Media Burn

While watching Media Burn today I couldn't help but wonder why we don't have any more of these pranks/stunts/artistic statements televised anymore. It's not because everyone has given up trying to change the world. I know there has to be some of this stuff going on, but I guess it's not as important or big enough to be broadcasted on national television. I believe these types of pranks/stunts/artistic statements are useful to make us look at things in a different way because the television is the easiest medium to reach people by.
Coming into class I was in awe with the film playing. That show destroyed all the stereotypes you have about T.V. It made you see a different way, making you believe that television could do anything it doesn't have to be all reality T.V. shows or news broadcasts. It really asks the viewer to reconceptualize what they think about T.V. Today, kids are born into a world where there are stereotypes about everything. To think out of the box is a skill to be developed and one that is normally shunned. So I give praise to groups that perform such artistic statements. They are the revolutionaries that help people remember it is okay to be different.

Sonic Outlaws

The Barbie Liberation Organization

1. The group is a cultural activist organization that challenges gender stereotyping in the toy industry through the intervention of switching voice chips of a Teen Talk Barbie Dolls with those of Talking Duke G.I Joe dolls.
In 1989, the BLO bought Teen Talk Barbie dolls and Talking Duke G. I. Joe dolls and gave them a makeover. The switched their voice chips put them back in their boxes and returned them to the store shelves where they found them (the intervention). Kids would buy these dolls thinking they would be getting a Teen Talk Barbie doll, but got a Teen Talk Barbie doll with a G.I. Joe voice. The BLO insisted that no harm was done, "The storekeepers make money twice, we stimulate the economy - the consumer gets a better product - and our message gets heard." They did this because they were upset with perpetuated stereotypes Teen Talk Barbie dolls gave to the minds of the future, the dolls were not an accurate representation of women in the world (the dolls were considered a form of evil brainwashing). This superficial image the Teen Talk Barbie doll imposed was considered a threat to the BLO. The BLO in turn wanted to make sure the truth was told.

2. The BLO is part of the RTMark which is an activist collective that subverts the "Corporate Shield" protecting US corporations. It brings together activists who plan projects with donors who fund them. It operates outside the laws governing human beings. Another one of their stunts was called Voteauction. Voteauction was a satirical website which offered US citizens to sell their presidential vote to the highest bidder during the presidential elections of 2000. Several US states sued the site for alleged illegal vote trading.

3.

Frampton's Formula

Frampton says that whatever happens the most in the film is what the film is about. When watching Natural Features I picked out dissolving/decaying faces in about every frame, but I don't think that's what the film was about. Because there were many elements in the film all taking part. There were watercolors, paintbrushes, the color black, all of these things were in every frame also. I think what Frampton was trying to get at is the theme of a film or the moral of the story. I don't think he meant a specific thing you see in a frame. Because if you have a moral or reoccurring theme then yes, that is what the film is about. I do believe if we watched a film and just picked out the one thing that happens the most whether it be a color, camera movement, etc, then it would probably change our view of the film. If I just watched Natural Features for the color black I would see the film as being a very dark film in its subject matter and its lighting. Overall, I think that we shouldn't apply his method of discovering what a film is about because then we only focus on one part of the whole, there is so much more in films. Maybe if every new time you watched it you paid attention to something else then I guess you could add up the parts to the whole idea of what the film is about, but who wants to do that. I also believe and want to state that maybe what Frampton was talking about is what the viewer does subconsciously every time when viewing a film. I know I have picked out one certain thing in a film before because I could relate myself to that scene(I had gone through a similar situation) . After walking out of the theater my friends and I discussed the film and they all thought the same thing about it, but when asking my opinion were surprised to hear my reaction to the film. I viewed it in whole different, unique way from the way they did. We all perceive things differently and that's because we are all different and come from different backgrounds and have different experiences. And that's the beauty of films. They are ambiguous. There is no right or wrong answer.