Below are the 4 most recent journal entries recorded in sthomsen's LiveJournal:

Wednesday, December 6th, 2006
1:42 pm	My Uncle Steve Died :-( Yeah so last night I found out my uncle Steve died, from Alchohol poisioning. He was only 52 years old, he has a boy that is 12 and daughter is 21. His wife, Judy died in 2001 of Alchohol poisioning as well. I know this is a wake up call for my family, they have lived their lives in sin and it's ashame that it ends this way, both my parents tried to witness to both of them and neither one of them wanted to accept. (Comment on this)
Tuesday, February 14th, 2006
2:19 am	Sarah Thomsen - Sherlock, readings 2 Sherlock Film February 13, 2006 I really enjoyed this film, I believe it showed great character in the actors without having them say anything. Sherlock did mix attraction and narrative. He showed that without speaking you can grasp the story line of what's going on, and have the film be appealing to the eye to watch without hearing dialogue. I was entertained by the whole show, I have a hard time understanding what's going on but by watching this film, I understood everything. There was a lot of sense of humor and scenes that made you laugh, like when one of the guys had put some kind of explosives in the balls when they were playing pool. The axe coming down and almost slicing someone if they were to sit on that seat. This movie had all mixed in, I see the playing part when Sherlock almost fell for all those tricks those two guys were playing on him with the poison, the axe and pool table. I compare it to a game, because its action and your wondering if hes going to fall for the tricks or not. I see it as a play, b/c it has characters acting, using their motion, body language. The film also had a story to it, you understood the plot. Sherlock wanted to be a detective and he got to be one, as he spyed on those two guys that set him up first with the watch, then set him up trying to kill him. There were some words written on the screen for us to read so we weren't completely lost which helped. This film had represented the film and media engagement by showing action, actors, comedy, a story/plot behind what's going on, kind of a little mystery to it. I found it to be very entertaining to watch. This film was the oppositte of "Smile Time." The only similarity is that they both had comedy in them. "Smile Time" was a dark sense of humor, scary type of show. Where as this movie was a classic film of real actors who don't have to speak and can show you their acting ability through physical movement only. "Smile Time" was for viewers whom are more older and act kind of like a kid at the same time, where as "Sherlock Jr." is for viewers whom are more intellegent and kids can watch. There is no sexual things in this film, their is no dirty language, the only reason kids might have a hard time watching it is if they don't understand what is going on. Sherlock Jr. is aslo very funny, I personally would rather watch Sherlock Jr. then "Smile Time." (Comment on this)
Monday, February 13th, 2006
5:55 pm	Sarah Thomsen Feb. 6, 2006 Angel January 31, 2006 As I was watching the show Angel, I paid special attention to the scene when Angel walks on the set of the show “Smile Time.” Watching it, as the outside viewer I got an eerie feeling, complete darkness, all the props of the show were neatly stacked and put away. When everything is calm and quiet, that’s when the scare pops up, because it’s when you least expect it. Angel then runs into a janitor whom is blind, no one was around in sight and there was complete silence. That scene caught my attention more then anything else. For me, to really pay attention to something it has to be a mood, setting that gets me in a uncomfortable mood, and for some reason that scene did it for me. I like to be scarred, I like the feeling of not knowing what is going to happen, and I personally believe that you have to be a person that likes to be scarred to really appreciate this kind of show. As a class we discussed the kids being brainwashed by this television show, as we observed how the kids were reacting, they all seemed obsessed, over taken by the characters on the show “Smile Time.” The characters on the show seemed to get some kind of sexual orgasm feeling, as the kids would touch the screen, I would not say that this is a show for kids to watch. Although, there are puppets, a show for kids on a show itself, it doesn’t mean anything. Because they make fun of the puppets, in a way its like saying what you look like isn’t necessarily whom you are. You could look innocent, look good on the outside, but that doesn’t mean that’s what’s going on in the inside, and that’s what they exposed with the puppets on the show of Angel. They were showing us that appearance could be deceiving. Take the girl that turned into a ware wolf as an example, she was gorgeous, she seemed nice, she had a sense of humor, but then she turns into a disgusting ware wolf and eats Angel. Also, they were exposing the inside of television, showing us the production, how executives can be nasty through the puppets, as the puppets themselves end up stabbing the human in the back when they were in the office. Showing all the ugliness behind the scene and how ratings can be nasty and important. If I had to rate an age group of whom I think should watch this show it would be 16 and older. I wouldn’t let my children watch the show tile their 18, because I personally wouldn’t want my kids to be exposed to that kind of entertainment under my care, but once your 18 I do believe you’re an adult and they can do what they want. I am kind of being a hypocrite, because I like the show, I use to watch it, but now I wonder why I did like it, and it wasn’t good for me. Readings (Tom Gunning, Ken Perlin, Jenkins Henry) February 6, 2006 “The Cinema of Attractions” reading was very difficult for me to understand. They’re talking about films that I’ve never heard of before. Voyage Dans La Lune,Tthe Bride Retires, La Roue. A lot of these films are French; it’s hard for me to grasp what the writer is saying if I’ve never seen the examples he’s using to explain what he means. However, some of the things that were said in the reading have caught my attention. “Melies and Porter have been studied primarily from the view point of their contribution to film as a storytelling medium.” This statement shows me that they see film as a story, rather then a bunch of lines, action, and the story in itself is more important then anything else in the film. Today, it would be the special effects or action that’s more important then anything else in the film. Today, it would be the special effects or action that’s more important in the film, then in it. After reading the whole story, I understand that independent films, use to be the norm and middle class families use to see them. As time progressed we got into silent films, to narrative, to action, like Lucas and Spielberg. The main focus of this reading is to inform us on cinema culture and how times have changed. From reading the story of Ken Perlin, I learned that a video game and watching a movie have different ideas of what you are reacting to, where your emotional stand point lands. As you play a video game, you are becoming that character, its up to you on how you want that character to turn out. Whether you want the character to win or lose. The character shows no emotion, no movement without you controlling the situation. Totally different compared to a film, TV, the director is basically telling you how to feel about the character. You have an automatic reaction to a character on screen where as on a video game you are the one that is in control. In Jenkins, I like how he used the example of the Truman show. This portion is talking about media in general, and I just watched the Truman show recently so this part stuck out the most for me. Jenkins goes into how he was shocked when he saw the end of the Truman show, how media is used in exploitation, and Truman slamming the door in the directors face at the end. I personally liked that ending, because it was showing that the person was in control rather then the media, whom had been ruling his life since he was born. I didn't get into Langley that much, his main argument is that technology changes how fans communicate to one another, how technology has taken away value. There was more care taken, more love, more edit, the fan had more creativity and was higher up then a fan is today. (Comment on this)
Monday, February 6th, 2006
7:59 pm	Sarah Thomsen : Media and Society Journal #1 - class discussion, Angel I'm not exactly sure if we were suppose to do the reading, b/c I got the feeling that the reading starts this week. However, in class we discussed what our favorite tv shows, video games and films are in class. I said my favorite tv shows were most of the ones on the wb, "one tree hill," "Dawsons creek," "Felicity," etc... I really love "That 70's Show" and "Saved by the Bell." My favorite films are "Matchpoint" which is a current woody Allen film, and I love Breakfsat club, st elmos fire, weird science, pretty in pink, sixteen candles, outsiders, I'm a big fan of the films in the 80's. I also love titanic, romeo and juliet, ten things i hate about you, any film with drew barrymore as well. I had also mentioned that I hate reality telelvison shows, except for the first season of American Idol, when Kelly clarkson won, she's one of my favorite singers today, she's got a beautiful and powerful voice. I love music more, Sarah Mclachlan, Sheryl Crowe, I love 80's music, Madonna, Prince, Micheal Jackson. In class we watched the show "Angel" that was a spin off of Buffy the vampire slayer. The episode was when the puppets took control of the younger audiences minds. The kids would touch the tv as the childrens show called "Smiley Time" would come on and the kids eyes would roll in the back of their heads. The pupets would lure the kids to the tv by communicating with them personally. As Angel walks on the set of "Smile time" I got an eerie feeling of darkness and evil, all the props for the show were put away nice and neatly. He ran into a janitor whom seemed to be blind and no one around in sight. It was quiet and Angel suddenly saw the flashing light which then evil forces pushed him back and he turned into a puppet himself. As he became this puppet, his self esteem was very low and on the show they kept on singing this song about low self esteem, like they wanted to brainwash the kids into thinking they had low self esteem. Watching the kids watch the program, the kids acted very obsessed, I think the show in general was addressing to me how powerful certain shows are to the audiences. It was a show in a scary violent way, and also how important it was for ratings to go up. The main puppet had said to the other puppets that he wanted them to take control and be number one, so they can get the credit out of it. It's obvious that the show was targeted for younger kids. The adults never payed attention to the kids, as if the tv was a babysitter for them. The language represents what kind of people watch the show, which would be people who like to curse, or hear mean tones. The kids show represented brainwashing, and sexual connections from the kid to the puppet. I also think this show represented how sick our society is today, can you imagine a show like this out in the 50's? You go from "Leave it to Beaver" to "Angel" there is a big difference. I also think they were mocking and making fun of the puppets, showing how society thinks that those kinds of shows don't really help they destroy. (Comment on this)