Society is Dead: We have Retreated into the iWorld

Andrew Sullivan colorfully displays his views on the new technology such as the iPod, iPad, iPhone, etc.  He argues that by using and iPod, you are essentially creating your own bubble and do not recognize the social behavior that is expected of you like a polite hello when you catch someone’s eye.  Sullivan ends his analysis with a very definitive opinion.  Obviously, iPods are bad for you socially.

Sullivan demonstrates awareness of his audience very clearly and accurately when he “talks.”  He refers to the reader as “you” like he is speaking to him directly, which in fact he is.  He chose to speak directly to the reader because he knew that his article would have power over almost everyone.  Almost everyone has an iPod now and even if they did not, they have an opinion on it.  In order to not offend anyone, Sullivan constructs his argument very carefully.  He does not begin by stating his reasons why iPods are bad, but instead captures the reader’s attention with New York City.  By easing into his topic and stating his observations first, he makes the reader open his mind to the possibility that iPods could be potentially hurtful to the quality of society.

Sullivan also creates an effective argument by citing his own experiences.  He shows the reader that he is a credible source.  He is not someone who just wants to get rid of all the new technology because he personally does not like it, but he is someone who truly loves his iPod and can understand the bad qualities it possesses.  Once he opened up to the outside world he found that he could connect more with the people around him.  Everyone else should too.

Old Movies in 3D?

The movie industry is making a big push back to the 3D movie line.  Back when it was new and therefore cool, everyone would go see a new movie in 3D, but the buzz has dwindled down considerably since then.  There simply is not as big of a demand for 3D movies anymore.  So why would they bring back old movies but put them in 3D?  It makes a lot of money.  It is more likely that people will pay the extra money to go see their favorite old movie in a theater with the big screen than go see a new movie in 3D anymore.  They are willing to pay the extra $3 or so for the glasses because they want to enjoy the experience.  They are forgetting that the old movies are not equipped for 3D.  They have very little 3D effects in them unlike the movies made for 3D showings. 

Disney first tested the waters with The Lion King in 3D.  It was a huge success considering The Lion King is a major favorite Disney classic loved by most people.  Plus, the movie targeted people of all ages.  Adults would take their children to see the movie because they had never seen it in theaters the first time and children love Disney movies.  Also, teenagers who grew up with Disney went to see it because they are still a child at heart.  To target the older audiences and people who simply do not appreciate Disney movies, they are making Star Wars and the Titanic in 3D.  I am sure that those movies will be Box Office hits too considering their appeal to the masses.

There is really no valid reason for converting those old movies into 3D.  The movie industry is only doing it out of greed.  Instead of coming up with new interesting stories, they have made it a habit of bringing up old ones hoping that the population will respond satisfactorily (which they have).  Unfortunately, this means that more movies are going to be converted into 3D format and less creativity will be happening.

Is a high school education too oriented toward standardized testing?

Cartoons are a very effective form of communication between the artist and the reader.  The artist can express his ideas on a topic that he feels is controversial without droning on and on about how it can be fixed.  He simply states what he feels is necessary and moves on.  The cartoon that Daryl Cagle drew in the text is a slam on the way the education system works.  He drew an interview of what seems to be a first time employee and a human resources person.  Asking a simple question such as “How has high school prepared your for this job?” only gets a scantron answer from the interviewee.  The scantron represents how most schools test the intelligence of a person. However, by doing this, the schools really only test the students ability to pick out the correct answer out of four. 

Cagle does an excellent job presenting his views of high school education to the reader.  The interviewee has a dumbfounded look on his face like he has no idea how high school prepared him for the real world.  Cagle’s cartoon elicits a clear and strong emotional response from parents and generally people everywhere.  When someone points out a flaw in the educational system, people everywhere go crazy and try to find ways to get the government to change public schooling.  Without this cartoon, I doubt anyone would know that that is what goes on in public high schools.  Cagle illustrates that scantrons are not the best form for teachers to make students show their knowledge because it cannot be applied to the real world in their future jobs.  Overall, his message is very clear and visually stimulating.

One for the Money Review

One for the Money is a movie based on a book starring Katherine Heigl.  It is about recently unemployed Stephanie Plum whose next job is at her cousin’s bail-bond business.  Her first assignment that she picks is a wanted cop who is from her romantic past.  The cop was tangled up in a shooting that he was framed for making him want to prove his innocence before being sent to jail.  Since she has never caught wanted criminals before, she has a hard time figuring out the ropes, but in the end she succeeds in a quirky way.

This movie is quite obviously geared more towards girls with the female lead trying to get revenge on her ex-boyfriend.  However, the action and comedy could make the movie enjoyable for guys, too, but the key word there is “could.”  The movie is well played out and left me guessing until the end.  Of course, the guy that you knew was the bad guy was part of the evil scheme in the end but a more devious intelligent mastermind was behind him telling him what to do.  However, I think some people would be disappointed with the humor in the movie because it was corny but personally I enjoy that.  There was not very much action but that is to be expected from a girl running around in high heels.  Also, when there was a mix up where she was about to be involved in a fight, her “knight in shining armor” (a.k.a. the cop) would show up and save her.  For those who love the action of the Bourne Trilogy or The Dark Knight then this movie is not for you. 

Overall, I thought this movie was a nice way to spend my time as an afternoon with friends.  It captured and held my attention throughout the whole movie.  It was not too long that my mind did not wander and daydream.  However, it does show that what our culture thinks is entertaining is downgrading.  The movie industry goes from great action-packed adventures like Captain America to movies like One for the Money which is not exactly top notch.  They should have slowed down and taken the best-selling book and made it an even better movie. 

Why the Music Industry Hates Guitar Hero by Jeff Howe

Jeff Howe is clearly against the whole idea of Guitar Hero from his negative review of the popular game.  His general argument is that the music industry and Guitar Hero should not fight but instead work together to make an even stronger game.  He obviously does not think his audience will be the producers of the game or the record labels because of his use of destructive language.  However, he might just want to irritate the music industry.   He calls the music industry “whiny”.  Whiny has a negative connotation associated with it and certainly is an attack on the music industry.  He is calling their argument for more money foolish.  His critical analysis is characterized by harsh language that judges the music industry and Guitar Hero severely.  Every sentence feels like an attack against the two warring industries.  However, he does not only refute their war but concedes a point to the music industry’s benefit.  Even with this concession he states “to be fair” which does not really sound like he wants to give them the benefit they are owed.  His language becomes less judgmental when he gives examples of new ways that the game could be developed in the future.  He is simply stating those examples instead of attacking other ideas that the company may have making his argument more effective.

Howe does a fantastic job of showing the reader how he feels about the subject through his use of diction.  He conveys logically that the industries’ squabble is unwarranted by questioning their every move.  He does vary his argument more by adding some ways that they could make the game better than the “crappy graphics, plastic guitars, and epic hooks.”  This variance is to the author’s benefit.  Without this then he would have just been seen as an attacker with no real objective other than to take down the games credentials without any real helpful progress.  Overall his argument was logical and I could see his side more clearly than I could support the defense.