Questionnaire

Just on my way to the train station when I get a phone call, we have to do this questionnaire! Here goes.

Age?
20

Sex?
Male

What is your degree subject (both if joint)?
Film Studies

Does ‘Being Bad’ relate well to the other modules you are taking?
Yes. Film, critical thinking and cultural studies.

If so, how? And if not, why not?
In film the use of bad cinema, critical thinking is relevant to all of the blogs (the ability to access and question ethics and morals) and cultural studies during the study of society.

Have you found ‘Being Bad’ too demanding, too easy, or at an appropriate level?
Appropriate, except for internet access for blogs near the end of the module.

Do you think the list of topics covered on the module was appropriate?
Yes.

Are there any topics not included in the module that you would like to see included?
Not really. The topics covered were interesting and varied.

Do you think that the format for classes has worked well?
Yes.

What did you think of the module team?
Groovy.

Do you think it would have been better to have had more:
Small group discussions?
Discussion and debate among the class as a whole?
Information and talk from lecturers?

The approach taken in the module is interdisciplinary (drawing on perspectives from English Literature, Film Studies, Creative Writing, Philosophy, Religious Studies, Media Studies and Politics): do you think this a useful way of approaching the topics covered in the module?
Yes.

Do you think that interdisciplinary modules are a good idea?
Yes.

Do you think you have benefited from the interdisciplinary approach taken in the module?Absolutely. My mind is opened!

Would you like to see more modules that cover this kind of subject matter?
No.

Are you planning to take the follow-up module PH2004 ‘It Shouldn’t Be Allowed’ at level 2?
Would have to look into it. Sounds interesting.

Would you recommend ‘Being Bad’ to a friend?
Yes.

Do you think that the blogs (web logs) were a good idea?
Yes. The blogs were one of the best parts of the course. Maybe a multi-user blog could be made so everyone can comment on each topic.

What did you think of the other assessments (e.g. would it be better to have one longer assessment rather than two shorter ones?)?
A long creative piece and a short essay would be better.

What have you learned from the module?
Everything can be classed as bad. Society cannot agree as a whole to any action as being totally 'good'.

What parts of the module have you found most useful and why?
The blogs because it’s easier to express your opinions when they have been though about and debated.

What parts do you think were a waste of time and why?
None really. Maybe more, shorter lecture could be held and each student chooses to attend a minimum of 12 to help be more of a personal module.

Are there any other comments you wish to make regarding ‘Being Bad’?
Thanks for listening! (Sort of!)

Media pressures

Don’t know if this will work seeing as all the blogs are due in today but one more can’t hurt!

After spending hours on an essay about how the media represents gender I am sick to death of the whole thing. However, I will just briefly explain the theories behind it.

Sex is a biological term, gender on the other hand, is about the individual, how they live their lives, what they eat, wear, perceive masculinity and femininity. This is the main point of it all and the media is telling us how to feel about 'maleness' and 'femaleness'.

So think outside the box people!

Thanks for listening. (Sort Of)

Drugs

In my opinion the government should either ban all drugs or allow them all. Personally I feel they should all be banned, including cigarettes and alcohol, even though I drink socially quite frequently. Smoking endangers not only the user but also anyone in the room, however, alcohol consumption can severely impair judgments and has potential to harm others more that tobacco abuse. Everyone is either directly or indirectly affected by legal or illegal drug use and this is why I think there are no ‘ok drugs’. On the other hand, if all of mankind’s vices were taken away then what would happen to a clearly desperate society?

It is not right that governments can collect billions of pounds/ dollars from allowing tobacco and alcohol consumption but at the same time condemn other drugs and claim that these are the drugs causing all the problems.

Thanks for listening (Sort Of)

Media and Police Investigations.

Yet again the news channels feel that they are helping get closer to finding a kidnapper by invading the lives of everyone the missing person ever spoke too. In the news today is a report of a girl missing from a holiday home in Portugal, see here. (http://uk.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUKL0439120620070504?rpc=401&)

I agree that in come cases media coverage can aid an investigation and we have an ever growing way of getting faces out there but it is the interviews with close family members and friends that I disagree with.

Our privacy is slowly slipping away and if anything should ever happen to me or my family I would not want cameras shoved in my face!

Thanks for listening. (Sort Of!)

Gun Control

After hearing about the Police Officer who was shot dead on Sunday, in Shropshire, I am confused at the whole situation.

How do people in this country get access to guns? I guess it’s the same as getting illegal drugs, but because this can harm others, I feel this should be a higher priority to the Police.

.

I feel that news like this raises two issues, how can we stop access to guns and should our police officers be armed? I think with regards to the second question that this may cause more problems that it helps, then again, the officer in Shropshire had the option to fire but didn't. A testimony to the man's character and in the past his attitude regarding weapons was rewarded with a commendation.

.

According to the Home Office however, gun related crimes are very low, if you read further on it does state that it is slowly growing.

.

Thanks for listening. (Sort Of)

Responce to Luc's blog on Street Racing

I agree with Luc's point that street racing should not be as tolerated as it is and I feel that there is a fine line between recklessness and ignorance. You cannot use the fact that the road seems safe as a way to get out of a murder trial, as the fact of the matter is, no road is safe.

There are many dangerous drivers out there who break many of the laws while on the road and this is not acceptable. I don’t know what goes through the mind of the speeder, drinkers and just bad drivers when they get into a car.

In my opinion more of the laws regarding “BLANK and driving” such as mobile phones and drinking, should be introduced as the road can always be a safer place.

The only safe driving!

Thanks for listening. (Sort Of)

Responce to Abi's blog on Bad Music

I agree. (See here) Society and family are to blame. Murders are not normal and people feel they need to blame someone.

In my opinion, music cannot tell you how to feel, only agree with your feelings, no matter how deep or forgotten they are.

I have this argument often with people when they say that Coldplay are depressing. I can agree that the majority of their music is slow, but music can only be described as sad when it is a reflection of the listener.

With regards to Marilyn Manson, even if they had listened to the music it cannot explain the reason for a mass murder, as I said in my blog on Oldboy, society need a scapegoat and Manson looks and sounds like one to the "norm"!

Music can be bad if the listener is bad, but the 'worst' music has ever been for me is dark. e.g. Tom Waits (check him out he's wicked!)

Thanks for listening (to Tom Waits, I hope!)

'Friends': Racist Propaganda!?

One most successful American T.V shows off all time, racist?

After watching censored parts of 'Whose Line Is It Anyway?' on the Internet, I found a clip of Wayne Brady pretending to ask a parent, "Mommy, How come no-one looks like me on 'Friends'?" [4 minutes in] Ever since then I have been questioning the morals of the show, which are fine when having to deal with typical situation comedy topics like love and parenthood, but when race or sexuality is mentioned the show has a lot to answer for.

Its is not only the lack of 'African-American's' in New York that annoys me but also of any other race. Ross' girlfriend from China is one of the only Asian characters that I can think of, strange seeing as Asia is the largest continent in the world! Also, because it was such an American show there was no chance in hell of an important character wearing a religious veil. The show could have demolished racist stereotypes and helped with the countries growing paranoia but instead it just steered clear.

In my opinion, the show reached a huge amount of Americans and well as everyone else around the world and giving across a much-needed message was not as important, for the creators, as getting cheap laughs at different races and sexualities.

Guest spot on 'Friends'? Not likely!

Thanks for listening (Sort Of!)

Bad Cinema

After watching Kids (1995) and doing a module on 'Shocking Cinema' at A level, I feel that my eyes have been opened to all types of uncomfortable and graphic films.

Kids was one that I found very interesting and found that it had more 'to say' than other films I've seen. Lots of films such as A Clockwork Orange (1971) or Crash (1996) have a lot to say about society and Kids was yet another one that has a message that needs telling.

The use of shocking images and memorable scenes is one that is affective in telling a story and I personally do not have a problem with it. It does not cheapen a film and it is not what is poisoning the youth. It is shows like 'The Simple Life' and 'Big Brother' that should be banned as they promote anorexia, vanity, racism, violence, and anti- social behaviour.

Shocking films are there for adults and instead of banning films, the law should come down on the children who are able watch films not suitable for them. Big Brother has updates of sex and violence on breakfast television and this type of t.v. is what is wrong with the media.

Thanks for listening. (I hate Big Brother!)

Responce to David's blog on 'Telephone Etiquette'

After just reading a blog on 'Telephone Etiquette' I have decided to try and change my phone manners to match my 'everyday manners'!

Usually I will let others on and off the train first, take of my hat or shades when indoors and all the usual stuff like table manners; however, I have not thought about phone manners properly. I agree 100% that people worry too much about their phones and when I forgot my phone the other day it was great! I could enjoy what I was doing and the company of those I was with.

In my opinion, not only are most people too worried about their phones but also they are just downright rude! Kids today! Tut!

According to http://www.reference.com/search?q=manners, manners are a way to ease the stress of communal living, so think about that next time your having a peaceful or personal moment and your phone goes off!

Thank you very much for being so kind as to listen. (Sort Of)

In responce to "Luc's" blog on stalking.

After reading Luc's blog on stalking , I came to the conclusion that stalking becomes an illegal matter when the stalker get a hold of information about the person that is 'private' or not intended to be revealed to others.

The argument of this as an enforced law is difficult. How can strangers (the jury) define when information is personal when they all have had different experiences in life?

In my opinion, the invasion of privacy from a government, is one that is bad, but also unavoidable if we want a 'safer world'. This is not a view of broad assumptions, but maybe we could monitor crimes better with surveillance. If we have nothing (illegal) to hide, we have nothing to be ashamed of.

Thanks for listening (Sort Of!)

Bad Bush

It sickens me that a man with such bad communication skills is the leader of the Western world. It is not necessarily the stupidity, the Bushisms, and the wars that annoy me, but his face alone drives me into a frenzied rage. (!)

The situation of having Bush as a president has become a joke in America, but this is from desperation of an intelligent (and out-voted) minority. Andy Dick makes a very good joke on his show, but there is a deeper thought behind it, that the President is trying frantically trying to reach out to the public, that he is acting differently in press conferences (whether that means smarter or stupider) and that he has a large amount of staff telling him what to say and do.

In my opinion, the most powerful man in the world should not be a puppet of hidden faces and George and the rest of his family use 'God' as a way to relate to the majority of America. (Family Guy also makes a joke about this)

Thanks for, erm, erm, the fish. (Sort Of!)

Graffiti

After hearing about a couple of school girls who got fined £80 for drawing with chalk on a pavement I got to thinking about 'graffiti'.

I've always been a fan of the art movement of graffiti, but I feel that the criminal act and artistic expression should be given separate names.

In this case, the work may not be defined as a great piece of artwork but seeing as it is not offensive and not permanent, the fine of £80 or an ASBO seems extreme. See more of this article here.

The law of graffiti states that young offenders should be given community service rather than a fine, (bbc.co.uk) and I feel this is fair in most situations, chalk hearts does not count in my eyes. Maybe the officers were having a boring day! If a policeman was in a school, a public property, should they arrest a child for drawing hopscotch on the floor!? This is crazy!


Thanks for listening (Sort Of)

Response to 'The Clog'

With regard to Carly's blog on sexual promiscuity http://carlysblog-theclog.blogspot.com/ I have thought of a quick test. The test is to find out about how society, and you as an individual, feels about ranging amounts of sexual partners.

After watching 'The Human Footprint' on channel 4 last night, I found out that the average for sexual partners in a lifetime is 10. The test is simply this, would you be more likely to admit to being over or under this average to others. Also, think about the range, how far over or under would you admit to and consider your answer if you were the opposite sex. Would it be the same?

If you were interested in the show you can go to the channel 4 website and take the Human Footprint test.

Thanks for listening (Sort of)

'Hic'!

On the news this morning there was a lot of debating about introducing new drinking laws. The debate was concerning minors drinking alcohol at home and the suggestion put forward by The Charity Alcohol Concern is that no one under the age of 15 should be drinking. As the law stands now any one over the age of 5 can drink but I’m not so sure that either of these ages is appropriate. Karen Gardner suggests that introducing children to drinking in moderation prevents alcohol abuse and teaches children responsibility, and I agree. By the time a child is 15 they would have already experienced alcohol, if not with a responsible adult then with others their age. This, in my opinion, is where problems regarding under age drinking occur.

Karen Gardner's website (under construction) is here... http://parentingcafe.co.uk/
and her main argument is on the bbc website here... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6598989.stm

A Responsible Parent?!

Thanks for listening (Sort Of!)

You naughty, naughty comedian!

I feel that both Lenny Bruce and Bill Hicks are 'nasty comedians' but in these instances I do not feel this is a bad thing.

Lenny Bruce destroyed censorship and a lot of his work has been taken out of context. Bruce on many occasions did not commit an illegal act but was arrested because of his political beliefs. Without Bruce’s actions we would not have so many greats after him and would not have freedom of speech like we do now. I do not think that Bruce had the same effect as people like Martin Luther King but I think his contribution to the counter culture was important. The film Lenny gives a better impression of the man than the tabloids ever did and shows how troubled the man actually was. (the film however may give him too much credit! see... )http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcoceOhB0QM

Bill Hicks was clearly also a troubled man but he used his pessimistic perspective of America to try and open others minds, trying to prevent the 'mall society'. He intentionally caused controversy as a tactic to get attention and both Hicks and Bruce had strong political intentions when they got on stage. For this I admire both of them, even if I do not agree with their lifestyles.

Thanks for listening. (sort of!)

Being Bad Blues!

After seeing the Harlem Globetrotters on Midlands Today I started thinking about oppression and how in a twisted way it creates some of the best things in life. The blues, for example, came from African slave music but it is one of the greatest forms of self-expression known to man. (In my opinion!)

If mankind had no "hard times" then could we have art? In my opinion most art, or art that is worth something, comes from a deep part of the human psyche that makes us express our inner emotions, even the best comedy comes from the pain of life. If it was possible to replace all of the oppression and evil in the world for art then I would do it, but would we still have an artistically literate world like we do now? On the other hand, as an individual, I would seriously consider exchanging a painful childhood to sing with the amount of soul that Billie Holiday did. (She was raised in a brothel, see... http://www.pbs.org/jazz/biography/artist_id_holiday_billie.htm)

In conclusion, I obviously have spent a long time considering why I can’t play the blues with the intensity of Ray Charles, Ella Fitzgerald, Billie Holiday and BB King, (!) but if they can do then can’t we all? I think there is an essential ingredient missing from most our lives.

Thanks for listening. (Sort Of!)

Being Bad/ Born Bad?

After reading the article in the Metro on the train to a lecture I was outraged at the broad assumptions made in comparison to the Virginia killings and the Korean film Oldboy.

The article was clearly written by someone who had never seen the film as they incorrectly labeled the genre as a martial arts film, which is ridiculous, as the film does contain brutal scenes but there is only two fights in the entire film. This issue of broad assumptions is discussed on the BBC Paper monitor... http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/magazinemonitor/2007/04/paper_monitor_158.shtml The writer speaks more about the real roots of the film, not in graphic Hollywood movies but Greek tragedy, and about the different newspapers ideas of the film warping Seung-hui Cho's mind.

In my opinion the photographs can be linked to the film but in no way to the killings. The film is right in the use of violence as a shock tactic and the film is artistically sound in its story and themes. I believe that it is society that cannot accept the mindset of a man who kills 32 people as just that way because he want to "be bad" and it doesn’t matter how many violent films he watches there is a clear mental health issue preventing morality and guilt. Film, TV or any type of media cannot stop these parts of the mind from functioning only suggest that they are not necessary, leaving it up to the individual, in this case Seung-Hui Cho not Chan-wook Park. (Dir. Oldboy)

듣기를 위한 감사합니다 (일종의!)

Bandits And Outlaws

Bandits and Outlaws are an interesting source of discussion. The idea of the "anti-hero" is used in almost all types of media, from film and TV to comics and literature. The idea is widely accepted that a good person can perform bad acts and still be like by the audience. In my screenplay I tried to push this idea as far as I could by making the two main characters both equally bad, leaving the audience to be stuck with which one to root for in the bloody shootout in the final scene. This had been explored in many different films but in most the characters are likable. Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, for example has a death count of 30 but the characters are rooted for right to the final scene. see... http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0064115/trivia
Although I have many favorite films the classic bandits and outlaws always appealed to me and I thoroughly enjoyed writing a short screenplay set in the old west. Maybe people should post their favorite bandits to see if we have an agreed favorite. Although I'm fond of Butch and Sundance, Bonnie and Clyde, Dirty Harry and all the others, my all-time favorite villain is defiantly Dick Dastardly.

Hehehehehe...!

Thanks for listening (sort of!)

Religion

JESUS CHRIST!!!

Hello and welcome to my blog.

I guess its not really suitable for Christians but what the hell.

So... During my Childhood I had no religion pushed upon me by my parents, they were both atheists and let me make my own mind up about Religion. This however seemed not to be the attitude of the school that I attended, even though it was not a Catholic school there was a strong Catholic feel. Obviously at such a young age I was impressionable and the idea of burning in Hell for all of eternity didnt seem all that appealing, so "on my own" I desided to become a Christian. A lazy Christian but one none the less. As the years went on the idea seem less worrying and I began to ignore the whole afterlife thing.

Since then I have always had a pre-programed sense of Religion and have considered it as a serious way of life a few times but nothing much came of it. Some people are comforted by the idea of an all seeing, all knowing being but I can live without.

After recently researching other Religions I have found that none are for me and that I am growing out of the ideas I learnt during childhood. The afterlife seems to me a really boring concept, even Heaven, and I am enjoying this life too much to worry about the next one. I hope that it concludes well and there are no surprises waiting for me beyond the grave!

Well thats my Religous history, wasnt it boring! Overall I feel that Religion is good for the individual but when you get a group of Religious people together bad things happen. (George w. Bush for President for example!)

Thanks for listening, sort of...!!!

Prostitution/ Stripping

Personally I feel that stripping can be demeaning, but it is nothing like prostitution. Firstly prostitution (the sexual act) is illegal, which in generally considered as “being bad”. Also it is linked with crimes such as sexual abuse, paedophilia, murder and drug use.
To argue that stripping is not the same as prostitution I have found the definition of a prostitute in the English dictionary.

Prostitute...
1. a woman who engages in sexual intercourse for money; whore; harlot.
2. a man who engages in sexual acts for money.
3. a person who willingly uses his or her talent or ability in a base and unworthy way, usually for money.*
–verb (used with object)
4. to sell or offer (oneself) as a prostitute.
5. to put to any base or unworthy use: to prostitute one's talents.
(http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=prostitute)

I am arguing that any service for money (be it sexual or not) can be classed as prostitution unless something else is gained except money, i.e. enjoyment. So If I were to work as a teacher or a policeman I would consider it as prostiting myself as there would be no personal gain apart from money.

Seeing as stripping is a profession that can be enjoyed by the stripper as well as the crowd I feel that this is only prostitution in the eyes of people who do not enjoy the act of stripping.

Thanks for listening (sort of!)

Smoking

Hello all.
Did everyone attend the lecture on smoking in week 2? I was stuck in Birmingham and missed it, and was wondering if any good issues were raised. I don't have a problem with smoking, however second hand smoke is an issue. I am behind the ban on smoking in public places as breathing smoke when you are a non-smoker is not only dangerous but unpleasant.
Blah blah blah.
Thankyou for listening. (Sort of.)