exchange between the couple is entertaining, but the way Zooey Deschanel acts, her body language and facial expressions, in the nonverbal communication sense is really hilarious. Apart from that, the omniscient “commentator” definitely lends a comic element to this movie as well.
Cognitive schemata are seen in the personality contrasts between the two characters. Although both come from a broken family, their mental framework and ideals in love, from the separate upbringing, differ quite significantly. One believes in the stereotyped romances in books and movies and so forth, while the other doesn’t believe that love exists.
The movie script, unlike most movies, involves the jumping from date to date within the five hundred days. In other words, the movie doesn’t follow a fully clear chronological order. However, these leaps through the past and present show the great contrast in the progress or the deterioration of the relationship. While the characters would find themselves caught in a similar or familiar situation, only the audience would be able to see the differences and compare it.
My favorite part of the movie was when they showed a scene which was split into half: One side showed the male character’s expectations, while the other showed the reality unfolding, (which must have been nauseating to the man). This is one instance where the male character’s curiosity and his hope for closure (meaning the success in his relationship with Summer), caused him even more pain and disappointment. Well, obviously everything did not turn out as planned and the whole “patch-up relationship script” was a total flop.
All in all, this movie teaches us to live life and enjoy it. Only when the time is right, you yourself would know when to take a leap from your comfort zone into the unknown. I thought this show was brilliantly and unusually filmed as the contrasts open for discussion are so wide and it gives the audience a clearer picture of what message the show was trying to convey in the end. A good question for me to ask would be: Has everything always met up with your perceptions and expectations in life? Are there other ways besides positive thinking to avoid or overcome such disappointment?
Certainly, life isn’t all that simple, but we still live.
Obviously, I managed to catch a sneak preview =)
Movie trailer site: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsD0NpFSADM&feature=fvst
This was not exactly a typical romantic comedy. It was a tragic romance. Don’t get me wrong, nobody died or anything, it’s just that I had a different expectation to how this movie would turn out. It was however, very funny. For girls, this movie gives a brief insight into how clueless the male species can be. Like when the adult male protagonist always looks to his kid sister for advice. For boys: You would be thinking, “That’s so true! Why are women so oblivious?” As the story unfolds, you’ll find that not only the verbal exchange between the couple is entertaining, but the way Zooey Deschanel acts, her body language and facial expressions, in the nonverbal communication sense is really hilarious. Apart from that, the omniscient “commentator” definitely lends a comic element to this movie as well.
Cognitive schemata are seen in the personality contrasts between the two characters. Although both come from a broken family, their mental framework and ideals in love, from the separate upbringing, differ quite significantly. One believes in the stereotyped romances in books and movies and so forth, while the other doesn’t believe that love exists.
The movie script, unlike most movies, involves the jumping from date to date within the five hundred days. In other words, the movie doesn’t follow a fully clear chronological order. However, these leaps through the past and present show the great contrast in the progress or the deterioration of the relationship. While the characters would find themselves caught in a similar or familiar situation, only the audience would be able to see the differences and compare it.
My favorite part of the movie was when they showed a scene which was split into half: One side showed the male character’s expectations, while the other showed the reality unfolding, (which must have been nauseating to the man). This is one instance where the male character’s curiosity and his hope for closure (meaning the success in his relationship with Summer), caused him even more pain and disappointment. Well, obviously everything did not turn out as planned and the whole “patch-up relationship script” was a total flop.
All in all, this movie teaches us to live life and enjoy it. Only when the time is right, you yourself would know when to take a leap from your comfort zone into the unknown. I thought this show was brilliantly and unusually filmed as the contrasts open for discussion are so wide and it gives the audience a clearer picture of what message the show was trying to convey in the end. A good question for me to ask would be: Has everything always met up with your perceptions and expectations in life? Are there other ways besides positive thinking to avoid or overcome such disappointment?
Certainly, life isn’t all that simple, but we still live.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Week 2 Entry: THE PROPOSAL
Movie: THE PROPOSAL (Release Date in Singapore: 20 August 2009)
Movie Trailer site: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPgZcW8MCaA&feature=fvst
A comic romance is ultimately the perfect way for a person to get that tingly feeling all over. When I first saw the movie trailer for “The Proposal”, I found that something very much stood out or deviated from a common traditional norm: The boss (a WOMAN) proposing to her secretary (a MAN). It seems like the woman (Sandra Bullock) took on the role of the usual male authority figure. This twist, indeed, indicates that the glass ceiling has been raised to a considerable height for women in the world of business. Apart from that, the movie shows very well, the interchanging “power play” between the two main characters.
Well it’s really tempting, but I’m not all out to go and ruin the movie for all those who haven’t yet watched the show, so don’t worry. =)
Now, what made Hollywood decide to film a movie that totally puts men in that rather humiliating position? The show does raise some issues, and brings to light that women today hold more power. But proposing to men? (Wow she’s got some guts.) The 21st Century Singaporean woman is often seen or perceived as one who intimidates men. I had a guy friend who said once that he would rather look for a wife from a foreign country. When I asked him why, he just said: “Singaporean girls are scary!” Certainly, the empowerment through education and various media influences have definitely helped to push women’s standing in society, to what it is today.
Besides the fact that our female population is highly educated, the culture of the media, which plays on our psychological perspective, has somewhat contributed to our wanting to be more than just the lady that stays home to look after the kids and cook for their husbands. (We’ve got ambitions too, you hear!) This form of linear interaction (linear model) through the television, radio, newspapers and magazines, has helped to influence the characteristic of being very competitive high-achievers. While movies depict more women in positions of power in the workforce, magazines that mainly cater to women encourage them to be confident and mature in society. At the same time, the radio screams: “IF MEN GOT PREGNANT, WOMEN WOULD TAKE OVER THE WORLD!” Note: We’ve got women’s rights movements because most societies have been dominantly patriarchal all along.
But seriously, are we THAT intimidating? Perhaps the male perceptions are slightly flawed. Because if that’s the case, why are we still fighting so hard against male chauvinism and discrimination?
Movie Trailer site: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPgZcW8MCaA&feature=fvst
A comic romance is ultimately the perfect way for a person to get that tingly feeling all over. When I first saw the movie trailer for “The Proposal”, I found that something very much stood out or deviated from a common traditional norm: The boss (a WOMAN) proposing to her secretary (a MAN). It seems like the woman (Sandra Bullock) took on the role of the usual male authority figure. This twist, indeed, indicates that the glass ceiling has been raised to a considerable height for women in the world of business. Apart from that, the movie shows very well, the interchanging “power play” between the two main characters.
Well it’s really tempting, but I’m not all out to go and ruin the movie for all those who haven’t yet watched the show, so don’t worry. =)
Now, what made Hollywood decide to film a movie that totally puts men in that rather humiliating position? The show does raise some issues, and brings to light that women today hold more power. But proposing to men? (Wow she’s got some guts.) The 21st Century Singaporean woman is often seen or perceived as one who intimidates men. I had a guy friend who said once that he would rather look for a wife from a foreign country. When I asked him why, he just said: “Singaporean girls are scary!” Certainly, the empowerment through education and various media influences have definitely helped to push women’s standing in society, to what it is today.
Besides the fact that our female population is highly educated, the culture of the media, which plays on our psychological perspective, has somewhat contributed to our wanting to be more than just the lady that stays home to look after the kids and cook for their husbands. (We’ve got ambitions too, you hear!) This form of linear interaction (linear model) through the television, radio, newspapers and magazines, has helped to influence the characteristic of being very competitive high-achievers. While movies depict more women in positions of power in the workforce, magazines that mainly cater to women encourage them to be confident and mature in society. At the same time, the radio screams: “IF MEN GOT PREGNANT, WOMEN WOULD TAKE OVER THE WORLD!” Note: We’ve got women’s rights movements because most societies have been dominantly patriarchal all along.
But seriously, are we THAT intimidating? Perhaps the male perceptions are slightly flawed. Because if that’s the case, why are we still fighting so hard against male chauvinism and discrimination?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)