yes, but how can you incorporate more smiley faces in the videos?
PS…My favorite feature was the thumbnail of the video…it looks like you are shouting!
I saw one of your other videos and didn’t know who you were. I’m glad I clicked the link in the email you sent me because I really liked what you had to say
I’d recommend that people include closed captioning on their videos, too. Not only will they reach a broader audience through reaching people who are hard of hearing or have a hard time understanding spoken English (or whichever language), but if someone’s unable to use speakers for some reason you’ll reach them, too.
Enjoyed the video. You make it look very simple.
Much of the current critical and theoretical literature on new media, including video and computer games, assumes both the conceptual transparency of the video or computer screen and the absolute authority of a rational scientific order. In keeping with these cultural prejudices, descriptions of the optical space of video games presume an uncomplicated optical scheme, founded on traditions of linear perspective. This can be seen with game designers, and game critics, treatment of video game perspective and point-of-view: video game spaces are understood to be the procedural outcomes of geometrically articulated orders derived from using program code and the physics of game engines. But, video game spaces are more than simply the sum of their code – they are experiential spaces generated through code and the player’s interaction with the execution of that code through the medium of the screen. Given this multifaceted experiential component of games, an uncritical conception of spatial phenomenology and the verisimilitude of linear perspective fails to explain how video games operate. Critical theory, theory which explains how the player operates both the game space and the game space, is needed. In this paper, I propose that the models of subjectivity and agency offered by psychoanalysis provide a way to investigate the relationship of the player, player-character and the screen. For this investigation, I specifically examine how perspective shapes the field of the gaze and the implications of that shaping.Because users interact with the video games as media objects, they are afforded a place or function within the space of the new media object while continuing to occupy their own physical spaces. Video game players must also simultaneously function on differing spatial planes. Thus telepresence is particularly pertinent to the player's presence outside, within, and as formulated through the medium of the screen, which Sherry Turkle explored in the non-graphical spaces of MUDs and MOOs.The video game player must perform at multiple levels while playing a video game. In this regard, the player is present in more than one spatial domain. Lev Manovich and Sherry Turkle have argued that this multiple presence is typical of new media interactions. One might argue that the video game player, because she generally accesses information stored on her local computer (online games with remote servers are an important exception) she does not experience multiple presences as she does with other new media objects which are housed remotely. But, this observation neglects that the telepresent state is based on existing in multiple conceptual spatial domains, not on existing in separate physical areas. The telepresent state means that the subject exists in multiple areas in such a way as to be able to effect change in that (or those) other areas while also being able to effect change in the subject's physical space. Thus, telepresence is based on the subject's presence in separate simultaneous areas that are based on differing spatial domains, but not necessarily differing geographical areas. I can understand why this brought Alejandro Amenabar to a fruitful career, but I really just thought this was a serviceable, brainless thriller. The one thing that irked me most is that Angela is simply one of the dumbest horror protagonists I've ever seen. She is vacant, unresourceful and a God-awful liar. For one, she NEVER calls the police, despite being embroiled in a steadily worsening snuff film situation; she has no compelling reason not to do so. None. When confronted by people who are suspicious of her snooping around, she stutters and says "no" a lot, or just repeats what they're saying to her. She has about two good ideas through the entire course of the film and it's kind of amazing that she even pulls these off. We are led to believe that Angela is an intelligent girl, but she shows us almost none of this, making one awful decision after the other.
Angela's indiscretions serve to highlight some flaws in the plot - again, why does no one call the police? Why are the killers keeping their video tapes in the basement of the school, and how come so many people have access to this basement when security is presumably patrolling it? And ultimately, what compels Angela to try and solve this case herself? All we know is that she has a cursory interest in (though supposed disdain for) violence, but that offers no real reason for her not to get anyone else involved.
This is a technically strong film with a decent message, though "obsession with violence in the media" is really old-hat by now. It's a far better delivery of the theme than Funny Games, I have to say it, and I'm sure it hit harder back in 1996. I guess this aged in a way that Se7en did; sensational pictures rarely seem to last very long.