Critical Response To The MV - Video Killed The Radio Star 1979

My immediate response to this video was boring. It felt like I was listening to a song with excess visual pictures. Everyone in the music video was dull; the men and the women. There wasn't any hype coming from the video. People in the audience seemed a bit confused too; no clapping or cheering.

The thing I think they were promoting was you don't need a video to listen to good music. They were showing how a video such as this ruined the enjoyment of breezy listen to the radio. Themes that were being showed in this music video was dullness. This video is implying the fact that music is still music even in video format.

Events that might have influenced this band might have been the start of television. When television starting, everyone and everything changed dramatically. Television affected everyones lives and producers decided to make music into videos. After this, everyone would be like, "We have T.V to listen to music, there is no point in listening to the radio anymore." That is when 'The Buggles' stepped in.

I was bored watching this video. Honestly, i tried skipping minutes throughout the video, looking for something exciting to happen. Sadly, there was nothing but this lame transition in the middle of the videos. The music video shows the men doing nothing, with blank expressions and the girls all good and happy. When they sang the chorus, the girls sound like they are blaming the guys (who aren't doing anything - no dance no expression) for killing radio music. I felt as if I wasted time watch the video when I could have just listen to it without visuals.

The visual has made me not want to watch the music video anymore, but since the song is so catchy, I'll still listen to it.

The Future

What will become of it? Will we stay the same people we were? Are our actions and behaviours change?
We don't know, it's true, but people don't realize the fact that the internet seduces people. With all this buzz about new internet pages, more and more people get sucked into this hole. Technology is taking us somewhere else...

I've been sitting on the bus many times and overall people I saw reading books were approx. 100/ per year. Thing was, about four of them were reading off of paper books, or hardcovers. The rest, well were reading of e-reader, tablets and iPads. People have been reading off of these tablets instead of reading of paper. I go to the station and I don't find as much people reading of newspapers anymore , because they can read the news off of the apps on their phones or tablets. I don't mind having this around, but people get distracted with this technology. They start to read and they end up getting off track from what they started from (e.i checking msn news and end up playing some angry birds). With, this they have more freedom, which bugs me. I have a similar problem; I'm texting to someone and I end up playing games on my phone not responding till 3 hours later.

Talking about video games, my little cousins have been influenced greatly from them, from the violence to the addictiveness.My cousin, Emanuel, in Grade 4, tries to act like a a character called 'Link' from Legend of Zelda and he ends up hurting my littler cousins. Not only that, when he get home from school, he goes straight to his Wii, while the others, actually finish their homework before watching T.V. Emanuel compared to my cousin Victoria, an age younger is smarter than he is. He apparently is in ESL, and I think it is because of the video games. His mother told me to read with him and throws tantrums, yelling he wants to play his games instead.

Honestly, what happened to modern childhood? When I was a kid, I never cared about those videogames an'all!

The People, The Media & The Photoshop

This image was not Photoshopped

Photoshop - to alter (a digital image or other image), using an image editing application, especially Adobe Photoshop.

Taken from Google Images

Media - the means of communications, as radio or television, newspapers and magazines, that reach or influence people widely

You're probably wondering why I posted these definitions. Well, I posted them because they are partly the reason of who is controlling us, the people. We see people portrayed a lot in the media, who aren't what they actually are. Use this picture of Naomi Watts for example:

Taken from Google Images

 

You can see the major differences between the two pictures.

  The one on the right says, "I'm pretty, so that means you have to look like me to be pretty.

On the other hand, the one on the left says, "This is who I truly am. Don't judge me for I know I'm beautiful in my own way.
  People like Naomi Watts is portrayed like this because the 'media' wants us to think that if that's the way celebrities are suppose to look, that is how we are suppose to look as well. It is true that Photoshop does make everything seem better, but it doesn't. It might change some features on their face or what not, but it shows that they are not happy with what they look. They are embarrassed of how they look in reality, when in reality, everyone looks fine in their own way. We aren't all perfect, and that's when the media steps in.
  They try to change you, making you not act and look like yourself. And we all know that they're pretty much using your face and body to create a better looking face and body. We can try to reduce this nonsense by trying to get people to be their selves and try not to act like someone else. People who don't feel right about how they look and envy models in magazines should try to act positive. They can just act like themselves not worrying about how they may look , or stay and live in someone else's shadow. In my opinion, I wouldn't care less about the way I look, because everyone's beautiful in their own special way.
  If I were to see the front cover of a magazine without the use of an image editing application, I would be astonished and surprised that the media can actually let people be themselves. This might not be a possible route because people are still unsure of what they are and how they look. It would probably take a little more time until everyone, especially the media to get used to how people look and how they should look.

-Louis

File Sharing: Bad or Good?

The million dollar question - Is file sharing right or is it wrong?

       Well, in my opinion, I think file sharing is is one of the best things in the world. I know that it is bad though because of the fact that people these days would rather 'download' songs & movies off of the internet, and that would make movie and music industries lose money. But what can you do? I mean I've downloaded a 'few' songs of the internet too, but people are still complaining about how this is a real threat to society. 

WELL, THEY ARE WRONG.

       This helps us create songs out of other songs which brings out our creative side. Let's say you decide to replicate one of Di Vinci's artwork  by painting it yourself and adding your own style to it, doesn't mean your stealing from someone, your using the Past to create the Future, your making a mix of your flavor and his spice to create a delicious meal.

       If I were Di Vinci's shoes, I would actually be proud of the people who try to do that. They take my art and make it their own - their not stealing my work, their mashing it up to make something bigger, maybe even better (or maybe not).

Taken from Google images

       Although, I'd be happy that people appreciate my work by adding flavor to my art/ music, but you know, it kind of is hard to make something from scratch. If you think about it, not one thing has been made possible, without using part of someone else's idea. Give the Blu-ray© discs for example. It was created upon records to tapes to discs. 

         I feel that it is acceptable to download copyrighted material if it were only intended for personal use, but the problem is that some people might take this advantage to sent to friends who might sent to other friends etc... I mean seriously, someone had to start the file sharing of one .mp3 file. That's where we get it from right?

Ha, he's a pirate xD

CareerMashing

I had to go to a presentation downtown that had something to do about what our jobs were going to be in our lives. I learned a lot from the people who work with Microsoft Canada, that 3D Animation is really cool and that made me think. I probably want to be a 3d artist, because of the neat and cool things you can build off of scratch. Not to mention out of Lego. That probably sums it up. I want to be a designer! They say these kind of jobs are for people who can visualize anything and use creativity to create things with unlimited imagination.
          In my opinion, without 3D animation, animations wouldn't seem more 'out of the box', even though I grew up with 2D animation, such as "Rugrats" or "The Weekenders." I was told to go watch some 3D Animations on YouTube to research more about this job, and I came across this video:

It was actually really awesome how everything was put together. I hated it.

Taken from Google Images

        I also praise the look on newly developed video games that use 3D animation. Games that are in 3D seem more in depth and more realistic, such as Assassin's Creed. I have most of the games and I am awaiting for the arrival of the newest game in the series to come out (I pre-ordered). Games that are first-person horror games are the best. It gives the feeling that you are actually in the game yourself, and the graphics give it that zest in the genre.
        Requirements for having a job like this is to have artistic skills such as drawings, story design, modeling and productions- as well as knowledge about digital tools and applications. I am pretty sure that I also require 80 above in both Math and Science. One of the booths told me that for requirement of an architect (Which I thought were kind of alike).
       A man who worked in game designing is Christian Allen. He has worked on many 'Ghost Recon' games and he also worked on Halo Reach. He started off as a moderator in Rainbow Six, and has moved from Bungie to WB games.

Taken from Google Imagessss

Texting > Blogging

Taken from Google Images

Texting - the most frequent way of communication. In my opinion, texting is one of the best ways of communication because of the distance you DON"T have to travel. You don't need to go all the way to his/her house to chat with them when you got yourself a phone! DUH! 

 Pictures taken from Google Images

Texting is also a big issue too :( 

Let's say for example, a "really important" person tries to texts his/her assistant for the papers for a "really important" meeting, but the assistant's phone died right before the text was sent. There are a lot of things that interfere with the communications between people who text, such as  parental issues (e.g grounded), Interference within their location (no connection underground, out of area), or don't even feel like texting at all.

 Pictures taken from Google Images

  

The first two are kind of exceptions because the world doesn't revolve around you (Yeah, that's right. YOU!). You can't expect them to reply back as soon as they get the text, they might have stumbled across some obstacles like those shown above, but that doesn't mean they can ignore them (the text messages), because that would be rude. It is like trying to talk to someone in a group of people when they are focused more on some other thing. "Angry Birds"*cough*

 I mean who does that? Aha, well I guess I do that too sometimes, but it's only for fun :)

If I were to make five etiquette rules for texting it would be:

1. Don't text when people are talking to you

2.Don't text while on the road - by foot or by car

3. Be cautious of where you use your phone (During class)

4.Don't constantly text

5. Don't text while doing work

Anyways, I'll chat with you people later, I gotta text some of my friends (kidding)

-Louis