American's Passion for Repeat Movies

           IMDB recently released their rankings for the highest grossing movies of the year, which basically means the movies that the most people attend. I chose to write about this topic in part because it is the end of the year, and as a movie lover, the best movies of the year are being voted on and rated. I also chose to convey my thoughts because after seeing the list, I was blown away by something not many people picked up on. Here is the link to IMDB's list from the past year and the picture located below with the year released and its rating from IMDB movie critics.

Now take a second to look at the list and see if you can draw any conclusions for yourself. Ill give you some time to think...

             Ok, starting with me, the first thing I picked up on was the insane amount of movies (I count 8/10) which are either sequels or involve identical sets of characters from past movies. The two movies that do not fit the list are "World War Z" and "Gravity", both fantastic movies that I would recommend. So that got me thinking to both what Americans like myself enjoy from movies and what movie companies have learned from certain successes in the past.
             To start off with the movie companies themselves, this data directly shows that they aren't willing to experiment with new types of movies (new plots, characters, settings etc.) and are much more comfortable making either remakes of old movies, clever spin-offs, or sequels to beloved classics. It really is stunning that 80% of movies in the top ten grossing happen to be movies in which there isn't a new storyline or character group and rather a repeat cast just so that movie producers can feel like they are making a safe bet when creating and filming movies.
              What this tells us about the average American, including me is that we don't like change in our entertainment at all. We are much more willing to watch movies that include casts we are both familiar with and enjoy watching for extended periods of time. Of the two movies that aren't sequels or remakes, both bolster a huge movie star in George Clooney and Brad Pitt, the reasons many people decide to go and see movies in the first place. American media seems to be very predictable in a sense that people don't really seem to enjoy watching new types of movies with lesser known actors and directors.

Americans saving money

Who doesn't like saving money right? If you can get a deal on something you really desire you get a large sense of satisfaction by be able to say, "I got it on sale". The thing is that, our desire for money only seems to be exponentially growing to the point of a semi-national-practice-informal "holiday"

This holiday I speak of is called Black Friday and it occurred roughly a week ago. Named in part because it lands on the Friday after Thanksgiving, and also, because in the past, traffic lights supposedly went black due to people speeding to stores and getting in accidents (source: here).

To me, a core American value seems to be the obsession with saving money. PBS was quoted in an article saying that, "America has definitely become a money obsessed culture". I couldn't agree more. If you aren't quite following, i'll provide a couple of examples. First, as I have already stated before, black friday has become an event so popular that people are now spending time on Thanksgiving, the national day of giving thanks, to go to stores and wait in line for midnight releases of deals. Another reason why Americans are obsessed with saving money can be seen in our interests in entertainment.I mean, we have a television show on TLC called, "Extreme Couponing" where the main goal is to get the most food items for the least amount of stuff. If America isn't obsessed with saving, who is? If America is obsessed with saving, is that a good or bad thing?

Do we really show what we are thankful for?

On Thanksgiving it's common to give thanks for whatever you want to be thankful for. Wether it be; having a healthy family, food on the table or the ability to chit chat with relatives who are rarely seen.  

Sadly instead of gathering around a table, sharing stories and telling jokes, statistically more people are heading to stores and waiting in lines for electronics and other consumer merchandise for some ok deals. Lets be honest, stores are still trying to make money and by the time you leave the store they will have most likely have made money off of you.

Sadly Thanksgiving shopping has become a new norm and seems like it wont go away. Tim Parry for the Multi Channel Merchant said “Thanksgiving Day shopping has evolved into something that’s more than just a fad, it’s become a tradition for some shoppers”. As hard as it is to accept this is becoming a new American tradition. This most definitely is a "fad" as over 50 million people went to stores on Thanksgiving according to the same article. (Here is the article link: Article)

Honestly this is terrible. Without getting into the roots of the first Thanksgivings', modern turkey days are supposed to be about sitting around the table with family and enjoying ones company. It should not have to do anything with saving money or shopping or spending the whole deal "deal searching" when someone could be with their family. Many reports have shown shopping on Thanksgiving rising in the past 10 years and it shows no signs of halting. It really saddens me that people would rather spend money on something that they most likely could live without than rather with the people that they love.

With this new American "tradition", are people really more interested in saving money than spending time with family?

Thanks!

Today Hawaii. Yesterday Illinois. Tomorrow who?

Gay marriage is in full speed in recent months with the 15th state, Hawaii, agreeing to pass a bill to allow gay marriage. December 2nd will be the most recent time for a couple to be married in Hawaii and Illinois couples will be allowed to legally wed on July 1st of 2014.

It is well known that the southern US has opposed same sex marriage (the states in dark red in the picture below) in the past but with the large amount of States passing gay marriage bills now, the question arises as to if and when these southern States will continue with the gay marriage bandwagon.

Laws regarding same-sex partnerships in the United States

  Same-sex marriage^◊

  Unions granting rights similar to marriage^†

  Legislation granting limited/enumerated rights

  Same-sex marriages performed elsewhere recognized^‡

  No specific prohibition or recognition of same-sex marriages or unions in state law

  State statute bans same-sex marriage

  State constitution bans same-sex marriage

  State constitution bans same-sex marriage and some or all other kinds of same-sex unions

Texas Senator Ted Cruz, is well known for his anti gay marriage views and seems to represent a majority of the beliefs of the state of Texas. Recently, he was quoted saying, "And that's the great thing about our Constitution, is different states can make different decisions depending on the values of their citizens."

To me, Ted Cruz seems very passive aggressive in this quote and that shows he really doesn't even consider gay marriage a remote possibility to pass. As a Senator he has a lot of power into the the way in which the public views certain issues and in this instance, he is the public a very radical view against gay marriage. His use of the word, "values" really stuck out to me because although many different people have many different views, Cruz is implying that many Texas natives agree with what he is saying. Maybe they do and maybe they don't but by saying this Cruz is speaking for the state of Texas without the voices of his residents heard. 

Gay Marriage is a heavily debated issue in the US in these days, but some States have agreed to allow gay marriage pass in upcoming months. There still seems to be a lack of unity throughout the US as some states are not even close to passing gay marriage. 

When do you think gay marriage will be officially legal in all 50 states?

Stars and Stripes in Cuba

Guantanamo Bay. A military detention camp in Cuba designed to hold some of the United States' most dangerous criminals who are specifically chosen to give unfair trials. Recently on 60 minutes I watched in awe to see what really goes on at Guantanamo. The 9/11 masterminds who weren't apart of the plane crashes but coordinated the events as a whole are currently being held there and thats what 60 minutes chose to focus on for their segment. The entire video clip/transcript can be found here.

Guantanamo is notorious for being an United States operated detainment center where torture, eavesdropping and unfair trails are part of every day life. These unfair trials include criminals (mostly terrorists) not having trials for over ten years as they are forced to sit in jail cells for 23 and a half hours a day. Sounds illegal right? Wrong. Since Guantanamo is located in Cuba, its legal jurisdiction flies under the Cuban flag which allows prisoners to be detained for much more substantial amounts of time compared to the US legal system.

Commander Walter Ruiz, the attorney for one of the 9/11 leaders was featured on 60 minutes speaking of the immoral activities that go on at Guantanamo. At first, I wanted to completely disagree with what ever he had to say due to the fact that I want to see a very severe punishment to the men responsible for 9/11. As I really listened to what he had to say, I happened to change my viewpoint towards the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo.

Ruiz claimed that, "Every day we listen to the national anthem in Guantanamo... but yet the constitution has been kicked down the road." It's interesting to think about this and I do agree with Ruiz because the US shouldn't be able to have a prison run by its military in a foreign country. These men and women, regardless of their crimes are being treated unjustly.

The question i pose is: Should the United States continue using Guantanamo bay as a prison camp and if so why?

 

Looking into the past?

As of right now, we are in full swing of the MLB playoffs, a showing of the greatest baseball teams in a tense 7 game series. But whats being focused in upon is not the baseball. Its the umpires (referee or baseball). Day after day it seems as if the only thing being debated is if the correct decision is made in game.

Saturday night marked one of  the craziest night in MLB World Series baseball.  And the call was wrong...But how on such a grand scale with millions of fans across the country watching could the call be wrong? Instant replay comes into question due to the fact that it still isn't used in modern sports.

"So now the outcome of the game is not being influenced by a call that could have been corrected", says Matt Kawahara of the Sacramento Bee. I agree with Kawahara completely because with the introduction of replay, sports of all kind would become more correct so that a game isnt decided on a fluke of a decision. 

What the media doesn't show

Within the past couple of weeks, Geico has been running a a commercial with the comedic twist by saying, "everything on the internet is true". Although many people seem to brush this off and don't think much into it; in my mind, Geico is brining up a pretty big issue even if they mean to or not.

Adrian Peterson, Minnesota Vikings superstar running back, was given some terrible news with in the past couple week due to the death of his son; who was killed by Peterson's stepdad. This really does sicken me to even have to hear about this as no one deserves to suffer like this child. But after watching an interview, Peterson didn't seem upset and he didn't manage to shed a tear throughout the whole issue so I decided to look into it more

The media made it out to sound like a terrible situation, but don't get me wrong it is. The only problem I had with the whole situation was the fairly significant detail that almost every single news station failed to report on. The first time Peterson met this child was in the hospital only days before the child passed. I personally think its unfair for the media to not include crucial details to any news story because it changes the entire bias from the person watching or reading about the event. 

News stations have been doing this for a long time and it doesn't fully show the issue at hand in many different examples. After hearing of this situation, I, like many other people across the world was stunned to hear that someone would hurt a child to the point of death and I felt extremely bad for Adrian Peterson and his family. My mindset changed when I had to do my own research to understand all the facts. When a news station/newspaper/radio show ect. doesn't include details, people are led to believe the wrong things very quickly, just like the "everything on the internet is true" mindset. Im not going to go as far as saying that it should be illegal to give false information but these news outlets are lying to their viewers directly.

The question I propose is as follows: Why isn't the media getting enough negative feedback when the fail to accurately report on a story? And/Or, Have you ever noticed the media present a story that didn't have all the facts straight?

Is life just a point system?

            As a Junior in high school, standardized tests and point systems have been something we have seen since 3rd and 4th grade. 

           Today, while in the act of turning in an essay my teacher gave me the option of turning it in two days from then, to take a final look over to make sure everything was going ok. Sounds great, right? Expect the first words out of my mouth were, "Are we going to have points taken off for turning it in later." After thinking about what I said it dawned on me that standardized tests, essays, or even high school related assignments have all become a numbers game. 

Its seems as if we don't care about improvement or academic growth but rather than spending our time and energy on the way in which to maximize the amount of points from a specific assignment. In addition, on of my teachers quoted a professor who said that more time is spent on the logistics of assignments and grading scales rather than learning or practicing new techniques both for writing and other subjects. 

           School has become a numbers game. Higher education is becoming harder to get into and what seems to matter the most during college processes is the one or two standardized tests you take during your Junior year. More emphasis is put on achieving a certain grade rather than improving a skill that will be helpful later in life. 

The question I pose is, who is to blame for this "point system" and why?

Why do we have IPads again?

This week, a Los Angeles high school came out and said that the IPads that they provided to student were not actually being used for education. What a shocker. One teacher against the use of the IPads said, "they kind of should have known this would happen." I completley agree with this teacher because IPads, in my opinion, provide no more educational benefit than pen and paper.

People in favor of the IPads would most likely say that the technology is good and its really effective to take notes or type in class. They also say that IPads can combine textbooks for lower costs, and the decreased weight from the IPad puts off a considerable amount of weight from the average textbook.

In my experience IPads are more often used for games and entertainement than for education. In addition, I find that the weight put on by backpacks is not considerable at all and doesnt seem to be a problem for kids who have been lugging around heavy backpacks for their whole lives. Pen and Paper seem to be more effective because they are quicker and more efficent to take notes on and charging isnt a constant worry.

"Dont pay me"

The Government shutdown of 2013 is still in progress and has shown little to no progress in its first day. Hundreds of thousands of people are out of Government filled jobs and they could be for a substantial amount of time.

Congress woman Ann Wagner posted a picture via her twitter  of a letter she sent to the man in charge of the payroll for congress asking to have her pay revoked for the duration of the shutdown. She also included the #fairnessforall (fairness for all). Let me also point out that she voted for and pushed for a shutdown to help put an end to Obamacare

What a great person right? Witholding her salary because she doesnt think its fair. The only problem is that this would be against the 27th amendment of the Constitution and thus her petiton for getting paid would be thrown out as to not break the constition.

Was it a publicity stunt? Probably. She could have  kept it a secret that she asked for this or she could have donated the money for that time to a charity that could really benefit. Nowadays it seems that many politicans are only trying to look good in the public eye rather than actually creating a positive direction for the US governmet. In my opinon this is one of the main reasons why an agreement could not be made over Obamacare nor many bills in the past.

Ask yourself if this action by Ann Wagner was a publicity stunt or was she genuinely serious? Are actions like these factors that are negatively affecting our

End to the US Government?

In 1995 the US government suffered a shutdown due lack of compromise between the Democrats and Clinton over medicare. This year the problem of a Government closing is surfacing between a conflict between a House defunded Obamacare bill and Obama which could eventually lead to a shutdown by October 1st causing  major components of the government.

Surprisingly this fiasco has really not received enough attention considering federal jobs could be temporarily suspended and other government actions rendered useless. Sure the occasional radio or news station is talking about this but even Yahoo, CNN, and NYT all are seeming to focus on other issues. But the Government isn't that important right? What do they even do? If no compromise on the House bill is made by Oct. 1st the economy is expected to drop, government owned buildings and facilities will close, national parks, zoos, delayed social security and overall slower government processes.

In all honesty, Americans need to get their priorities straight. A long term shutdown could lead to loss of jobs even in the private sector and a permanent defunding of needed programs. This controversy really isn't broadcasted as much as it should be. As of right now Congress has 7 days to figure all of this out before the government goes into lockdown mode because Obama and other leaders are trying to stop the government from spending crazy amounts of money. News stations all across the country should be petitioning for a faster resolution between this problem because as of right now we are headed down a very slippery slope.

Enough water for all of Africa?

Imagine how easy it is to run to your kitchen and fill up a glass of water; cold or hot within seconds. It really is amazing how some countries are incredibly more technologically advanced compared to others even when it comes to basic necessities that we take for granted like running water and proper sanitation.

The New York Times recently reported of a huge underwater Aquifer (wikipedia link) that will help to get water to the 17 million people who lack water that is even close to being able to drinking. In a separate article by ITV (Britain's biggest TV news network) the same aquifer was measured to contain roughly enough water for 70 years of constant drinking and pumping for people across Kenya. The article doesn't just stop there, it specifies that this aquifer will fill all of, "Kenya's water needs" which shows the mass enormity of this situation.

This article was really intriguing for me in a few ways. First the obvious; it increases the living conditions of people in Kenya and thus, less people will need to worry about getting clean and safe-to-drink water. Next, if you happen to google "Kenyan Aquifer", all the articles happen to be from 3-4 days ago and then the situation seems to fall of the entire spectrum with no follow up articles. This really shocks me because if you are to go to Yahoo.com, the main article that showed up first for me was "Krispy Kremes new strategy". This proves that our entire media coverage of important news is flawed not only in the US but also across the world. Are Krispy Kremes really more important than saving the country of Kenya and all its inhabitants from lack of water? Who is to blame for no broadcasting this story to show its mass enormity?

The Monopoly That Is The College Education System

         A little over a week ago, my family and I made the three hour trek up to Madison, Wisconsin to drop my brother off at school. Walking down the main street of the of the capital of the "Cheese State", I noticed many signs and posters advertising help with student loans that could stretch over 200k in just the four years a student is attending the school (lets not even get into graduate school). I wondered if it really was worth draining your parents bank account or taking out huge loans to be able to hang a small piece of paper that says you graduated from a specific college. Or, was it more beneficial to get four years of work under your belt out of high school?

         Not too long ago, CNBC posted a news article explaining the current college education system  and if it really was worth the estimated 150k-200k to take part in higher education. The author, a man who went to both Northwestern and Columbia, reflected on some of his past classmates that were making more money than some of his same classmates that were able to graduate from high-end Ivy League schools. Private schools and public schools have exponentially increased due to lack of State funding and money that the Governments just don't have.

         As many high school students are approaching the college years we have to ask our selves; is this college education really worth it? Nowadays if you don't go to college many employers wont even consider hiring you for a job. In addition, college tuition is only increasing and colleges are becoming harder to get into. Thus, many employers are only hiring successful college grads. It seems as if the only way to get a job is to go to college but does this fact place a burden on kids that cant afford it? Where are they to turn when they cant pay for expensive college education? Are there any benefits from not attending college out of high school?