- Nico: I think Nico has given a very clear-cut situation of what is going on in the comic book industry and how by utilising the great and speedy “information superhighway” that the Internet promises to be – will help change the industry for the better. However, I can’t really grasp what he intends to do as a project proper. Also, isn’t the whole idea of collecting hard copies of the comic book (esp. the first issues etc.) an important part of the comic book culture?
- Arnie: Arnie’s proposed script is more a part of something larger. While the process of writing his script will get him his honours, the finished product promises much more! I very much like the idea of his script trying to break free of conventions but the whole idea of glocalising a film seems a task that every film professional is working on at the moment, without much of a success?
- Sarah: Sarah has chosen to re-explore the broadcast model of Radio and I think that is a really good choice in itself. Too many media people have jumped ship and declared the death of broadcasting, moving on to the exciting “prospects” of the new media and perhaps Sarah’s work will help us take another look at Radio? It’s a pity though, as her abstract hasn’t given a hint of what the content is going to be like.
- Michaela: I like how Michaela has a strong focus on her topic and her work promises to take the audience on a investigative trail, digging deep into the idea of commercial television news. However, (I am not that familiar with the Australian TV yet) would her scope be a bit too large?
- Vivian: She has in mind something really$ practical. Her project brings forth to me the idea of urbanisation and probably how she is going to fight that phenomenon. But I was just wondering, if location is that important? (Given how we are ONE global village now.)
- Sue: Sue’s proposed work is that on the masses’ view of war films as actual events. I like how she looks to try to put a reality check on what most of us think of as accurate depiction of war, even though the film is blatantly a commercial piece. Yet, the problem with her abstract, I think, is that she is trying to do too many things at the same time.
- Pheona: Phoena’s work is probably one that is going to have a huge impact on the “real” world when it is completed. She has recognised, where many hasn’t, the need to separate the notion of qualifications = knowledge in teaching. It seems like a focused piece of work and the only drawback for me is probably what the practical teaching resources are going to turn out to be.
Kris: I know the flaws on this one so I am just gonna pick out the few that I am currently trying to figure out.
- I haven’t yet decided on the stand, which is good in a way and maybe not so good to start my research with.
- I haven’t worked out a focus although I have already decided on the films that I should look at.
- I have quite alot of directions I could go (and they are all swimming in my head and on my notes)
p.s. thanks to Sarah for the template so I didn’t have to link the posts to each on my own. 
Filed under: LABsome | 3 Comments
I am not sure if ‘having a stand’ is the right way to think about this. you should let your research guide you rather than trying to reverse engineer a desirable end result.
i think you need to start by thinking about the notion of cultural and its transportability. in your abstract you say
“Incorrect representation of cultures would result in inaccurate understanding of these cultures by the global audience whose main source of knowledge comes from these Western remakes of films.”
incorrect and inaccurate are very loaded terms to use. you are fixing the meanings and then deeming deviation as inaccurate. remember r. williams. while cultures have a agreed upon literacy, there is a dynamism within the conventions. i would think that you need to nail down this before you can move to look at translation.
cheers
hmmmmm okay… will sleep on it.
Thanks anyway!
Kris.
haha no probs Kris. I’m glad I could be of assistance! ;o)