Michael Medved Part 3

         Medved’s paper was overall extremely eye opening and was written in a way that made you think about what he was claiming about Hollywood.  I found his argument to be strong, sound and valid, but also interesting.  He used examples and statistics that helped to confirm his argument.  I hadn’t really thought too much about the affect that the media really had on society until I read his paper.  I definitely agree with his disagreement with the way that Hollywood is lying to us as media consumers.   More importantly however, I support his conclusion that the only way to contradict a lie is with a truth.  


          He talked about how we need to remember that messages in the media matter, that we can’t view and accept the world’s portrayal through a TV screen, and that we might not be able to “turn off” the media, but we can turn it down.  The only weakness that I found in his argument was the fact that he never mentioned a positive side.  Although I agree with him that Hollywood is lying to the world, I believe that some of the media can affect us in positive and even life changing ways.  We live in a world where we are so concerned with what goes into our bodies, then why wouldn’t we be concerned with what goes into our minds?   

word count: 233

Michael Medved Part 2

Medved argues against Hollywood’s claim that they only entertain and don’t influence. He had a lot of sound and valid points.  For example, he related an event that occurred in 1982, Where the surgeon general of the United States released volumes of data showing that prolongedviolence on Tv promoted more hostile and aggressive behavior and attitudes of those viewing it. “ABC TV,” Medved said, “Trotted out one of their vice presidents who said “Unfortunately,

there is no conclusive scientific evidence to suggest that media imagery impacts world behavior in any way.”” I concur with everything Medved has claimed, however I believe that his argument would have benefited by talking about the positive aspects of media reflected on society.  Because although he was pretty justified in not agreeing that the short clip in “Lethal Weapon” was promoting safety and affected “thousands of lives”, there are also inspiring and things seen in cinema that really do affect for the better.  For example, in the film “Mr.

Smith goes to Washington”, courage and faith are portrayed along with steadfastness and honesty as Mr. Smith stands up to evil men that would corrupt America.  There are many otherinspiring films that have the opposite effect on people. 

          In response to Hollywood’s statement that they only reflect society, Medved makes a moving and vivid point.  He talks about the reflection and false portrayal of murders, crime rate, cheating on your spouse and the lack of church goers on TV.  All of those categories are greatly dramatized in C.S.I shows and are often shown quite contrary to reality.  He referenced one of the few times prayer was even included on TV, and it was in a Simpson episode where they prayed to God only to say “thanks for

nothing”.  He goes on to discuss the fact that Hollywood is showing society in a way that is not how the world really is.  People watching those shows however, feel inadequate and think that maybe they are the odd one out.  

          Next, in response to Hollywood’s assertion that they if you“don’t like this stuff” then you can just turn it off, Medved uses an example of Madonna.  He asks the audience how many of them had ever gone to a Madonna concert. Few hands were raised, but nearly every person in the audience knew who Madonna was when he asked for his last question.  In accordance with this, was his quote of saying that “If you don’t like the smog, just stop breathing”, is the same as saying that we can just ‘turn off’ the media.  


word count: 432

Michael Medved Part 1

In October 1994, Michael Medved spoke to Ricks College about "Hollywood's Three Big Lies about Media and Society" 

Michael Medved started out his argument that Hollywood (meaning the people involved in any form of media; director, producer, actor, script writer, etc.) is damaging society with a very convincing and interesting statistic concerning how much time children really spend watching television.  He said that by the time a child turns six, he will have watched more TV than he would ever spend with his father in a lifetime.  In his argument, he points out that

Hollywood claims that they don’t affect people through their entertainment.  But how could they not, when so much time is spent consuming the media?  According to Medved, thethree big lies that Hollywood claims are: 

“(1) we just entertain, we don’t influence people; 

(2)we just reflect society as it is, we don’t shape society; and 

(3) if you don’t like it, just turn it off.” 

           He talks about the three different lies and goes into detail explaining how and what they are lying and covering up.  He has examples and thought-provoking information in each category.  For the first lie he talks about how if a thirty second commercial can change your opinion or cause you

to buy something, then why wouldn’t a two hour long movie have an influence on you?  For the second lie he addresses the fact that so many things on television are blown way out of proportion and often don’t portray life as it really is.  For the third lie, he talks about how we don’t always choose what we hear or see.  To close his paper, he readdresses the three lies and has solutions for them in the form of three truths.  

word count: 290

Rides Made into Movies, Movies Made into Rides!

           Films have a great impact on society in many different ways!  One way is through amusement park rides. When we watch films, we have a tendency to become a part of the film for that hour and a half that it plays.  Turning movies into rides and rides becoming movies is a way that people can be a part of the action of the movie. 

           Disney does this with a lot of rides and movies.  Pirates of the Caribbean was a ride before it was ever a movie and  although it wasn't as much of a success as a movie, so was The Haunted Mansion.  Disneyland and California Adventure have alot more rides that came from movies including, Indiana Jones, Star Wars, Splash Mountain, Honey I Shrunk the Kids, A Bug's Life, The Tower of Terror, Toy Story, Snow White, Peter Pan and many more!  They are even planning another movie to be made after the attraction "The Jungle Cruise."    

           Disney is not the only company that turns movies into rides.  Universal studios has made rides for The Mummy, Jurassic Park, The Simpsons and a few others.  They also now have a Hary Potter amusement park.     http://www.imdb.com/list/vdduX9c5Pv4/

          Why are rides so successful at being movies? and why are these movies popular rides?  I think that it wouldn't even matter if the movies themselves weren't that great!  When people grew up going on and loving the ride, it is exciting for it to be made into a movie.  It is also extremely creative that the Imagineering teams at Disneyland are able to accompish taking a simple ride and creating an entire film out of it!  Along the same lines, it is exciting to have our favorite movies made into rides so we can become a part of the films that we love! 

word count: 301

Independent Filmmakers

      Everyone can't be as well known a director as Steven Spielberg.  And you don't have to be to make a good film! A lot of times, those independent film companies make more meaningful films because they aren't focused too heavily on special effects.  They are more concerned with the artistic aspects and the moral messages being portrayed.

       Contrary to belief, Film Festivals are not only for famous and well known directors to participate in.  They will take part in them so as to "attract media coverage"(http://curiosity.discovery.com/question/how-film-festival-work1)  But Film Festivals are perfect for new independent filmmakers that want to have their work judged by a professional and to have their work noticed.

       Just because a director isn't famous, definitely does not mean that their films aren't wonderful.  "The Butterfly Circus."  is a great example of this.  This film was entered into a Film Festival concert and not only won the Film Festival, but also won a Gold for the best short film!  Director Josh Weigel was given a list of words to choose from to create a film.  He chose the word 'hope' and created this magnificent film.   Weigel didn't have a lot of money to work with the film, but he truly created a masterpiece! And it is becoming a full length film!

word count: 213

Past Films

           In the past, films have meant more and gone deeper than what is viewed simply on the surface.  In the 1940’s, the economy was unpleasant and the film industry was expected to take a fall.  However, John Russell Taylor, an English critic and author said of this time, “Economic necessity pointed the way towards smaller films, depending on stronger ideas rather than higher productive values.”  Despite America’s recent economic state, filmmakers who earn a lot of money, are leaning against as a crutch not only their special effects, but the dependency that American’s will be blinded by them and won’t question the lack of a well told story.  Cinema in the 1940’s focused more on the idea of the film rather than “higher productive values.” Even with the so called “smaller films” made during these years, many of them made it to the top one hundred greatest movies of all time.   

                Casa Blanca, Citizen Kane, Gone With the Wind, Singing in the Rain, Seven Samurai, The Searchers, and On the Waterfront were voted to be in the top twenty best movies of all time. (Entertainment Weekly) And they are all made within a span of about fifteen years; from 1939 to 1956.  At this time, there was little use of computer animated effects.  Citizen Kane broke the Hollywood mold and using deep focus camera work, overlapping dialogue and intriguing and distinctive camera shots that had never been used before, caused it to be known as the greatest film of all time.  And many filmmakers after watching this film were inspired in their movie making techniques and even pay tribute to it in their films.  Singing in the Rain on the contrary, was loved and remembered for its wonderful songs, storyline, choreography and casting.  On the Waterfront not only had stimulating cinematography and symbolism throughout its inspiring plot, but it also had one of the greatest moral messages shown in its time.  Another inspiring movie that used very little special effects was Rear Window.  This Hitchcock classic portrayed everything from the view through Jeffrey’s window and the audience only saw what Jeffrey could see, unlike many films today where the viewer’s know more than the characters themselves do.  So much was depicted about the characters through the music and the panning and zooming and different subjective shots of the camera.  The particular way this unique film was made caused audiences to feel suspense without dramatic lighting and intense shots and special effects.  Because of the times that these movies were made in there wasn’t a lot of that sort of technology, and filmmakers had to rely on artistic cinematography in their films.  They focused on the development of the characters and the resolution and realizations at the end of the movie.  Along the same lines, they were packed with deep meanings and everything tied together to arouse more than one emotion and to inspire and eventually become classic films.  The arousing of emotions can be shown through themes, camera work, editing and/or the actors.  The Twilight series is a good example of a very unrepresentative film with unnecessary CGI and actors limited to only rendering one emotion.  Other films however can show the positively created emotion through the use of special effects without becoming overbearing.

word count: 544