. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .·. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.

..
.
·<-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:•.·:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: :•·•:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:·.·:·:·.•>:-:-:-:-. -:-:-:-:-·-:-:-:-:-:.·:-:-:-:-.-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:•··:·:·:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-. ••. . ·.-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-::-:.:-:•.• . •·:-:-:-::-:-·-:-:-:-:-:•·.•·.:•:•:-:-:-:•
•
.
•
•
•
.
•
.
•
•
.
•
•
.
•
.
•
•
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
.
•
.
.
•
.
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
•
.
•
•
.
•
.
•
.
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
.
•
• :,t
• .. .... . .... .... .. . . .............................
............................
........................................................................
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
................................................... ........................................................................ .................................................................................................. ...................................... ............................................................................................. ....................
...... .
.�....
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
................................................................................................................ ..................................................................................................................................
......... ....
. . ............... ... .... ......... ..................... ............................... ........ ........ ....... ..... . .................. ........ ............ .. .......................... ........ ........ ......... ........ ............ ......... ........ ....... .....
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .. .. . ... ... .. ...... . . . . . ... . .. . ... .. .... .... . .. .. . . . .. ..... . ...... .. .. ... ..... . ...... . .. .. .. .. ... ......... . . .. ..... ... .... ... .
..
.
.
.
.

...... .. ... ....... .. . ... . .. . ...... .. .. ....... ... ... ...... . ... ... ... .... ... ... . .. .. .. . . . . . . .. .. .. . ....
............................................................ ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ...

I
•
>
:
:
i:!l:!:i!l:::i:l:=:l:i:l::i:l•.il il il il l il l: l:i 11=•:•=·=1·=·=·:=·=1r·=•:•=·=·ti:trtrrt t\:: : :;i,.,•.•,i;:•i;,•.,•:.•.i•.•.:•.l•;•.:l•.•.:•l.l•.•.•l.l•.• l: lllll: il i l il l il••!•i•l•i•l• •i•l•i•l•i• •l•i •i•l•il il il l l l:.-: .----.;.,_:• ■ ■ •• ■• ■'■ •• ■ ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.:.

•••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••• •••• ••••••••• •••••••• ••• • ••• ••••• • •• ■ ••• ■••••••••••• ■•••••••• ■••• ■ ■••••••• ■••• ■•• ■ ■•••••• ■•• ■ ■••• ■••• ■•••• ■

:

'

:

: : : : : : : : : : : : :: : : : : : : : : : : :........

. ...•.•.•....
:•...•.•.._,..•.•·:,;:· . :,·,·:,;·:,-,,·_·,; .•:•:•:•:•:•.•.•

•

•:•

:

•

:.: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

•....

•

.
.
.....................
...........
.....................................
.
..................................
.................................
........
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..................
.
.................
....
.. ...................
..... .............
............
......................---�-��............
...........
..............
.............
.............
. .
..............
.
.............
. .. .................................................................................................

......
.
... . ..........
.
.........
. .
. ...........
.............
.....................................
.
......................................
..............

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ■•••

• ■•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

•

I

I

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

■

•

•

•

•

•

.........................................................................
.......................................
........
•

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

EDITOR’S NOTE
It is with great excitement and pride that I present to you this year’s pub-lication of the Eyecandy Film Journal. As an organization, we have slowly
acclimated ourselves to the printing process, re-learning the knowledge
we had lost since the pandemic struck. Despite the many challenges we
faced—from receiving enough funding to understanding the printing process—we have stuck through thick and thin, working hard to produce thisyear’s volume.
When I first joined Eyecandy, I knew close to nothing about creating amagazine, much less leading an organization. My first year was confusing
and chaotic—from learning editorial jargon to helping out in a process webarely knew—to say the least. But I found myself working alongside amazing people, who encouraged me to go far beyond what I could see myself
doing. I had never once imagined that I could be Editor-in-Chief, but looking back, I’ve come a long way. I’m far from being perfect, but so I’m grateful for this opportunity.
Creating volume 33 was an enormous responsibility that all of our staff
members stepped up to, and I want to take a moment to acknowledge
and appreciate their efforts. They are the backbone of this magazine, frommeticulously going through each of the articles and layouts to bringing thewhole magazine together. Their dedication, passion, and drive are embodied within the pages of this magazine, and I couldn’t be more proud to be apart of this organization and work alongside these talented individuals.
So, without further ado, all of us invite you to embark on this reading journey. Happy reading!

Isha Chury
Editor-in-ChiefRyan Gosling and the Sigma Maletable of contents

06 By Amelia York

Truman Through the Exit Door

09 By Nicholas Nygard

Little Miss Sunshine: Beauty in Dysfunciton

13 By Alexandra Tineo

Don’t Mess with Scooby Doo

17 By Lauren Pretto

Cutting into the Cutaway

22 By Alexer Ascunion

Godless: Why Westerns Do Women Better

26 By Paige Kellher

Seeing the Idol Industry Through31 White and Perfect BlueBy Jade Diones

The Obsessed Artist: What Passion Destroys

37 By Lauren Tivy

Xavier: Renegade Angel

43 By Roman Hernandez

Adaptation’s Best: The Last of Us

47 By Eamon Raftery

Witches and B*#^hes

51 By Isabel Selling

Operating Under the Influence in The X-Files’
56 “Sanguinarium”
By Rowan Lester

David Lynch: To Dream in the Dark

61 By Evan Amberose

Meet the Staff!

3Isha Chury - Editor-in-Chief

Analy Hidalgo - Co-Editor

Madeleine Lingad - Co-Editor

Marco Navarro - Co-Editor& WebMaster

Alexandra Tineo - Financial
AdvisorRoman Hernandez Co-Financial Advisor

Jade Diones - Social MediaManager

Kazarina Liao - Co-Editor

Alyssa Flores - Co-Editor

Skylar Smith - Co-Editor

Lauren Tivy - Co-Editor

Amelia York - Co-Editor

Chloe Brown

Andre Dal Corso

Meet the Students!

Alexer Ascunion4Isabel Selling

Paige Kellher

Eamon Raftery
5

Evan AmbroseJack McCarthy

Rowan Lester

Kiana Reid

Daisy Herrera

Sophia Tillman

Lauren Pretto

Nicholas Nygard

THE POWER OF RYAN GOSLING
Written by Amelia York

Upon looking up “sigma male” on the social
media app TikTok, users will find edits ofmen running down hallways with chainsaws
after women, smashing mirrors, and perpetrating violence. One will hear the suave
voice of Christian Bale reminding us that,“You can always be thinner, look better,”1or the snarl of a bloodied Brad Pitt stating, “We’re a generation of men raised by
women.”2 One might see Ryan Gosling drive
down lonely roads in lonely cities after committing the most desolate crimes.
The “sigma grind set” refers to intense ideals of self-efficiency, independence, and assertiveness. In online spheres,disillusioned men have turned this lifestyle
for “success” into an excuse to idolize violent, antisocial fictional characters to justify
their social ostracization. This online idolization can lead to toxic behaviors that harmthe “sigma” and those around them.
To alleviate this toxicity, we must
deconstruct the sigma mythos and findfictional characters that serve as better rolemodels for positive expressions of masculinity. There is an iridescent, shining light that
captures one solution to breaking the sigma
cycle - and that light is Ryan Gosling.
For those not chronically online, adefinition of “sigma male” might
be beneficial. No official research journals or scholarly
sources have published reports on this topic because
sigma isn’t real.
The only sources that
subscribe to this caricature
are pseudoscientific blogs
forcing products down theirconsumer’s throats. These
articles may be blatantpatriarchal propaganda to most, but
to fully digest
the sigma grindset, place yourself
in the shoes of thedisenchanted man.
Estrangement and depression are not issues
to be minimized in anygroup of people, eventhe most privileged. The

2

Designed by Alyssa Flores

problem is that these men take a machiavellian approach to amending their hollowness,prioritizing respect over love. The Adult Man,a self-proclaimed “no BS guide to adulthoodfor men” (a product and personal empowerment website), preaches, “A sigma male is a
man within the socio-sexual hierarchy whochooses to live his life outside of the normalsocial dominance hierarchy structures ofsociety. Sigma males share many traits incommon with the alpha archetype, though
their tendency to walk outside of the lines of
traditional social dominance hierarchies setsthem apart and makes them different.” 3
According to the manliest man website to ever man, sigmas are assertive (aggressive), leader-like (selfish) figures who,
due to their self-sufficient and nonconforming tendencies (lack of social skills), tend to
take on a “mystery man” persona. This sigma
model takes from a larger structure used tocategorize men and limit their expressions ofmasculinity, known as the “socio-sexual hierarchy”4. There are two significant takeaways
from this paradigm; First, the “inventor”
who proposed this philosophy is Vox Day, aknown alt-right activist.
Secondly, the hierarchical wolf packstructure that influenced this concept is
non-existent. Professor Barbara Zimmerman
has clarified that wolf packs’ mythic “alpha”
and “omega” social structure is detectable
only in wolves in captivity. In the wild, thesecreatures simply co-exist as families. Their
dynamic is much more empathetic than the
territorial pecking order that uncontextualized studies have made it out to be. There is
deep-rooted irony in the fact that the phenomenon “sigma men” have crafted
their persons around nothing morethan a disillusioned dream.
The structure isn’t real, but theway men have turned this wolf-packhierarchy into a lifestyle manifesto
has become reality. Wolves aren’t
the only things used to represent
the sigma grind. The mascot forthis so-called “subversive figure” can take the form of avariety of white, cisgender, heterosexual fictional men. Somestars on this list include Christian Bale’s Patrick Batemanfrom American Psycho, Jake Gyllenhaal’s
Lou Bloom from Nightcrawler, Brad Pittand Edward Norton’s Tyler Durden/Narrator
from Fight Club, Joaquin Phoenix’s Joker,
and Ryan Gosling’s Officer K from Blade
Runner or the unnamed protagonist from
Drive.
Underneath their physical characteristics is a more nuanced trait essential
to becoming a sigma mythos martyr. While
we absorb the demented thoughts of Patrick Bateman and the anarchistic schemesof Tyler Durden through narration, most ofthese men seldom express their emotions
through calm and collected communication. Lou Bloom’s frustration with failingin the journalism industry is demonstrated via guttural screaming and mirror
shattering (self-destructive tendencies,
much?). The fracturing of Joker’s psyche
after committing murder is portrayed via
slow-motion interpretative dance, with noone but his reflection to react. The Drive
protagonist spends more of the film’s runtime driving and beating than speaking. He
serves as the epitome of what makes themale sigma trope so dangerous.
Overemphasis on violence and lackof healthy expression on the screen leads
to silent repression and aggressive impulses in reality. Men idolize this internal
harboring of emotions, believing it will givethem the same mysterious aura of their favorite lone wolves. Instead of sharing their
feelings, they’re locked in a self-inflicted
cycle of bottling up their resentment of theworld, which can lead to malicious behavior.
Nicolas Winding Refn’s 2011
neo-noir crime thriller Drive features
everything a sigma-seeker could everwant: social incompetence framed
as suaveness, aestheticized ultraviolence, and Ryan Gosling. The prologue
to the film, featuring Refn’s namelessprotagonist serving as an accessory
to robbery as the getaway driver, sets
the tone for the rest of the movie:
lowlighting covering the cast in
shadows with the neon reflection ofstreetlights as the only illumination,a dreamy synth wave soundtrack
washing over everything that
occurs with a wave of sleekness,
Gosling’s bad boy gloves andiconic scorpion jacket, and thewinding streets of L.A. The city
he weaves through during his
crimes is so expansive anddevoid of non-artificial
light that the driver isshrouded in a sense ofanonymity. 		

This mysterious nature makes thecharacter appeal to men who feel outcasts
from society. Aside from his illicit activities, the driver’s day job performs vehicularstunts for the movies (“I drive…for the movies,” Gosling explains in his charming yet
detached voice), literally putting on masks
imitating actors and then crashing or cruising6. He has no sense of self, meaning others can easily attach their identities to thedriver.
The disillusioned male can picture
themselves winning over their dream girl
(Carey Mulligan’s submissive character
Irene, in this case) from their more alphacounterparts (Oscar Isaac’s troubled yet
cocky character Standard), beating gangsters bloody in between cruising the dark
streets of the big city. Their standoffish
nature is perceivable as slick as opposed
to strange. Gosling’s white skin, blonde
hair, blue eyes, and youthful facial features
are impossible to overlook when analyzing
how privileged men who feel as though
they have been scorned by society connect
with his performance. Research reviewed
by Emily Mazzurco suggests that “media of
pop culture has played a part in the crimesof 25% of offenders”7 and that “People are
more likely to imitate someone similar tothemselves... Age, gender, social status, andcompetency level are all traits people imitate from others” when it comes to committing a crime.
Despite his wrongdoings, theDrive protagonist stands out fromother sigma mascots because, unlike more blatant psychotic characters such as Patrick Bateman or Tyler
Durdan, the driver has moments oftenderness and empathy that justify
his actions (abuse, burglary, homicide, etc.) for film bros. His caring
nature towards Irene and her son iswholesome when isolated from therest of the movie’s events. Capturing
non-conventional yet “bad-ass” malecharacters displaying acts of kindness
is important because it encourages“misfit” men to emulate this benevolence. That said, there are much bettercharacters to emulate than the Driveguy.
Years of research have led to the
explanation for why portraying poor
behavior on the screen results in poor
behavior off the screen as well as theconsequences of toxic masculinity.
While this work helps give those who
do not trust common sense as to why
behaving in isolating behavior is terrible for the individual and those aroundthem, the downfall of all this studying

3

is that it has minimized research exploring
positive expressions of masculinity.
According to doctors in Counseling
Psychology Matt Englar-Carlson and Mark
Kiselica, “Positive masculinity emphasizes
the adaptive character strengths, emotions,and virtues of men that promote well-being
and resiliency in self and others (Isacco etal., 2012),”9 The hope that men can channel
their emotions towards more significant
change in them and their communities lies
on Ryan Gosling’s shoulders. Encouraging
positive masculinity revolves around shifting from asking men questions such as“What is wrong with you?” to “What kind ofman do you want
to be?”
Now that the perpetrators of thesigma grind set in cinema have been identified and deconstructed, one must examine
the male characters that could spark virtuous masculinity. It is principal to searchfor characters who maintain a quiet, independent demeanor but in healthier ways.
Two characters currently in the cinematic
sphere who embody these traits are Robert
Pattinson’s Bruce Wayne and Pedro Pascal’s
Mandalorian. While both characters initiallystruggle with reaching out for help or showcasing their affection towards their loved
ones, their developmental arcs tackle theseexact problems. The Mandalorian ultimately forgoes his mission for loot to protect aninfant-like alien he has traveled across theuniverse with, illustrating how to put others
before yourself in a caring way instead of aself-destructive one. The Batman demonstrates endearment to Alfred in his personal
life and fondness towards his community
when he helps those in need in Gotham in a
civil manner at the end of the film.
The Mandalorian and Mr. Waynebalance the mysterious nature that makes
the sigma lifestyle appealing alongside
genuine tenderness and compassion forothers. While these two lone but loving
wolves make great additions to the Positive
Masculinity Cinematic Canon, a characterfrom a film that has not even been released

Endnotes

1American Psycho, directed by Mary Harron (2000).
2Fight Club, directed by David Fincher (1999).
3Joshua Sigafus, “The Sigma Male Explained: Understanding the Lone Wolf,” lastmodified February 23, 2023
4Joshua Sigafus, “The Socio Sexual Hierarchy Explained: Where Do You Rank?,”
last modified September 18, 2022
5

6Elise Kjørstad, “Wolf packs don’t have alpha males and alpha females

Drive, directed by Nicolas Winding Refn (2011).
7 Emily R. Mazzurco, “Copycat Mass Killings: How Personality
Might Moderate Identification with Antisocial Characters,” Kean
Quest 4, no. 1 (2021): Accessed February 28, 2023
8 Mazzurco, “Copycat Mass Killings.”

4

could shatter the Sigmasphere forever. His
name? Ken. A tsunami of memes and media
expressing excitement over Gosling’s brief
appearance in the trailer for and behind-thescenes photos of Greta Gerwig’s upcoming
Barbie film has infiltrated online spaces
previously dedicated to praising Joker andTravis the taxi driver. Gerwig’s rendition ofKen, in his sleeveless denim vest, fluorescentroller-skating fit, and pink-ascot-cowboy-hat
campy combo, embraces strength and charmin a positive light unfamiliar from that shownin American Psycho or Fight Club. Only fleeting seconds and shots have emerged, but
those shown depict Gosling expressing his
emotions visually (although not violently)
and grinning while enjoying healthy hobbies
such as rollerskating with his iconic friend
Barbie. If these snippets alone have gathered
the attention of current sigma-worshippers,
one can only imagine the idolization that will
spawn once the film comes out in the summer of 2023. In all of his Drive Guy glory, Ryan
Gosling might be able to drive these film
bros away from the kind of man they are to
the type of man they should want to be.
Ryan Gosling makes an excellent
lighthouse for guiding lonely men away fromthe darker depths of the sigma grindset,
but the waves are monstrous. More positiverole models in media that harbor desirable“masculine” traits while spurning antisocial,harmful behaviors are necessary to channel
the toxic masculinity pool that has grown inonline spaces into positive masculinity. More
importantly, one should look off the screen
and at the reality around them. How can you
maintain the persona you want to portray
while practicing kindness? What is morevaluable to me, my image or
the happiness of myself
and those around me?
Who can I look to for
inspiration in this dark,
cruel world? The answer is still probably
R yan Gosling.

Through the Exit Door:AR
ejection

DesigneWritten
d by:

9

#

of Modeby Nichorn Succlas Nygard

John M
ccarthy
AlyssaFloresessall actors. Every aspect of his life is designed
to be broadcasted to millions of people, doneby having thousands of cameras placed evThe Truman Show was always one of myerywhere, recording his every move. The mainfavorite films as a kid, mainly because the idea that
drama of the film is that the seams of this false
the guy from The Mask was playing ‘an averagejoe’ was hilarious. On my first watch as a kid, I had reality are starting to fall apart. He goes against
no understanding of the film’s themes. Basically, any the entire 1000-plus crew in search of truth andfreedom.
scene without Jim Carry’s pearly white teeth on the
An important aspect is that Truman – atscreen didn’t catch my attention. But while rewatchleastatthe beginning of the film -- is a very haping this movie through the lens of a young adult inpybecausehe has fulfilled nearly every facet
America, the significant themes of capitalism, conof
theAmericandream. He has a stable desk
sumerist culture, and the disillusioned idea of thejob,adecentrelationshipwith his wife and best
American Dream, started to shine through.
friend,
a
home
that
he
owns,
and complete safeThis film would not have had the impact it
ty within the confines of the suburbs. However,
had if not for Carrey’s performance as Truman.
we learn later in the film that one of Truman’s
With the tragic character Truman, no other actor
passions is to travel, despite never being able tocould have added so much humanity to the role as
do so. I think this dream of traveling shows how
Jim Carrey did. From 1998 to 2023, The Truman
he wants to escape from a “perfect life”.
Show has retained its immense relevance. I underWhat is important to realize here is thatstand this film to be an example of how people candespite having what many people would define
feel disillusioned when they finally reach certain
as a great life, Truman still wishes to escape.
standards of success. Part of the reason I feel
The relationships he has are shallow, showingthat Truman’s character arc has becomethat America idolizes superficial relationmore relevant is because many popular
ships over true, vulnerable affection. The
drama shows today include main characshowrunners were able to fulfil every
ters with completely opposite arcs. Despiteother aspect of his life with the exception
their large differences, they continueof meaningful relationships. To summarize
to tell similar messages of how to
the final decision, Truman is given a final
live a good life.
choice by the creator of the show, ChrisOne character arc
tof; he can enter the real world andthat shares a similar mesface the harsh realities of everyday
sage but with a completelife or live in an artificial world built
ly different character arc
for him. In one of the most iconic
is Breaking Bad’s, Walter“Itdoesn’tmatter
how
safe
or
happy
climatic moments of the film, Truman
White. The Truman Show
leaves through the exit of the TV
something
might
seem,
if
it
isn’t
real,
it
and Breaking Bad bothset, and we lose sight of him as hetackle what it means tocannot fulfill you.”has escaped the eyes of the viewer.
strive for superficial goals
What does Truman’s final decision
like money, versus more important things like relainformus
about
the American dream?
tionships, yet their main characters have opposite
Truman’s choice to leave everythingarcs. Both pieces of media reject the American
behind could be interpreted as simply being
Dream and superficial ideals of success.
dissatisfied with the things that he had. AlternaAs a basic plot summary, The Truman Show
tively, I view his dreams of escape as somethingtakes place on Seahaven Island, a completely
else. Truman is more concerned with chasing what
manufactured town that functions as a studio set,is real than what is commercialized or
artidisguised to Truman as a regular town.
ficial.
I
believeinthetheoreticalreal
Truman is our everyday man who is livworld, Truman would have liked
ing in a world he is convinced is real,
when in reality, every person he sees, all the things that he had, but thetragedy of Truman’s life does not
his neighbors, colleagues, acquaintances, best friend, and even his wife, come from the suffering he faces
day-to-day
areRejection of the American Dreamsuffering he faces day-to-day. In reality, Truman
lives a prosperous, healthy life. The tragedy stems
from the fact that it doesn’t matter how safe or
happy something might seem, if it isn’t real, it cannot fulfill you.
Truman’s ending choice brings me backto how the film is relevant today. The “American
Dream” is the idea that anyone from anywherein America, can pull themselves up by their bootstraps and attain wealth. Our modern idea ofsuccess goes hand and hand with theAmerican Dream because it typicallyrefers to your career, wealth, andthe value of the material possessions
that you own (clothes, cars, jewelry,etc). The more of these things you
have, the more “successful” you areconsidered and the closer you areto achieving the American Dream. Success rarelyrefers to the state of your health, relationships, or
passions. The issue is that, while being a hopefulsentiment, the American Dream clearly isn’t thewhole truth as it conveniently leaves out the partabout everybody having different difficulties, andfewer/more opportunities to attain wealth basedon race, class, gender, etc. A study published by
Crystal L. et al., titled Believing in the American
Dream Sustains Negative Attitudes toward Those in
Poverty, examined how often participants agreed
with statements that put more or less blame onpoor people for their class positions. They concluded that because of a large belief in meritocracy,
the widely held idea of the American dream (or inother words, “upholding the principle that status
in society is earned”) led people to have morenegative attitudes towards people in poverty. They
found a correlation between those who believed inmeritocracy and those who put blame on people
in poverty. While the idea that anyone can cometo our country and succeed with an equal shot is
a hopeful vision for our system, it simply isn’t true.
Meritocracy and the American Dream, should not
be believed in because of how they can change
your outlook on people who aren’t succeeding. We should strive for a version
of success that doesn’t view those whoare impoverished as solely responsible
for their position. The film’s lastscene is a rejection of the American dream

and a message urging the viewers in both thefilm and the real audience to leave behind
what’s fake and strive for what’s real.

“I Won”, Walter White’s Portrayal of Success.
When thinking of pieces of media
that portray an opposite arc compared tothat of Truman’s, I immediately thought ofBreaking Bad. Truman at the start of his arc
is completely sustained by his material possession but isn’t fulfilled bypassions or meaningful/real relationships. I would
summarize Truman’s arc
in the film as a man who
thinks he has everything
until he drops everything
for what is real rather than what is pleasurable but artificial. At the end of the movie,
he willingly leaves everything behind, exiting
the TV set with nothing. On the other hand,
Walter White, the lead of Breaking Bad, is
not sustained financially but fulfilled by real
relationships. The difference between thetwo characters is that Walter lacked a jobthat sustained him but had meaningful relationships while
Truman was sustainedby his job and the systems aroundhim butwasn’t fulfilled by any
real relationships.

“ A message urging theviewers in both the film andthe real audience to leavebehind what’s fake and strive#

Walter White’s arc throughout the show is a journey looking at a man willing to throw away thelittle he has for things he has convinced himself hewants – like power, money, and respect. Walter
White is an overqualified, underpaid chemistryteacher who, after a cancer diagnosis, turns toa life of crime in the drug business to make a
lot of money before he dies. By the end of theshow, Walter has successfully climbed the criminal
empire ladder; other criminals respect him, police
are obsessed with/or fear him, and he has moremoney than he could’ve ever imagined. Yet by theend, he is a shell of a man. Walter has nothingof substance. The relationship between his family
and friends is shattered, and anyone who evenremotely cared about him had clearly severed“Yet by the end, he is a shell of a man.
He has nothing.”

Yet this doesn’t stop anyone from glorifying
these actions and sympathizing with the man
who “keeps getting kicked down”. I believethese interpretations of character arcs likeWalt’s lead to harmful mindsets like that of theAmerican Dream. I believe these interpretationsof character arcs like Walt’s lead to harmful
mindsets like that of the American Dream.
Our society makes judgments about people’s worth based mostly on their wealth andjob. While most of these judgments are harmless, it shows just how much we equate successwith money and status. These judgments affectthe way we view media. Relating it back to
Breaking Bad, beliefs like the American Dreamormeritocracy are why peopleview Walter White’s journey through wealth as an
admirable journey regardless of what he loses in theprocess.
Overall, certain media
interpretations that are
informed by meritocracy or
the American Dream can beespecially harmful. Adopting ideals
that prioritize health, meaningful relationships, and passion will lead you to chasethings that actually matter. Truman taught us
always to follow what is real and fulfilling overwhat is superficial and pleasurable. Making
health, meaningful relationships, and passions apriority of your desire, is the first step to walking through the door, just as Truman did.

Many people have explained
to me that they believe
Walter White is a man
who has nothing andbecause of this,decides to make achange in his lifeand rise in power
regardless of what’sagainst him.
Some people thinkBreaking Bad is anunderdog story. Now, you’re probably thinking, how does this relate to Truman and theAmerican Dream? Both pieces of media address what success really is and how shallow
things like money andpower are ultimately
worthless. Current “Making health, meaningful relationships, and passion
trending shows anda priority of your desire, is the first step to walking
movies feature
characters who
through the door, just as Truman did.”lead self-destructive
lives.

EndnotesMiller, Julie. “Twenty Years Later, Everything Is the Truman Show.” Vanity
Fair, June 5, 2018.
Hoyt, C. L., Burnette, J. L., Forsyth, R. B., Parry, M., & DeShields, B. H. (2021).
Believing in the American Dream Sustains Negative Attitudes toward Thosein Poverty. Social Psychology Quarterly, 84(3), 203–215.
The Truman Show. United States: Paramount Pictures, 1998.
Gilligan, Vince & Gould, Peter. Breaking Bad. Netflix. AMC, 2008.

#12

Little Miss Sunshine
Seeing Beauty in Dysfunction
Wr i t t e n B y : A l e x a n d r a T i n e o
D e s i g n e d B y : C h l o e B r ow n

Who would have anticipated that a family in a 1971 yellow Volkswagen traveling to California would reveal the truth about
beauty pageants, dysfunctional relationships, and loser-winner
mentalities? Yet what the family didn’t anticipate was that thevan would break down mid-700 miles, and they would haveto push it the rest of the way to California! Jonathan Dayton
and Valerie Faris’s Little Miss Sunshine (2006) showcased
the complex dynamics of family relationships, the struggles oflosing, and the power of acceptance to move forward. The film
was able to tackle these themes in an honest, yet comedic way,providing an unexpected and powerful message to its viewers.
Since its release, the matters surrounding untenable beauty
standards, economic hardships, mental health struggles, and13 what it means to lose have become more common in daily

life. As society changes, this film ages with it. Many can
see themselves in the shoes of these characters. For instance, Olive, a little girl aged 7, is fixated to win a beauty
pageant. For a child, getting applause, a crown, andprize money for her beauty is immensely appealing. Or
Dwayne, who is tired of his family’s constant bickering,and if given the chance, would leave to be anywhere elsethan home. In another case, Frank got lost amid a romantic affair, and once his lover found someone else, his
mental state began to plummet. Each of these characters
represents a real struggle as they try to gain a valuablelesson through their paths. Despite their difficulties,
these characters’ stories remind us that beauty, security,and love are worth striving for.

The Hoovers: Who Are They?

Sheryl is the mom to Olive and Dwayne. It has been
Olive, who is 7, is drawn to beauty pageants. However, her role to make things right in their household andshe’s unaware of the realities and expectations surto make rational decisions to balance the disorder.
rounding these events. She cannot grasp the fact Little Often, she clashes with her husband due to theirMiss Sunshine praises beauty standards. Considering differing personalities and views. Sheryl shows more
the fact that every pageant awards girls opposite of her sympathy for her family due to her motherly instincts,
as the winner, she is unprepared for this cold truth.
while her husband sees things as either good and bad
Olive doesn’t realize how harshly a competition based with no other perspective.
on appearance will judge her, so her innocence creates
Sheryl exemplifies hope and connection. Without
a sense of naivety.
Sheryl, the Hoovers would not be together because
As a symbol of purity, Olive represents wonder,
the mom is the mediator, also known as the glue of
curiosity, and excitement about the world. She sees
the family. She keeps everyone in check including
Little Miss Sunshine as a fun and exciting experiher husband when he comments offensive and inence unlike her older brother, Dwanye, who views
considerate words to his family. As a result, herbeauty as shallow and irrelevant to be judged
family developed closer bonds due to her ability
and awarded for. She has this one-sided view ofto see how differences can work together.
having fun without knowing or experiencing the
Richard is the dad to Olive and Dwayne, insuperficiality of people. Olive embraces her true
addition to being the husband to Sheryl. He has
self, focusing on the joy of the moment rather thanaone-dimensional view of becoming a winner inworrying about her appearance, fitting in, and thelifewhich he applies to every situation, includingpressure of being admired. This outlook on life
his
brother-in-law’s
dilemma. Richard was fast to
provides her with a sense of liveliness andconsider Frank a loser because he, in Richard’s
enthusiasm her teenage brother and the adults
view,gave up on himself.
around her have yet to experience.
Richard illustrates a need and obsession to always
Dwayne embodies what everyone makes out “yourbe a winner because he believes that in every
teenage years” to be like. Moodiness and lack ofpersonthere is “a winner waiting to be awaked andaffection are at a peak, but so is Dwayne’s silence. He
unleashedupon the world.” His “Refuse to Lose”
chooses to be mute and only communicate throughprogram creates a destructive mentality that there is
written messages, all the while displaying a cold,stone-faced expression. Compared to Olive he has the no room to be a loser. Chances to be high to lose but
Richard’s household would be riddled with criticism
opposite of a bubbly personality he lacks any form offor not being the winner he praises if this were tophysical and verbal affection.
happen.
Dwayne maintains that if one thing is terrible, thenEdwin Hoover is Richard’s
everything is terrible
dad and the grandpa to Oliveand so is life. Whenand Dwayne. He is the mostasked about who he hangs
irrationaland blunt out of allout with he wrote “I HatetheHoovers.
He lived throughEveryone,” and meant
many experiences and his words
everyone, even his family.
of advice to Dwayne went along
When he is surrounded by his
the lines of, “F**k a lot offamily as they argue, he doesn’t
women.
Not just one woman. A
react or comment on the chaos
lot of women.” He has a foul
he sees happening, he justmouth
and doesn’t hold back,nonchalantly sits there.
especially around his
grandchildren.
14#

Edwin embodies the carelessness of living without
any limitations. Due to his age, he has nothing to lose.
However, this does not affect the deep love he has for
his family, as he is willing to do anything for them.
With his mentality, he teaches Olive a valuable lessonof so be it if the world turns its back against you. It
doesn’t matter who doesn’t like you; what matters isthe effort you make to put yourself out there. This
gives Olive confidence from a source other than her
parents.
As an uncle, Frank is typically a distant family member. In some cases, uncles may be closely involved
and in others, they may be present only occasionally.
However, Frank was not given the choice whether or
not to re-establish close relationships with his family.
His sister Sherly took him in after he tried to commit
suicide. He had no other person than his sister after helost everything in a one-sided relationship.

he emphasized that the women competing for Miss
America should remain slim by not eating ice cream.
Olive’s mood turned cold and she felt self-conscious
about gaining weight. Her dad was oblivious to theimpact his words had on her, and it wasn’t until her
mother interjected that he understood the implications of his words. In life, we’re constantly losing
personal relationships, opportunities, or friendships.
It’s common to struggle through hardships and neversee the positive side. As a result, when things arebad, everything is a disaster. Then we start to get intoa negative mindset and outlook on life that nothingturns out our way. I see how Richards’ perspective on
being a winner is encouraged within America because
no one wants to be stuck in a loser state ofmind.

Even at the lowest point in his life, Frank harboredhope. Since he proved that anyone can overcome any obstacle and be content with themselves again. Through his journey of recovery,
he showed that no matter what happens in life,
there will always be the love of family.

Does A Loser Really Lose?
There is one thing Richard cannot stand:a loser. You cannot be a loser under any
circumstances.This is quite hypocriticalcoming from a man who lost a job deal, risks bankruptDespite the inevitable losses
thatcy, and makes judgemental comments to his family.
Although his kids were taught the loser/winner men- occur in life, it isn’t necessarily true that we don’t gain
tality firsthand, the harsh result of this ideology is that anything from these negative moments. As shown in thefilm, Frank lost everything in Richard’s eyes; he’s a loser.
his kids think less of themselves since their dad only
But Frank realized he was better off once he became more
accepts winners.
connected to his family. He had his family’s unconditional

15

The Little Miss Sunshine
love which he never received in his romantic relationship.
pageant, for example, gave his
Because the man he was dating left him for someone else,daughter a chance. He told
he might have been considered a loser, but in reality,
her that if she wins, only thenhe was a winner since he won something more valuable.
will she be able to particiLosing people who have never recognized your value is thepate. Along the way throughbiggest win. It shows you something you never would have
California, her dad begins toseen before. In Frank’s case, this was his family because
make her feel guilty. During a
if those situations hadn’t happened, he would not havefamily outing to eat, Olive
formed a close relationship with his family. His family bondordered breakfast with ice
was the greatest love he could receive.
cream on the side. However,

The Beauty In Dysfunction

stepped on stage to join
her. In the midst of judgment, they didn’t care,If someone asked me if I would want a functionalfamily, I would answer no. Perfect families are far from all they saw was a vulnerable loved one, so theyreality because each individual has flaws. A perfect
stepped in.
family cannot exist when considering the barriers ofcommunication and inevitability of death. When it
comes to defining family, there are many reasons why Just as Olive’s family
it is ambiguous.
placed themselves in
the picture when
All families face heated arguments, financial burdens, and personal differences. Nevertheless, in most problems arose in her
life. My family would do thefamilies, there is not an overnight turnaround wheresame for me. As a result of the difficult
everyone makes up for their arguments and the hardsituations I’ve faced, my parents have taught me what
feelings created.
not to accept and how I deserve more. Being awayfrom home to attend college, I struggled with housing.
I wanted to feel comfortable about where I would becalling my “home” while I was separated from my family. Unfortunately, I received the opposite of a homeaway from home, and I paid a considerable amount tofeel this way. I didn’t know that I deserved more out of
housing, until speaking with my parents, who advocated for me in ways I would not have done myself.
My parents helped me realize that I should not have tosacrifice my comfort and sense of security in order toattend college.
Seeing movies about families puts into perspective that wehave seen each other at our happiest and saddest moments.
In a family, values are derived from hardships and failures
It requires time and energy
to repairexperienced individually or collectively. The family continbonds after what was said and done during
ues to move forward with a positive relationship with one
disagreements. I have been through conflicts withanother regardless of the difficulties encountered. Like theeach of my family members, and each of them had their Hoovers and Tineos, there will always be someone who is
own personal problems and perspectives. However,super energetic, emotional, strong-willed, foul-mouthed,I have learned from those experiences that every
or empathic. These traits can make road trips, dinners, errelationship has its downsides. Sticking through and rands, and quality time more hectic. Although our persongrowing together taught me that every dysfunction
alities clash at times, we bring out different types of energy
is worth working through because we grow closer tothat make us a family.

each other.
Every person can learn a valuable lesson from thedysfunctional setting we’re placed in. Olive learned
from being a part of a beauty pageant that slowly
Bibliography
became more hectic the more she performed on stage.
Amid girls showing their talent in a provocative way,
Faris, Valerie, and Jonathan Dayton. Little Miss Sunshine. Fox
Olive dresses in her everyday attire and performs true Searchlight Pictures, 2006.
to herself. She dances to “Super Freak” which drops
any chance of winning. But when everyone in the16room was filled with confusion and shame, her family

Don’t mess With
Scooby-Doo
Written by: Lauren Pretto
Layout by: Kazarina Liao
The year 1969 is widely recognized as the year
when American heroes Neil Armstrong and
Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin took humanity’s firststeps on the moon, but I would argue that
only a few months later, an equally significant moment in American history happened— the very first episode of Scooby-Doo, WhereAre You! One may believe the previous sentence would not only be a stretch but possibly
blasphemy to compare the two. However,seeing as the characters of Scooby-Doo would
continue in programming of all ages forover fifty years, it would be ignorant to say that the two events
haven’t had equal significancein American pop culture. It
is for this reason that as film
lovers — or at the very least, as
lovers of entertainment — it is ourduty to understand what makes
Scooby-Doo and the Mystery
Gang so successful ascharacters in orderto prevent a horrific downfall of thisanimated masterpiece.
Understanding thesecharacters and the show
is vital right now, as

17

some adaptations have begun to disregard theshow’s fans and history in an attempt to ruin its
reputation, including HBO Max’s Velma released
just this year.
In 1968, the Hanna-Barbera company faced
adversity when parents started to complain about“excessive violence” in their cartoons, resulting
in many of the company’s shows (like Space Ghost
and The Herculoids) being canceled.1 With a lackof popular programs, the company looked for a
new family friendly hit. After seeing the success of The Archie Show, Hanna-Barbera took totheir writers Joe Ruby and Ken Spears to writea show about a teenage rock group that solved
mysteries between gigs. They created Mysteries
Five which featured five teenagers and their bongo-playing dog named “Too Much.” Spears andRuby took another pass at the show and decided
to change their original five characters into four
teens based on characters from The Many Loves
of Dobie Gllis2. Though the second pass of thecharacters impressed the company, they became
worried that the show would be too scary, possibly causing another controversy. In its third run,
Spears and Ruby removed the rock band aspectof the group to further emphasize the comedy ofthe show, with specific emphasis on Shaggy andScooby-Doo.

Finally, it was approved and sent off toproduction.

the familiar prescence of Fred, Velma,and Daphne. In the final years on ABC,A Pup Named Scooby-Doo was produced,
taking the characters back to elementary
school, a common trope for the 1980s.6
Around this time, Hanna-Barbera also
produced television films for these characters including Scooby-Doo Meets the Boo
Brothers, Scooby-Doo and the Ghoul School,
and Scooby-Doo and the Reluctant Werewolf.

On September 13, 1969, the first episodeof Scooby-Doo, Where Are You! (titled “Whata Night for a Knight”) flashed onto
screens all around the country on the
CBS network.3 The show would go on to
produce three seasons, totaling forty-one
episodes. After the show was recognized
as a success, Hanna-Barbera didn’t wantto limit themselves to their short TV
As Scooby-Doo’s popularity continued
format and created The New Scooby Dooto thrive from Cartoon Network reruns,
Movies, producing 40
Hanna-Barbera and“whereareyouminute episodes inWarner Bros started to4stead of their usual 20.
scooby doo?” produce direct-to-video
Hanna-Barbera evenfilms like Scooby-Doo
tually moved from CBS to ABC whereon Zombie Island, Scooby-Doo! and the Witch’s
they collaborated on a third season of
Ghost, and Scooby-Doo! And the Monster of
Scooby-Doo, Where Are You! on the new
Mexico, among others. These movies
network. By 1977, when the show saw
were the first versions of the plot thatsome slipping ratings a year later, Scoofeatured the Scooby characters withby’s nephew, Scrappy-Doo, was added
darker tones, fighting against actual
to the character list to spark new attracsupernatural forces. The Witch’s Ghost also
5tion. Despite this generation’s distaste
introduced The Hex Girls, who not only
towards Scrappy-Doo, adding him into
became recurring characters in the franthe show did the job. The Scooby-Doo andchise, but possibly the most beloved side
Scrappy-Doo show ran with some minor
characters of the show’s history.
changes until it was renamed again to
The New Scooby-Doo Mysteries to bring backIn their first live-action release, Scooby-Doo, director Raja Gosnell took the
mystery solvers into great consideration
when casting, landing on Freddie Prinze
Jr. (Fred), Sarah Michelle Gellar (Daphne), Matthew Lillard (Shaggy), and Linda Cardellini (Velma).7 The cast’s famous
chemistry demonstrated an iconic comedic, yet loving relationship. Victoria Rose
Caister from GAMERANT remarks, “Ev-18

en though 2002’s Scooby-Doo has
fundamental filmmaking issues, its
iconic cast is not one of them”.8 In aninterview on Meet The Stars, interviewer
Rachael Fedder asked the cast why they
all thought Scooby-Doo was so popular,
and Gellar easily had the best response,saying, “It offered so much more thanevery other cartoon. It was so ahead ofits time… and it wasn’t gender specific.
It wasn’t a boys’ cartoon or a girls’ cartoon…” followed up by Freddie Prinze
Jr.’s memorable response, “it was atalking dog…”.9 The cast was so loved
that the sequel, Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters
Unleashed, came only two years later inthe March of 2004. This response fromthe cast confirmed exactly how the fans
had felt about the show for so long. It
also proved that when the filmmakers
made this movie, they honored themost iconic parts of the original cartoon—whilst adding a deeper plot andscience-fiction element to make it more
intriguing for new fans.

series fostered a major boost in the Scooby-Doo fanbase, as it re-established important character details while simultaneously expanding the universe.10 This show
was the first to truly recognize the longrunning history of the characters, borrowing many pieces from its past. The series
called back to characters like Vincent Van
Ghoul and also sister shows like Josie and
The Pussycats, Dynomutt, and Captain Caveman
and the Teen Angels. Not only did this show
expand the universe, but it expanded theplot as well. Scooby-Doo! Mystery Incorporated
featured the decade’s old, regular mysterysolving format—while also transforming
into a televised novel as the team searched
for the underlying secret of their town,
Crystal Cove.

It wasn’t until the new millennium thatthe characters would be picked up again
for TV by Warner Brothers, creating
What’s New, Scooby-Doo? This modernizedversion of the show was the first tofeature modern technology, alongside
reimagined characters and art style.

by-Doo feature film called Scoob! The
film, like shows previous, paid homage to
its origins and based its plot line aroundother cartoon characters like Dynomutt,
the Blue Falcon, and Dee Dee Sykes —while once again featuring celebrities like
Simon Cowell. This was the last we saw of
the characters until HBO Max took overto create Velma.

Cartoon Network and Boomerang
pickedup the crew again creating Scooby-Doo! Mystery Incorporated (2010-13),
marking the first Scooby-Doo series made for cable television. This

19

“They honored
the most iconic
parts of the original cartoon...”Throughout the decades, people loved
Scooby-Doo, even if characters, plot, or
supernatural elements were altered, andthere’s a good reason for it. Ian Moriarty from Atom wrote, “The characters
are archetypical and unchanging…
The characters balance each otherout… It’s formulaic in a comfortingway”13. Christopher Orr of The Atlantic wrote, “Indeed, over the past 50
years, the Scooby-Doo characters havebecome almost archetypal, Joseph
Campbell–worthy portraits of teenagerdom”14. Everyone seemed to have a“the show feels like it’s trying to annoy
anyone that watches it, and the Scooby-Doo IP almost seems secondary to
the entire concept.”14 Rotten Tomatoes
critics’ consensus resulted in a generous 42% approval critics score. Thoughaudiences are a bit stronger in theirbeliefs, giving the show a poor 7% approval rating with comments like, “Simply put, destroyed a classic show…”. 15
Clearly, the show took a wrong direc-“When we can absorB a moment thatbrings us back to that innocence, it
speaks to our core”
consensus on why the show was sogreat. It was family friendly, andflawlessly combined comedy andmystery, and the cowardly talking dog
was both the perfect loveable mascot.
Together, these characteristics createda show that would be reimagined andadored for decades, being one of the
few shows that generations could love
together.
Therefore, this show and the people
that love it alike would be disrespected if one were to strip away these elements — such as creating a raunchy
show with explicit material, character
relationships negatively altered, andwithout the loveable Scooby-Doo. A
show like Velma (2023) which had
unfavorable reviews even before theshow came out.13 Forbes Magazine wrote,tion somewhere — the question is, how
could they possibly make it this bad?
Produced and voiced by Mindy Kaling,
the show takes an R-rated turn on thesecharacters while stripping them of theirmost valuable asset, Scooby-Doo himself. That’s right, the show that planson carrying on the legacy of the Mystery
Gang left out arguably the most important member of thecast. Another vital
aspect omitted in thisseries is the Mystery
Gang’s relationshipwith one another.
What has made thesecharacters so loveable
throughout the years
is their connection
to one another — unchanged whether
20

it was a lighthearted short or more
complex plotline. Velma disregarded
what made the show so entertaining
for decades for the sake of sarcastic,
vulgar, and brash humor. By making
these sacrifices, this new show not
only disrespects Scooby-Doo fans but
also defames these beloved characters.
Nostalgia is a very sacred thing. In
this life, we spend so few years in
the wonderful innocenceof childhood, unconcerned with making aEndnotes:[1] Tim Hollis, Hi There Boysand Girls!: Local Children’s TV
Programs (University Press ofMississippi, 2010), 20-21, 54.
[2] Mark Evanier, “News From Me,” POVOnline, (2002), accessed February 8, 2023.
[3] “Scooby Doo, Where Are You?”, IMDb,
accessed February 2, 2023.
[4] Stu Shostak, “Program 276,” The Stu’s
Show, (2012).
[5] Mark Evanier, “Scrappy Days: The Birth of
Scrappy Doo And What I Had To Do With It,”
News From me, accessed February 16, 2023.
[6] “Tom Ruegger is back!”, Platypus Comix,
accessed February 16, 2023.
[7] Chris Suellentrop, “Assessment Scooby-Doo:
Hey, dog! How do you do the voodoo that you
do so well,” Slate, (2004), accessed February 12,2023.
[8] Victoria Rose Caister, “No Live-Action Ad
aptation Will Beat Scooby-Doo’s Casting.” GAM

21

legacy of our lives and using our time
wisely. When we can absorb a momentthat brings us back to that innocence,
to that untainted happiness and entertainment — it speaks to our core. Thisis exactly why preserving the essence of
Scooby-Doo and the Mystery Gang is so
important and why shows like Velma
offend us so fiercely. Deep down, no
matter what age we are, our innerchild never dies. Remembering
this is what keeps us young andfulfilled through the rougher
moments of adulthood.
I know it did for me.

-ERANT, (2022), accessed February 12,
2023.
[9] Rachael Fedder, “Meet The Stars:
Scooby-Doo,” Youtube, (2015).
[10] “Scooby-Doo: Mystery Incorporated,” TV
Guide, accessed February 28, 2023.
[11] Ian Moriarty, “Why ‘Scooby-Doo’ Still
Endures After 50 Years,” Atom, (2020), accessed
February 14, 2023.
[12] Christopher Orr, “The Secret of Scooby-Doo’s Enduring Appeal,” The Atlantic,(2020), accessed February 14, 2023.
[13] Angie Han, “Velma’ Review: HBO Max’s‘Scooby-Doo’ Prequel Is Too Snarky for Its
Own Good,” The Hollywood Reporter, (2023),
accessed February 11, 2023.
[14] Paul Tassi, “HBO Max’s ‘Velma’ Is Getting
Absolutely Savaged In Reviews And Online,”
Forbes, (2023), accessed February 11, 2023.
[15] “Velma: Season 1,” Rotten Tomatoes, accessed February 6, 2023.

Cutaway
Cutting Into The

Written by Alexer Asuncion

What’s the deal with television? It seems likeevery month, there’s some new series
that takes over headlines.
Logging onto any
streaming services,it’s immediately
apparent just how
overwhelming youroptions are when picking ashow to watch. Many showshave a “gimmick” in order toprovide a unique quality to theirnarrative.
Whether it’s a science
fiction setting, a workplace friendgroup, or a superpowered cast,
there’s something to elevate a series,
making it more than “just a show”.
And even in the absence of some kindof interesting story setting, writers
capture our attention by creating relatablecharacters with dynamic relationships, butwhat if a show were to do the opposite, relying
on a gimmick that actually takes away from themain narrative? namely; Family Guy and the
Cutaway Gag. Is this really a great strategy tohelp define your show, or does relying on a “lowbrow” form of comedy bar your show from thediscussion of “good television”?
Before we dive into the use of cutaways,
let’s take a closer look at this narrative tool. The
Cutaway can be defined as an interruption fromthe main narrative to a different scene, at leastaccording to Wikipedia. In Seth MacFarlane’s
Family Guy, if you haven’t already seen the

Design by Alyssa Flores

show (I recommend Seasons 4
and 5 to start), throughout each
episode, we see many characters
set up a joke, i.e. “This is worse
than the time I…” or “This is better
than…”. The scene is then interrupted and we cut to whatever joke thecharacter had proposed. In the mostbasic sense, cutaways can just be
seen as the follow through to ajoke that was set up previously.
This style of writing finds a nicehome in animated televisionshows.
It makes sense, as animation
allows for gags that aren’t aseasily accessible, or even possible,
to take place.
However, that doesn’t mean that
cutaways aren’t used in live-action
shows. Everybody Hates Chris, 30
Rock, and Brooklyn Nine-Nine all
make great use of this writing convention. They each are also written by comedians, which is where we can find the origin of
this style of joke.
Before television writers were evercoming up with cutaways, stand-up comedians
already were performing them. Take legendary
actor and comedian Robin Williams for example.
He had great impressions, but these impressions
usually came out in the form of cutaways fromhis main joke. A situation would be described,
he would compare it to something or someone
ridiculous, and then he would impersonate the#person he mentioned in the comparison. This was
essentially the birth of the cutaway, because at thetime this style of comedy wasn’t named. Other
comedians would eventually end up adopting andpopularizing this style, and later many of thesecomedians would find themselves in the writers
room.
So how exactly does Family Guy relyon these cutaways? While we see this techniqueutilized sparingly in some sitcoms, Family Guy
makes the main narrative feel almost secondary,treating the cutaways like a trademark of theshow. Taking a look at some numbers, in earlier
seasons of the show we saw about 10-12 cutaways
per episode, meaning they occur quite often. And
with how ridiculous some of the setups are, like a
National Geographic special on Firetrucks in thewild or Popeye’s large biceps being tumors, it’s
hard not to associate the two.
So what could other writers possibly haveto say about this technique? Sadly, not everyone
is a fan. While you see cutaways used in plenty ofshows, many writers have critiqued Family Guy’s
writing team for their insistent use on them. Just
take a lookat South Park’s Season
10
Episode3 titled“Cartoon
Wars
Part I,in whichthey compare#

the writers of Family Guy to a group of manatees
jumbling words together to form these cutaways.
Matt Stone and Trey Parker weren’t alone in thissentiment, as the writers of The Simpsons sent
flowers and a “Thank You” letter after the episodeaired. Through this, it’s clear that some people
aren’t very supportive of the direction Seth MacFarlane takes his work. You hate to see such great
minds tear each other down; however, it’s hard toreally disagree with them.
To a degree, they aren’t entirely wrong.
Family Guy isn’t really praised for its quality narrative structures, with most episodes going in totally random directions. While some may find thisstyle of storytelling unique and interesting, it does
ultimately feel like an almost random sequence of
events by the end of the episode. Even the morememorable episodes struggle to feel like “a real
episode of television” instead of a one-off gag. On
top of that, the random nature of the jokes andhow quickly they’re dropped can make the show
feel pretty stop-go at times. Especially if the writer’s decide to employ an infamous “long cutawaygag”, in which we’re stuck with the joke for a fullminute or two. Many of these gags (i.e. the Conway Twitty songs, the Chicken Fights, the “Wolf”
cutaway) can be considered some of the worst
cutaways in the show, as they make the show stop
entirely in its tracks. These problems all preventthe audience from really spending time with thecharacters and understanding them to their core.
And if you aren’t able to invest into the narrativeand really connect to the characters’ cores, thenwhat’s the point?
Other than it being a unique style ofwriting that helps set the show apart from other
adult animated comedies, it’s a way to explore
more jokes than just those that the main narrative
calls for. In a larger sense, that’s just the conceptof sitcoms as a whole.
Even the most well-received of sitcoms
boil down to the same formula. Three’s Company, Malcolm in the Middle, The Boondocks, ineach of them, the cast finds themselves in somehijinks, they reach a conclusion, and then theyfind a way to return things to normal by the time
the next episode rolls around. The entire genre
is built off of a system that relies on a non-committal narrative that persists between episodes.
Of course, writing conventions are broken all thetime and we see many shows experiment andintroduce an episodic element to their characters’
stories; however, this begins to take away fromone aspect of sitcoms that often
is underappreciated, non-commitment. like an almost
random sequence of eventsby the end of the episode.
Even the more memorable
episodes struggle
to feel like “a real
episode of television” instead of aone-off gag. On topof that, the random nature of the jokes and how
quickly they’re dropped can make the show feelpretty stop-go at times. Especially if the writer’s
decide to employ an infamous “long cutaway gag”,
in which we’re stuck with the joke for a full minuteor two. Many of these gags (i.e. the Conway Twitty
songs, the Chicken Fights, the “Wolf” cutaway)
can be considered some of the worst cutaways inthe show, as they make the show stop entirely in
its tracks. These problems all prevent the audiencefrom really spending time with the characters andunderstanding them to their core. And if you aren’t
able to invest into the narrative and really connect
to the characters’ cores, then what’s the point?
Other than it being a unique style ofwriting that helps set the show apart from other
adult animated comedies, it’s a way to explore
more jokes than just those that the main narrative
calls for. In a larger sense, that’s just the concept ofsitcoms as a whole.
Even the most well-received of sitcoms
boil down to the same formula. Three’s Company,
Malcolm in the Middle, The Boondocks, in eachof them, the cast finds themselves in some hijinks,
they reach a conclusion, and then they find a way
to return things to normal by the time the next
episode rolls around. The entire genre is built off ofa system that relies on a non-committal narrative that persists
between episodes. Of course,
writing conventions are broken
all the time and wesee many shows experiment andintroduce an episodic element totheir characters’ stories; however, this begins to take away fromone aspect of sitcoms that often
is underappreciated, non-commitment.
The sitcom invites anyone
to enjoy any episode, without
having to be aware of any
previous plotlines. The viewer
is not asked to understand theepisode within the context of a larger narrative, butrather to enjoy the moment and have a good time
watching what’s in front of you. Family Guy takes
this concept and cranks it to the max by relying
on these self contained jokes to provide a bulk of
the entertainment, with a general narrative to act
as a vessel for the setups. It is a show designed forthe common man, a show that dares invite anyone
and everyone to sit along for the ride and enjoy(assuming you can stomach some of the morevulgar moments). It is the “Sunday Funnies” of theboring, old Newspaper, the only-slightly-regrettable one-night-stand of your 12 year, dead-bedroom relationship. It’s everything you’d want fromtelevision, without the commitment. But does thatmake the content itself any good?
What exactly is “Good Television”? If wewere to take a look at some critically acclaimed
television series’, many shows follow long, drawn
out narratives that reward viewers to dive into theworld of the show and understand the complicatedmotivations behind the characters, but not everybody has the time for that.
Not everyone can live comfortably and have thefree time that many longer and “greater” showsdemand. We live in a world where single mothers
are working two jobs to keep their kids in school
and where people aren’t paying other people backon Venmo for the Jack-in-the-Box you bought themlast week, which is equally as bad. People havejobs to do and families to feed, so it’s not possible
for everyone to invest themselves into televisionseries’ if they aren’t being paid for it. And if thesepeople aren’t able to watch these shows, how canthey rate and discuss them with other watchers#and critics?
This is the problem with more pretentious
television discussion. Either the reviews are madeby people who are being paid by the show to
put one out or by someone who has managed tomonetize their time spent watching. Even general
discussion is often headed and filled with fans who
have spent a significant amount of time watching
the show. This creates an echo chamber, in which
all discussion generated about the show is just by
those who are dedicated to it, inflating reviews andratings until it’s considered “Good Television” nomatter how mediocre it may be.
Do I believe that Family Guy is an underlookedshow that deserves a spot in the discussion of“Good Television”? No, but I believe that theconcept of “Good Television” ought to be definedby yourself, the viewer. If a show is enjoyable toan individual, its reception is no reason to invalidate the enjoyment in that moment. Hour-long
intimate episodes aren’t the only way for shows toreach a viewer’s heart, a simple 11-minute quarterhour short could be just as enjoyable. If
you aren’t able to commit enough ofyour schedule to watching T.V., you
should still be able to find something you like. Before reading
reviews and discussion regarding
your favorite shows, ask yourself,“Why should I care?”Some shows aren’t foreveryone, and Family Guy just so
happens to be for an audience that
can’t dedicate entire days just to
television. Television discussion can get pretty pretentious,and asking people to dedicate
entire hours of their time to enjoy
the full context of episodes is kindof ridi ulous. Critics can hate theshow all they want, but there’s nodenying that there’s beauty in everything, even the fruit you forgot about
in the back of the fridge.
Endnotes
1Family Guy (FOX Broadcasting Company
January 31, 1999-Present).

26

27

28

Music BreakA journey through dreams anddisillusionment

We here at EyeCandy Film Journal have attempted to capture (in words) the
elusive dynamics between media (film, shows, music, games, etc.), the humansubconscious, and reality. After months of extremely conscious effort, weare delighted to present to you a concoction of mystifying articles and designs that we hope will delight you all.
Sweet dreams and even sweeter readings,
The EyeCandy Film Journal Staff
30

Seeing the Idol Industry Through

WHITE
PERFECT BLUEAND

I

t is not an exaggeration to say that at one point
we have dreamed of a life in the limelight. Red
carpets, elaborate photoshoots, exclusive
events, world tours, etc. When conjuring up yoursuperstar alternate universe, a life where thesound of camera shutters tracing your steps andbillboards with your face following your dailyroute is often what we envision. Our minds are immediately drawn to the idea of public validation,
but what people often tend to neglect in these
fantasies are the evident perils a public career
entails.

Intense fan culture coupled with pressure to succeed makes danger inevitable, yet it is considereda taboo topic. Cautionary tales of the idol industry
are conveyed through an unexpected loophole —horror films. Two exemplary films are Satoshi Kon’s
1997 animated film, Perfect Blue, alongside Kim
Goksun and Kim Sun’s 2011 live-action film, White:
Melody of the Curse. Despite being outwardly
presented as fictional events with apparitions anddisillusionment, both films present very real challenges that idols face. Perfect Blue deals with theanxieties of being in the public eye and the mental
toll it takes on you far after leaving the stage inpursuit of a different lifestyle. White covers how
detrimental a lack of success is in theidol industry — causing rifts
between members,

io

nes

In Asia, this seemingly glamorous
lifestyle is attached to the occupationof an “idol” — a term used to refer toperforming artists (often pop music) managed
by an entertainment label.
“Idol” in a Western context isused in reference to religious and cultlike worship of a figure. This is no
coincidence, as Asian “idols”
adhere to both definitions. Idols

live a life far detached from the rest of reality, yet
our only separation from these almost holy figures
are the stage and cameras. Fans of idols often failto remember this, fans expect more from idols thanjust a three-minute performance onstage.

a

M
By

a

ten

D

Desig

ned

W

rit

By J

de

31

d

ei
el

ne

g
Lin

ad

leading severe sacrifices, and dealing with public
scrutiny. These films reveal how being put on apedestal creates a vicious cycle of idols’ safety
and health being put in jeopardy, yet these hopeful starlets risk it all for a chance at fame.
Unsurprisingly, fans of Asian pop music are often
referred to as “stans” instead, attributed to American rapper Eminem’s track of the same name [1].
Merriam Webster defines “stan” as “an extremely
or excessively enthusiastic
and devoted fan [2],” withmany netizens contendingthat the word is derived froma combination of the words“fan” and “stalker.” This
term has become normalized online, but manyobsessed idol fans still meet the criteria. Their levelof devotion — rooted in a parasocial connection— drives stans to perceive their favorite idols as
properties. Parasocial relationships refer to thecase where fans become invested in a dedicated,
one-sided relationship whilst the idol is unknowingof their existence. The fan and idol dynamic transcends simply enjoying the music they perform,
with extreme cases leading fans to spend their
daily lives in pursuit of their idol.

not date anyone out of respect and loyalty to thefans cultivating their careers. Sasaeng fans go to
extremes just to receive any form of acknowledgement, even if it is negative. Korean news outlet, tVn
eNEWS, interviewed a self-proclaimed saesang
as part of an in-depth study on this incomprehensible lifestyle. This obsessed fan explained,
I feel like I get to know more about and get closer
to the idol I love. If I go to a concert, there arethousands of people attending, so the idol would
not know who I am. But if
I become sasaeng, they
will recognize me. If I keep
telling them, ‘I am so-andso. I saw you at that place before,’ they will start
to take note of me and ask, ‘Did you come again
today?’ To sasaeng fans, being recognized byidols is a good thing [4].

HOW MUCH WOULD
YOU SACRIFICE FORA TASTE OF FAME?

When browsing media related to the Sasaeng
phenomenon, a certain animated film often comesup in conversation. This unhealthy parasocial
dynamic would influence the underlooming threatof the film Perfect Blue.

Perfect Blue marked Satoshi Kon’s directorial, fullIntense idol fans are known as a “sasaeng,” alength feature debut; further bolstering his career
Korean term which translates to “private life.” Their as a successful director for his highly surrealist
extreme behavior includes,
films. San Francisco Chronbut is not limited to, “serial
icle’s Bob Graham puts itstalking, technical surveilbest, “Perfect Blue manages,
lance and snooping, andthrough animation, to takeattendance at all public
the thriller, media fascination,
events” [3]. Sasaengs feel
psychological insight and pop
inclined to pursue this unculture and stand them all on
healthy lifestyle often due
their heads [5].” Perfect Blueto the parasocial relationreceived high praise fromship that is accentuatedcritics, earning an 83% fromas a marketing ploy.
critics on Rotten Tomatoes.
Idols are in a sort ofMany audiences were“exclusive" relationshocked by this film's
ship with theirgraphic content for anfans, as they mustanimated film, but its

32

Idols are dancers, singers,
rappers, entertainers,
comedians, emcees...
strong execution would leave a lasting impact
on pop culture.
Kon’s directorial debut would defy the boundaries of what brightly-colored animation is able
to depict, as a clever double-entendre of thefacade the entertainment industry maintains
despite its dark reality. Kon outwardly scrutinizes fan culture — from stalking like the behaviorof sasaeng fans, to fans feeling entitled tocontrolling what a public figure pursues in boththeir occupation and personal life. Perfect Blue
concentrates on the protagonist, Mima Kirigoe,
who graduates from her idol life as a memberof the Japanese pop girl-group, “CHAM!,” topursue a career as an actress. This transition is
not easy, and her difficulty to conform to thisnew lifestyle further complicates her ability todiscern reality from illusion. Her paranoia isrooted from two cases of her private life being
invaded — she discovers an online publication
titled, “Mima’s Room,” which contains extremely personal diary entries written from her
perspective, and is stalked by Me-Mania who

disagrees with her endeavors as an actress. The
complaints surrounding her life as an actress revolve around her breaking the idol fantasy she
pursued in a girl-group, as she plays a maturerole in a television series, even partaking in an
explicit rape scene. Her manager, Rumi — who
we later find to be the culprit behind “Mima’s
Room” — is also driven into psychosis out ofher desire to vicariously live out her idol dreamthrough Mima. Between Mima, Me-Mania,
and Rumi; “the key emotional contest is overthe command of Mima’s identity, where eachcharacter attempts to exert their power andinfluence to control and exploit her [6].” Thecollective struggle between these three characters is evocative of the potential dangers theidol industry possesses. Mima is the centerpieceof it all, yet she has little to no authority over her
own life.
At the end of Perfect Blue, there is no clear
resolution — Mima still hesitates to recognize
herself as the “Real Mima.” Even when Mimais removed from the imminent dangers in her
life, she is conditioned to believe that her life
remains in constant jeopardy. Dedicating yourwell-being, privacy, and essentially your whole
life to the idol industry is no easy sacrifice. Evenlong after your retirement; the scars from yourpromotional period still struggle to heal, andthe trauma lingers.
But, it is important to note that sacrifices aren’t
confined to after becoming a public figure, italso begins during the start of the process.
Although we like to believe that stars are born,
many stars are intricately manufactured. For
those who dream of becoming the slim "5%" of...models, actors, influencers,
even therapists, or yourparasocial significant other.

33

The flashy life you envisioned at the start is riddled withdanger that the industry refrains from speaking up about.
the [idol] groups [that] reach superstardom, [7]”one must undergo a rigorous training program.
This training program has been compared tothe military, with the exception that instead of
mostly adults, it is adolescent youths. According
to South Korean culture critic Kim Heon Sik,“thecountry’s three major entertainment agencies
begin recruiting potential stars from as young
as 12 and 13 [8]” — an age not old enough tobuy a lottery ticket, but apparently old enoughto gamble on the trajectory of their future career
path. Far away from home, and often no longer
enrolled in school, these teenagers spend themost crucial time of their youth going in andout of the practice studio. Despite how highly
sacrificial being a trainee is, success is not evenguaranteed.
Kim Gok and Kim Sun’s 2011 horror film, White:
Melody of the Curse, convey the lengths thattrainees and companies alike will go to succeed in this highly competitive field. Contrasted
to Perfect Blue’s depiction of leaving the idol
industry, White illustrates the trials and tribula-tions finding success in the idol industry. White
focuses on Eun Ju, a member of the fictional
girl-group Pink Dolls — whose bubbly and feminine debut concept fails to strike a chord withthe general public. Despite Eun Ju’s attempts tomotivate and console her fellow members, they
ostracize her. Eun Ju’s late start in the industry,
history as a back-up dancer, and decision towork with a “sponsor” all fuel the fire in theirstruggling group synergy.
The term “sponsor” refers to a wealthy individual who provides monetary support to struggling
hopefuls in exchange for sexual favors. Former
K-pop girl-group member, Serri of Dal Shabet,says in a YouTube Q&A: “That depends on thecompany. Sometimes the company CEO offers
that, or the sponsor contacts them individually[9].” For some idol groups to have the mere
opportunity to release a song, they take thedesperate decision of “sponsorship.” Unfortunately, most idols do not possess the authority
to deny “sponsorship,” as rejecting their advances presents the possibility of their debut34

In my viewing of the film, I found that the horror
lay within the company’s tactics rather than thecurse itself. The company enabled a competitiveand immoral work environment, with everyone’s
collective greed to succeed culminating in thedeaths of nearly everyone involved. One of
the most haunting scenes for me in the film iswhere Pink Dolls’ manager approaches Eun Ju
in the dormitory and asks her to reflect on her
sponsorship which made this company movepossible:

project being entirely canceled. Eun Ju’s compliance to sponsorship would allow the company to move into a newly renovated studio,
where she uncovers a dusty VHS tape labeled,“WHITE.” After playing the tape, she becomesenamored with its contents: a music video
for an unreleased girl-group song. Pink Dolls
re-releases this track, and we witness a drastic
image change for the girl-group: the once innocent girl-group in fluttering pastel skirts is now
adorned with tight, black leather outfits. Pink
Dolls is finally receiving the public recognition
they strived for, but we quickly discover that itcomes with a price.
Pink Dolls is struck by a curse where whoever isgiven the center position for the song stands inthe face of death. Driven by desire, Eun Ju proceeds to promote the track as a solo artist under
the new moniker, “White,” despite cautionary
warnings. After Eun Ju receives first place forher song on a musical program, she preparesfor an encore stage — and unbeknownst to
the characters, her final stage. This sequenceis intense, the scene becomes violent with amultitude of fatal technical difficulties. Eun Ju
meets the same inevitable fate as her members,
proving the curse to be indestructible.

35“Eun Ju, you want to make your dreams cometrue, too, right? Don’t think too hard. You hit
rock bottom, now you need to slowly climb
back up. [10]”Eun Ju outwardly expresses her distaste for thesponsorship, yet her manager tempts her withthe dream she has slaved away years of her
young life to pursue. The manager recognizes
her power within the company, and what she
must do to ensure that the group succeeds in the

It is impossible to return to thelife you pursued before themoment you stepped onstage.

competitive industry — unfortunately, she decides
to exploit the members’ vulnerability. The film
effectively touches upon a multitude of sensitive
subjects within the industry: bullying, sponsorships, abuse of power, ageism, sexualization,
manufactured public personas, false marketing,etc. White manages to cover subjects that are
rarely covered in mainstream media as the industry seeks to promote the fantasy of the occupation, albeit the inclusion of sensationalized horror
elements.

Closure is not an option for those who devotetheir lives to becoming attributed to the title of“idol.” The way the industry operates is much
like a haunted curse. As long as these issues in
the industry fail to be addressed for the future
generations of performing aspirants, this harmful
cycle will prevail.

Endnotes

It is

ed
rsu

imp

pu

1. Eminem, “Stan,” (Aftermath Entertainment
and Interscope Records, 2000), Track 3 on The
Marshall Mathers LP,
2. Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, s.v. “stan,”
Similarly to Perfect Blue, White offers a scathing
accessed January 30, 2023
critique on the facade presented by the pop
n
to
r
tu
3. Sean Redmond, “The passionthidol image through horror. Using the
e lif
o re
t
e
e
l
yo plays of celebrity culture,”
explicit and fictional nature theusibsEuropean Journal of Cultural
genre presents, directors areoStudies, vol. 19 (2016),
able to convey their perspec234–249.
tives on these issues without
4. So Young Park, Ji
facing the same critical
Young Park, and Se Mi
backlash as documentary
Yang (Directors). 2012.
coverage. Although both사생팬의 실태 밀착취
films are fictional, and재 [Documentary]. South
present outlandish imagery
Korea: tVn eNEWS. Relike apparitions, they do nottrieved June 25
shy away from presentingeo5.
Bob Graham, “Animatedvery real issues. The start ofdmoment yo s te ppe‘Blue’
Has a Surreal Twist / Japeach film is realistic in their deu
anese film scrutinizes pop culture,”
pictions of what goes on offstage and
San Francisco Chronicle, Oct. 15, 1999
behind cameras for these starlets, but as the film
6. Craig Norris, “Perfect Blue and the negative
progresses, there are more stereotypical horror
elements such as jump-scares, eerie music, and a representation of fans,” Journal of Japanese &Korean Cinema, vol. 4 (2012)“monster” which disturbs the normalcy in the di7. SEOULSPACE, “How Much Money Do Kpop
egetic characters’ lives. We are witnesses to the
Idols Make? A Five Billion Dollar Industry,” Oct.
exploitation of these young, impressionable girls
4, 2022in this toxic industry who tirelessly work without
8. So Young Sung, “Why K-pop idols flee fromthe support system they desperately need — yettheir groups,” Korea JoongAng Daily, Oct. 19,
this is obstructed in both our viewing of the films
2014
and reality.
9. 세리데이, “걸그룹 출신이 밝히는 연예인들의 어두운 뒷세계 | Q&A 연예계 비하인드 (engNeither of these films end with closure for thechn sub),” YouTube video, 5:53, Aug 30, 2019
characters, nor the audience. Mima still fails to
10. White, directed by Kim Gok and Kim Sun
discern hallucinations from reality. The curse of“White” still lingers within the company building. (DOO Entertainment, 2011), 8:25.

th

s ta

n

e
or

ge

.

b ef

7
36

The
Obsessed Artist:
What Passion Destroys
Written By

Lauren Tivy
Designed By

Kiana Reid andMadeleine Lingad

T

he Obsessed Artist is a trope thatrefers to a number of films, spanning decades of filmmaking, dissecting thepowerful and very real consequences ofperfection. The trope itself describes
such a vast number of films because of its
non-specificity, but it also attracts filmmakers because it tells their story – the story of anartist. In essence, it’s a story of the lengths one
is willing to go to achieve perfection even at
the detriment of well-being and self. It examines the question, “What is success worth?”.

37

If you’re unfamiliar with the trope, The Obsessed (or Tortured) Artist refers generally to movies and TV where our main character has a specific skill (be it chess, dance,etc.) and that field consumes them so much sothat their journey to perfection invades andinfects all other areas of their life. They overcommit, and the central conflict of the film/
show revolves around their mental or physi-

cal downfall as well as the pain inflicted on
those close to them. Think of shows like The
Queen’s Gambit or movies like Black Swan,Nightcrawler, Whiplash, or I, Tonya. To
better understand what the genre aims
to do, it’d be helpful to look throughsome of the most popular adaptations tostudy how they vary from one anotherwhile still holding the same central theme.
The 2010 film Black Swan1, directed by Darren Aronofsky, is one of the most apt andfaithful adaptions of the genre. In the film,
Nina (Natalie Portman) aspires to play thelead role in her ballet company’s productionof Swan Lake. Combining elements of drama, thriller, and horror, the movie showcases Nina’s obsession with her craft and how
it leads to the rapid and dramatic decline ofher personal life and well-being. This film inparticular leans heavily into themes of horror and obsession, dramatizing these themesby featuring elements of pain and Nina’s
physical transformation into the Black Swan.

WHAT IS SUCCESSWORTH?
Another popular plotline in the trope is theintroduction of a rival who acts in competition with our main character. In Whiplash2(Dir. Chazelle, 2014), Andrew (played byMiles Teller) is under constant threat of replacement by the conservatory’s alternate
drummer, who is pitted against Andrew by
his authoritarian teacher (J.K. Simmons). In
Black Swan,
Swan, a new dancer in the company
represents everything Nina is lacking in her

performance and now threatens to replaceher. In both movies, these characters are amanifestation of the artists’ self-consciousand doubt. Under the pressure of losing all
they’ve worked for, the characters are on aforced path of self-improvement, usually exceeding their current boundaries and pushing them to the edge of what is physically andmentally possible. Almost every movie under
this trope contains some sort of propelling
intimidation, in different respects, person orotherwise, that acts as a catalyst, forcing thecharacter to move forward even when it creates an unhealthy situation for themselves.
These themes represent a very American
ideal of success, inspired by stories of the‘greats’ who claim there is no way to the top
that doesn’t include intense sacrifice. The
films act almost as a satire of this mindset;
they push their characters further than real-world success stories would tend to go.
The characters are pushed so far, in fact,that another popular theme included in thisgenre is delusions, both visible manifestations (like in Black Swan)
Swan) or logically disillusioned choices in judgment (like Teller’scharacter in Whiplash
Whiplash).
). In evaluation ofthis particular mindset, I would say it’s notcentral to our character motivations, but#

38

work, even when it’s brilliant, is neverenough. They must be the best at what
they do in a global context and they also
must be awarded by an outside gazein the forms of parental approvable,audience approval, or financial gain.
A further example in conjunction with theAmerican Dream is the film Nightcrawler

HE FURTHERBLURS THE LINE
OF MORALITY.
(Dir. Gilroy, 2014).3 Lou Bloom (Jake Gyllenhaal) becomes a video journalist in thesphere of Los Angeles’ crime newscasts. At
the beginning of the film, he’s been movingfrom job to job, but he finally finds money and acclaim in “nightcrawling” or thefilming of late-night street crime and vehicular accidents for broadcast. Attempting to perfect his craft, he further blurs
the line of morality and exploits the painof strangers and also the people close tohim. Here, Lou, who is arguably unhinged
from the beginning, doesn’t work at the
detriment of himself in a typical sense,
but rather to the detriment of others, inadvertently furthering his own personal ethical decline. And, as a result of thisobsession, he further degrades his ability to connect with others as a whole. We
watch his decline as he becomes more andmore disconnected as the film continues.
Another common theme in these films involves mirrors and moments of personal
self-evaluation the main characters makethrough their mirror reflection. In I, Tonya
39(Dir. Gillespie, 2017),4 a story based on thereal-life Olympic medalist Tonya Harding, there is a scene toward the end of thefilm where she’s looking at her reflection
in a dressing room mirror and finalizing
her makeup before one of her final performances. She starts to cry subtly to herself
but quickly stops and puts on a performative smile. In this moment, she feels punished by the world as she continues to faceoutward challenges which take away fromher skill, hard work, and dedication. The
audience is let in on this intimate scene
and we sympathize with her while also

being given time to reflect on her experiences during these quiet moments. In thissequence, the film poses the essential question to the audience, “Was it worth it all?”.
In Nightcrawler, Lou stares at his reflection before violently shaking and slamming the bathroom mirror. This takes
place after his first major setback in the

Obsession is a theme that I think attracts
many filmmakers because of its elevatedstakes and high emotions. Once you’re
able to create a connection with the audience and your main character, the movie
takes you through the highs and lows of
their journey and keeps the audience extremely engaged throughout. It’s no surprise that the trope has led to countless
Academy Awards like Natalie Portman’s
winning Best Actress in 2011 and Damien
Chazelle’s record-breaking 2014 Best Director win, being the youngest director toever receive the award for this category.5
Such success in the genre forces us to ask,
what is the goal of the filmmaker portrayfilm and reflects his obsessive need to suc- ing the obsessed artist and why does it work
ceed and his harsh self-criticism which so well? One might claim that this specifichelps propel him into further consuming filmmaking style is bad for a general conpassion. In Black Swan,
Swan, Nina begins seeing sciousness because it glorifies a negative
her reflection take on otherworldly forms. lifestyle. While most audience members
Her appearance and failure to portray the would be frightened by the gore, pain,
Black Swan is theand suffering repfilm’s
centralresented throughconflict and theour main charTHE OBSESSED
mirrorshows
acters, The ObARTIST
TROPE
her
progresssessed Artist trope
physically withrarely concludes
RARELY CONCLUDES
rashes that evenwith the artist havWITH
THE
ARTIST
tuallymorph
ing learned any
into dark feathHAVING LEARNED ANY lessons throughers and wings.
out their film. In
LESSONS
THROUGHIn our ending
Black Swan,
Swan, Nina
scene, we learn
commits a very
OUT THEIR FILM.
that it is a mirultimate act ofror (or a shard
self-destructionof glass) that is used metaphorically to during the end of her final performance
destroy her old self. For better or for worse, whilst saying, “Perfect. It was perfect”.
she becomes exactly what she wanted. She is clearly delusional but ultimate40

ly regrets none of the pain and sufferingthat she put herself through. And the fictional audience’s thundering applause
only supports and justifies her sacrifice.
So, what does the filmmaker wish to tell thereal-life audience of the film? Is it fine toalienate the people you care about and push
yourself to your greatest creative, emotional,
mental, and physical boundaries if it means
achieving success? Film as a medium is anextremely powerful force in its influential
capabilities, socially or on an individual, and

WAS IT WORTH IT ALL?
it is entirely possible that an audience member who idolizes a celebrity or character onscreen could misinterpret a story structure
like this and strive to be just like the – admittingly successful but destroyed – artist. In
my eye, the aim of cinema is to create a filmthat displays something real about the world.
And in good cinema, it contextualizes and enlightens a feeling or experience that you wereunable to see with the naked eye; for lackof understanding or lack of experience. The
Obsessed Artist is something that resonateswith audiences because it comes from a placeof a semi-autobiographical nature. The filmmaker, always an artist in practice, uses themedium of video to relay emotions ubiquitous with all artists, sometimes even throughmediums they know little or nothing about.
Whiplash and La La Land director Damien
Chazelle shows his personal love for jazzby featuring the musical genre as a major
plot point in his movies. The stories resonate
641

with audiences because they come from an
extremely intimate place and occupy thisunique cross-section of artistry. In otherfilms in the trope, the director doesn’t necessarily have a particular fondness for theart featured, but it is the very real and authentic story of an artist that translates
across mediums and captivates audiences.
Furthermore, an intense and technical focus on complicated industries like figureskating or band music shows an additional
level of filmic mastery, illustrating so accurately the specifics of the respective art
while also making the topics understandable
and entertaining for a general audience.

We’ve postulated ‘why?’, but even more
important is what it adds to the cinematicconversation and what it adds to society as awhole. Do these films promote a cautionary
tale or a how-to? I would argue that thesefilms work (and don’t usually create neurotic ballet dancers) because the endings are
purposefully left ambiguous. Without aproper conclusion, the final story of theirsuccess remains unknown. Did they continue onto a path of greatness or did they

flicker out somewhere along the way?
Through the films’ final moments, we’re left
with a simple message. Success is what you
make of it. We’re not shown a montage ofthe great lives our characters go on to live.
Usually having created the monster during
the film’s runtime, we’re left to assume theopposite. Their stories are ongoing and up
for interpretation, showing that no specificpath to success is necessarily ideal. By subverting typical story structure (i.e. a clear
resolution), the characters don’t improveupon their flaws and don’t learn their lesson which leaves the audience room to giveconsideration to what they would be willing to do to achieve perfection. I don’t see
this genre of films ever losing its popularity as filmmakers and audiences continue
to examine greatness and what it’s worth.

“PERFECT.
IT WAS PERFECT”

Endnotes
1. Chazelle, Damien, director. Whiplash. Searchlight Pictures, Twentieth Century Fox
France, 2010. 1 hr., 50 min.
2. Aronofsky, Darren, director. Black Swan. Sony Pictures Classics, Universal Pictures
International, 2014. 1 hr., 47 min.
3. Gilroy, Dan, director. Nightcrawler. Open Road Films, Hollywood Classic Entertainment, 2014. 1 hr., 57 min.
4. Gillespie, Craig, director. I, Tonya. 30WEST, 2017. 2 hr.,
5. “Oscars Youngest Directing Winners by Age 2022 | Statista.” 2022. Statista. 2022.

7
42

XavierThis leads to episodes containing some hilarious
out he is his Father’s killer, and it’s made extremeWritten
by mannerisms are best described ly obvious to Xavier, but he just
Designedby on.
scenarios.
Xavier’s
never catches
McCarthy,
as a manRoman
who is so stupid, that he sounds intelliXavier’s quests will lead himJack
to askphilosophicalgent. Using
big, scholarly words in the most incor- questions in comical
Hernandez
Alyssa Flores
rect manner, he develops his persona of a spiritual
seeker. Xavier, despite his puzzling appearance,
is incredibly charming. The show also mocks
real-world ideals and societal problems, like other
Programs like Aqua Teen Hunger
icturesuch
yourself
as aPark.
young
child,
animated shows
as SouthIdeologies
Force, SquidBillies, and Robot Chicken are
such
as religion,
politics,
class structure,andyourmore
staying
up pastyour bedtime
to watch
are
not
safe
from
Xavier.
Being
a
show
where
the
a few examples that may be responsible
favorite Cartoon Network shows. Your favorprotagonist
seeks
psychologicalenlightenment,hefor young trauma. The show that sat at
ite episode of Adventure Time just finishedoften
questions
everything.
Religion
is
often
his
the mountaintop of this absurdism was
and Cartoon Network just told you goodmain target as one of the episodes follows Xavier
Xavier: Renegade Angel, perhaps the mostnight. You’re about to shut off the TV when
meeting a child who attempts to play god. To givethe screen goes black, displaying the message, scarring of Adult Swim’s lineup. The show
some context, this child uses real science, to help
is visually concerning, featuring obscure“Adultmay
contain maturematerial
his
father Swimwith his“Christian”
science. His
dad
and crude animation, but is layered withsomemight science
not findsuitable.”
Your
finds
outviewersthat Christiandoesn’tactually
intricate writing and creative comedy.
curiosity
bettergod.
of you,youdoanything,gets
andtheforsakes
Thisandis justonestay
Subverting initial expectations, Xavier:up a little
longerto see what
Adult
Swim
examplewhere
the writing
utilizes
comedyto talk
Renegade Angel will have you hooked in a
is about
to present.
It is then when you’re
aboutcomplexideologies.

P

Renegade Angel

young mind is exposed to some of the mostWithinothertelevisionepisodes, shows
the show tackles
surreal,absurd,themesofColonialism,
Reaganism,
Utilitarianism,
ever created.
domestic violence, worker exploitation, wealthdisparity, and so much more. Every line of dialogue is so creatively thought out, that every jokehits its mark, even if you don’t understandit on the first watch. It’ll crack you up,
and make you ponder higher meaningat the same time.
Spiritualism is the core themein Xavier: Renegade Angel. Xavier,being a shaman, often tries to solve
problems through spirituality. The
show often presents these in exaggerated and satirical ways. As achild, Xavier’s father
was murdered ina house fire. He
vowed to find his
father’s killer,and “slay him,
to death.”Turns

genre you may not have expected to love.

“What doth life?”

This a commonly asked question
among philosophers, but more commonly asked by the protagonist of the series,
Xavier. Xavier is an inquisitive being, whojourneys the chaotic lands in search of
the answers to life’s most perplexing
questions. Seeking spiritual enlightenment, he uses his teachings to aid
those he encounters, often causing
more harm than good. Premieringin 2007, Xavier: Renegade Angelran for two years on Adult Swim,
totaling 2 seasons, each withten episodes. Written by
Vernon Chatman, who
is now a head producer forSouth Park. Xavier: Renegade Angel went
relatively unnoticed upon its release. Many
critics called the show puzzling and incoherent, stating that the show is too random andhumor incomprehensible. Others found those“flaws” to be charms instead and over theyears the show has garnered a cult following.
These fans adored the series’s dark and subversive humor, addicted to Xavier’s clever
but incredibly stupid nature. The fanbase
continues to grow, with many looking back at
the show claiming it was ahead of its time.
The show’s crude and peculiar art
style and animation can be concerning tofirst-time viewers, but rest assured
this is one of the best qualities ofXavier: Renegade Angel. The
series features a mix of 2D and
3D graphics, with glitchy andbizarre animation. Characters’
designs are often odd andlack detail. A great way to describe it is to picture Shrek’s
style of animation and design,with a fraction of the budget.
Although it may notappear intentional, this artisticstyle enhances the chaotic natureof the series, using its’ crudenessto enhance the absurd comedy. The
oddest design of the show goes to theprotagonist, whose appearance is almost
impossible to explain. Xavier above all isa humanoid being. He has two legs, twoarms, and a head. However,
his features go beyond that,possessing some peculiar
characteristics. He’s
got long

blonde hair, with a duck beak for a nose,
accentuated with a brown left eye andblue right eye. Instead of a left hand, he
has a snake hand, which is a literal snakethat lives alongside Xavier. Instead ofnormal human legs, he has horse legs
that bend backward as a horse does. His
entire body and head are covered in darkhair and his chest has six nipples where
his abs are. On top of it all, he has themannerisms of a shaman, wearing only asmall loincloth as he wanders the lands.
Despite his jumbled mess of a design,
Xavier is a ridiculously charismatic andiconic protagonist, using his freakish
appearance to unintentionally
freak out those he meets.
		On top of the extremely peculiar visuals of
the show, the show has
some hilariously brilliant
writing. Jokes in this comedy series fly at you at
insane speeds. The tempoof the dialogue is very fastpaced, and on first watch,jokes will fly right over yourhead. The writing is intricately layered with jokes having
subliminal and psychologicalmeanings.

44

Much of the humor of course rely on Xavier, with his aloof and oxymoronic personality. His intentions, while good, often result incatastrophe for those he tries to help.
Jokes in this comedy series fly at you
at insane speeds. The tempo of the dialogue
is very fast-paced, and on first watch, jokes
will fly right over your head. The writing is
intricately layered with jokes having subliminal and psychological meanings. Muchof the humor of course rely on Xavier, withhis aloof and oxymoronic personality. His
intentions, while good, often result incatastrophe for those he tries
to help.
This leads toepisodes containingsome hilarious
scenarios. Xavier’s mannerisms are best
described
as a man
who is so
stupid, that
he sounds
intelligent.
Using big,scholarly
words in themost incorrectmanner, he develops his persona of a
spiritual seeker. Xavier,despite his puzzling appearance, is incredibly charming. The
show also mocks real-world ideals and societal problems, like other animated showssuch as South Park. Ideologies such as religion, politics, class structure, and more are
not safe from Xavier. Being a show where
the protagonist seeks psychological enlightenment, he often questions everything.
Religion is often his main target as one of45

the episodes
follows
a child
ways.
Questioning
the Xavier
origin ofmeeting
life, human
who attemptsdomestic
to play god.
give
some
consumerism,
abuseToandrelationships,God,andthismore.
He’susesa little
misguided
andnarcontext,
child
real
science, tohelp
cissistic,claiming
that
everything
he
does,
“Is
his father with his “Christian” science. His
his
There
also many
moments
indaddestiny.”
finds out
thatareChristiansciencedoesn’t
the
show
where
the
narrative
straysaway
fromactually do anything, and forsakes god. This
Xavier and takes the viewer on either a spiritual,is just one example where the writing utilizdisturbing, or psychedelic journey. It uses trippy
es comedy to talk about complex ideologies.
or disturbing imagery with its’ uncanny animaWithin
otherthe ashow
tion. Thesevisualswillepisodes,
always have
deepertacklesthemesofColonialism,
Reaganism,
meaning that ties into the plot, which
is up toUtilitarianism,
domestic
workertheviewer to discover
whatviolence,
they mean.
exploitation,
wealth disparity,
andso muchIn one episode,
Xavier helps
a spoiledmore. Everyof dialogue
is socreatively
wealthy
child line
understandhow theother
99% oftheworld out,
livesthatin poverty.
Viewers
thought
every jokehitsaretreatedEmodynamits thenmark,even toif youdon’t
ics,
the idea thatjoythecanfirst
understandit onbeneitherIt’ll
createdwatch.
cracknoryou
destroyed. The balup, and make youance of happiness
ponder higher
is constant. This
meaning
at istheabsurd idea
sametime.in apresented
way that shockSpiritualism
ingly makes is
the
core
sense
andthemeleavesyouXavier:extremelyin
intrigued. The
Renegadeshow
promotes
Angel.
Xavier,these
absurdbeing a shaideas in ways thatman,
often tries
weird you out andto solve problems
make you laugh.
through
Xavier:spiritualRenegade
ity.
The
show
often
Angel was relatively
presents
theseinexagunnoticed upon its release.
geratedandsatirical
ways.
Shows
like,
Aqua
Teen HunAs
achild,
Xavier’s
fatherwasger Force, Futurama, Robot Chicken, and others
up muchof thespace
murderedin atookhouse
fire. He
vowed
on
Adult
Swim’sschedule.
to find his father’s killer, and “slay him, todeath.” Turns out he is his Father’s killer,
and it’s made extremely obvious to Xavier,but he just never catches on. Xavier’s quests
will lead him to ask philosophical questions
in comical

The show only featured Ten 12-minuteepisodes for its first season, so you have
had to have been up pretty latebinge-watching Adult Swim to
stumble across it. Those
who were fortunate
enough to do so in 2007 left
mixed reviews. On one
side, there were theseries’ die-hard fans,
who adored the chaotic
yet hilarious tone of
the show. For others,
they didn’t understandthe appeal of the series,
claiming that it was too
chaotica and difficult tofollow.
The show is niche, and not everyone who watches it will enjoy it. Overthe years, as new platforms like Instagram,
YouTube, and Tik-Tok were developed, clips
from the series began to circulate. Thanks tothe show’s style, no matter where you start
watching, clips without context are always
funny. Nowadays, the devoted fanbase creates artwork and promotes the show on theirsocial media. One fan even created a remaster of one of the scenes of the show, using
up-to-date computer-generated graphics.
The series has been a pioneer for thesurrealist and absurdist genres. The show’s
use of non-linear storytelling, uncanny style,and ridiculous animation have been inspirational to adult-animated comedies that havecome along in the past decade. A prime example would be The Eric Andre show, which
took the absurdist style comedy to the realworld. Smiling Friends, which uses a more
linear approach to storytelling, built on achaotic and unpredictable world, using
a similar blend of 2D and 3D
animation. Both of theseshows fall into the surrealism and absurdism genre,a genre that Xavier: Renegade Angel helped
popularize. There wastruly no other show
like it on release. It
inspires show writers
to approach bizarre
worldbuilding. Adventure
Time, although not an adultseries, features protagonists
journeying through peculiar
lands. Many animated productions
take inspiration from the series whether
they know it or not.
Xavier: Renegade Angel is an underrated gem. It has everything you could wantin an adult-animated comedy. Dark humor
that’s creatively written, animation that is
unique, and how the show makes full use ofits’ absurd art style. You might find yourself
confused, shocked, and even disturbed attimes watching this show, but will be filledwith laughter. The series has a charm noother show has, with one of the weirdest but
most entertaining protagonists in all of Adult
Swim’s lineup. Using spirituality as the basetheme of the series, Xavier: Renegade Angel
constantly builds off itself, using the protagonist as the center point of a unique universe. Thus proving that taking creative risks
can pay off.

Endnotes
1 Chatman, Vernon, and John Lee,creators. Xavier: Renegade Angel.

PFFR, 2007-2009.

#Video Game Adaptation:
HBO’s The Last of Us
BY EAMON RAFTERY

Whether or not an adaptation is successful varies
depending on the power of the audience’s imagination. Readersdevelop a subjective understanding of the author’s world
and the characters inhabiting
it. However, a spectator isvisually presented withthese elements — hence
the unidirectional movement of adaptations fromliterature to film andtelevision. Today, everyone wants the world built
and characters envisioned
for them materially, which
isn’t inherently bad considering the incredible success ofadaptation franchises like The
Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter. The audience receives a face to the diegetic
characters (Daniel Radcliffe is Harry Potter), andthe world these characters inhabit is brought tolife thanks to visual effects. Adaptation allows
the media’s original form to thrive in ways it
previously couldn’t, simultaneously expanding
the work’s creative universe. Another alternative
purpose for the adaptation, is to extend the media’s coverage to broader audiences — as fansand newcomers alike get to see beloved stories
materialized on the big screen. Not everyone
may enjoy or approach a story in its originalliterary form, but films may be a more digestible
medium for general audiences.
Video games are a realm of media with equally47

capable storytelling that can translate to movies and television. However, Resident Evil andTomb Raider’s video game to film adaptations
are subpar compared to the aforementioned
literary adaptations. The only caveat of adapting
a source already cherished by dedicated fans is
the set of strict expectations held for the newform that the old audience comes with. This canbe much harder considering videogame characters, unlike most literary ones, have a predefined
face and voice. But so far, no video game adaptation surfacing in the last few decades havecome close to the success of HBO’s most recent
attempt: The Last of Us.
As a diehard fan of the 2013 video game,
I must admit that coming into the first few
episodes has felt somewhat like walking on atightrope. Unsure of how accurate or committed to the source material the writing and acting
would be, one holds their breath when judging if
Joel, Ellie, or other beloved characters are justly
portrayed, and if the moments that makes thegame such a masterpiece will hold up in live-action. These aren’t unjustified concerns for video
game fans either, especially with this visual
format. Take Sonic the Hedgehog’s film adaptation for example. The first trailer received overwhelming amounts of backlash over the weirdly
uncanny valley design of Sonic with humanteeth. The Guardian writer, Keith Stuart, compared the film to a “200-mph slap in the face.”1
The negative reaction was so unanimous that themovie was delayed almost a full year to reimagine Sonic’s CGI. The difficulty there was in thetranslatability between the original cartoon form

to its live-action adaptation; also because
he’s an anthropomorphic, blue hedgehog. Casting directors likely have a mucheasier time when the source material has
human characters and is based in reality.
But how can video games be fun
while also attempting to be realistic?
Surprisingly, The Last of Us (2013) is. Rather
than hyperbolic hacking and slashing throughhordes of zombies, you play as a middle-aged
man transporting a 14-year-old girl across thecountry. They aren’t exactly killing machines orideal video game protagonists. This makes foran effective transition to live-action, where thequality of a scene is much more dependent on
the tension and drama as opposed to over-thetop CGI action. Additionally, this series is oneof the first video game adaptations to be done fortelevision rather than film, a key decision. Most
pieces of literature adapted for feature-lengthfilms undergo a process of compression for
the two-hour film format, losing out on a lot ofcontent. Video games are similar. The Last of
Us (2013) has a 15-20 hour story that would be
impossible to adapt in two hours justly. From thevery first scene, you want to reflect the pacingand execution of a video game that at times feels
like a cinematic experience itself.
The opening moment of the game isdescribed by Wired Magazine’s Will Bedingford
as a technical miracle. By using real actors withmotion capture, the faces of the game characters
express real fear, and the player experiences
what feels like a live-action film covering thefirst day of the apocalypse, with every angle
explorable to the player as you rotate the camera.2 As Joel carries his daughter Sarah throughthe chaotic streets, the player not only observes
his adrenaline and fear, they embody him. Conversely, in the first episode of the adaptation, thesequence of Joel carrying Sarah is less immersive to the viewer but equally as tense. This isthanks to the expansion of Joel and Sarah’s story

provided in the show thatwouldn’t have been necessarily possible in the game.
We spend much more time
getting to know Sarah inthe first episode, as she
takes Joel’s broken watch
to be repaired as a birthday
gift while the impending
doom is foreshadowed
ominously. The creators of
the adaptation, Neil Druckmann and Craig Mazin,established three tenets
when adapting a screenplay from the game. Thisis demonstrated through the contrasting opening
sequences of the game and the show: action into
drama, dramatize the mundane, and dump the
gameplay.3
The Chicago School of Media Theory
evokes a fascinating point regarding media adaptation: “Like the biological organism that thrives
in its new environment, successful adaptations
change over time, adapting to new conditions,migrating to new areas, and4
ultimately, doing their best to perpetuate their
existence.”5 The first scene in The Last of Us
pilot episode presents a panel of scientists
decades prior to the Cordyceps
outbreak. In response to theirbiggest worries, a scientist
mentions fungus withchuckles and dismissals from the audienceand host. As he
entertains the possibility of the world

getting warmer, of a fungal
species adapting
to withstandhuman bodytemperatures, theforeshadowing becomes obvious. This
simple yet effective
opening scene bridges
together, in a highly self-reflexive manner, the adaptation of thecordyceps fungus that begins the apocalypse,
and the adaptation of a video game from 10
years ago. Now introducing a far broader audience, fans of the original game and newcomers
to the show, expanding the world and remainingtrue to repeating what makes the game so special, The Last of Us has perpetuated its existencemuch like a biological organism.
It’s safe to say that after the third episode,I was easily convinced that this was the best video game adaptation I’d ever seen. The first two
episodes generally held true to the eventsof the game, recreating cinematography andiconic lines of dialogue, but then, the first substantial divergence from the game took place.
It was a risk and it paid off massively, demonstrating that an adaptation should aim to provide
new meaning to existing work, not just retell it.
The episode tells the story of Bill and Frank. Billis a survivalist that Joel and Ellie inquire about
getting a car in the original game. After barely
making it through his zombie infested town, theyfind a car and also find Bill’s survival partner,
Frank, hanging from a rope, bite marks on his
body. Not much is assumed regarding the natureof their relationship, but fans have long insinuated that Bill and Frank were romantic partners.
In the show’s episode, they take this speculation and run a marathon with it. We receive abeautiful, decades-spanning love story about
49

this stubborn, distrusting survivalist opening hisarms to a straggler that fell into one of his traps.
There’s such a beautifully acted moment when
the two share their first kiss. The catharsis of
this intimate gesture after years of loneliness at
the end of the world is so palpable. The world of
The Last of Us is remarkably expanded whilst
holding nearly no similarity to the original sequence in the game. Going back to Druckmann
and Mazin’s core tenets for adapting a screenplay: dumping the gameplay and dramatizing themundane is exactly what this episode does. This
tenet of removing gameplay beckons an inquiry
into the playable sequences that have also been
adapted in the show.
Moments where the player controlling
Joel becomes the spectator viewing Joel, are still
very prevalent, especially in the fourth and fifth
episodes. Joel and Ellie arrive on the outskirts ofKansas City – although, in the game it’s Pittsburg. They are promptly ambushed by bandits
and lose their vehicle, needing to fend for themselves. This sequence is almost identical in theoriginal and adapted forms. The key difference
can be attributed to the dumping of gameplay.
This section of the game has a large emphasis on
stealth and combat, lots of sneaking around with
Joel and Ellie to avoid what appears to be some
sort of militia that has overtaken the quarantine
zone from the military dictatorship. The show
expands much more on thehistory and dynamicof this militia group
now controlling
Kansas City,
providing an
identity tothese momentary
antagonists.
Enemies,identityless, barely observed up close after stranglingor shooting to death in the video game become realhumans with complex issues and motives. Throughcontext clues in dialogue, we learn of the horrible
treatment that the people of Kansas City faced by the
military, of the leader, Kathleen, and her vendetta
against anyone who ratted out their neighbors to thegovernment. This is where the next two important
supporting characters, Henry and Sam, come in. An
older and younger brother, Henry is a father figure andprotector for young Sam, who immediately reflects
the innocence of Ellie as they quickly become friends.
The obvious difference here is that in the show, Sam
is deaf, and Henry communicates with him in sign
language during a zombie apocalypse. Not only doesit heighten the intensity of protecting a deaf little
brother from zombies, but it also provides the overarching conflict behind Kathleen’s obsessive search forHenry and deepens the moral ambiguity of the wholesituation. Mazin explains, “Neil (Druckmann) and I
felt: let’s get under the hood, let’s understand some ofthese people, and let’s not steal their humanity because it cheapens the impact of their sins.”4 This point
seems especially pertinent to video game adaptations
in particular, where a large portion of the enemy characters are often rendered to nameless humans trying tokill you. Rather than an NPC, you have a human.

DESIGN BY SKYLAR SMITHENDNOTES
1. Stuart, Keith. 2019. “The Sonic the Hedgehog movie trailer is
a 200 mph slap in the face.” The Guardian.
2. Bedingfield, Will. 2023. “‘The Last of Us’ Does What NoShow Has Done Before.” WIRED.
3. Ibid.
4. Ibid.
5. Brokenshire, Mark. n.d. “Adaptation | The Chicago School ofMedia Theory.” Humanities Division: Lucian. Accessed March
7, 2023.

50

Witches and Bi*ches
Written by Isabel Sellings

Designed by Daisy Herrera

For centuries, Western society has been
obsessed with witches. When one thinks of theterm “witch” one might think of early depictions
such as the Wicked Witch of the West, with her
iconic green skin and shrill voice. Yet behind thisdepiction is a centuries old war on the religionof witchcraft. Since the early 1400s, women havebeen accused of being witches for a variety ofreasons— sexual promiscuity, aging, or features
such as birthmarks or scars. The hunting, torture,and execution of women accused of being witches in England and New England hold a place inhistory as an era of fear and panic. But despite
the stigma and fear towards witchcraft, witches
hold an important space in cinema history. Fromearly depictions like the Wicked Witch, to more
modern versions like the Love Witch, cinema’s
depiction of witches has evolved with western
society’s attitude towards women in general, as
well as differing religious practices. This article
aims to answer the question of how and why
did the cinematic evolution of witches occur.
First let’s start by explaining witchcraft.
Many of us know the tropes of flying on a broom
and creating fireballs out of thin air, but whatwitchcraft really is is much more intimate. Witchcraft is intuitive, essentially manifestation and using items to enhance that manifestation.There aredifferent types of witches such as Pagan, Hoodoo,
and Wiccian. Within each type, a witch usually
has a main element they use within their craft.

51

This could include sea, garden,
kitchen elements, etc. “Light” magicis used for selfless purposes, meant
to improve their own and other’s
lives. “Dark” magic is generally
used against others with intent toharm. However, some witches saythat light and dark magic are subjective, arguing that what is “light”
and what is “dark” is a matter ofcontext. Dark magic has been used
to describe historically black usesof witchcraft such as Voodoo. Thishistorical misconception illustrates
the connection between witchcraft
and social isolation. The white patriarchy has turned witchcraft intoa fear mongering weapon, while
real witchcraft is not a weapon for
fear, but a tool for empowerment.

As we look at how film has portrayed witchcraft, we can track how the cinematic depiction of the witch has evolved with societal values towards women andother marginalized groups. According to Kristen Sollee, professor at the New School
and author of Witches, Sluts and Feminists: Conjuring the Sex Positive, “If you wantto talk about representations of witches in popular culture over the past 500 years,
you have to really talk about representations of women in popular culture at large
over the past 500 years.”(1) Going back to the early days of popular cinema, we cantrack the evolution of the witch with waves of feminism that rippled across the West,
particularly in America.

We can track the evolution of the witch with waves offeminism that rippled across the West
The first depictions of witches in Hollywood came in the 30s, with two of the most
iconic witches present in this decade: SnowWhite and the Seven Dwarfs in 1937 and The
Wizard of Oz in 1939. These brought forth thelasting cinematic image of the witch: ugly,
manipulative, and the essence of evil. It should
be noted that many anti-semitic symbols madetheir way into witch character designs in thistime. Big, hooked noses have always been aprevalent anti semiticstereotype. The iconic
black witch’s hat has its design roots in the
1200s, where the Catholic church would decreethat Jews must wear a judenhat, a pointed cone
shaped hat, to identify themselves.
Later when Jews were accused of being tied to Satan —as witches were — thosewearing a judenhat were subject to anti-semitism. On the other hand, the Wicked Witch
and the Evil Queen’s counterparts, Snow Whiteand Glinda the Good, are presented as pure,
innocent, and the epitome of Anglo-Saxon
beauty standards. This dyad of magic in theform of good versus evil, ugly versus beautiful,and corrupt versus virtuous is reflective of societal values in this time. Women were either
obedient and pure, or tainted and evil dueto them being outsiders to society. Outsiders
were threats to the Christian morals the Westadhered to for hundreds of years The Catholic church in Europe dictated how non-conformers, such as Jewish people, were treated.

400 years later the Catholic and Protestant church in Europe in addition to
the Puritan church in colonial America led mass witch hunts against those
who they did not understand. Accusations of witchcraft were fueled by xenophobia, and those morals bled into
American cinema in the 1930s. Films ofthis era depicted witches as evil due totheir rebellion against Christian morals.
Allison Yarrow, author of 90s Bitch:Media, Culture, and the Failed Promise of
Gender Equality states, “As the 90s dawned
things were looking up for women. Daughters of second-wave feminism came of age
and chose new paths unavailable to theirmothers: delaying marriage and children,
pursuing higher education, joining theworkforce, and assuming independence
and identities outside of the home.”(2)This newfound cultural independence andempowerment for women gave rise toa decade full of witch centered media.

52

Films and television shows like The Craft,  Ho- Witchcraft itself is not evil, and only
cus Pocus, The Blair Witch Project, and Sabrina seen as “dark” when its power is used
the Teenage Witch all came out within 10 years to abuse others. In this way, Theof each other. Even the book Wicked, which Craft shows an evolution of witchwould be the source material for the hit Broad- craft in Hollywood due to the power
way musical, was published in 1995. The 60 of portraying and using witchcraft
year progression of feminism is shown through being in the hands of witches themthese various witch depictions. Witch characters selves, on and off screen.
were now multidimensional, veering away fromThe Craft took the image of an
the rigid good vs. evil trope of cinematic past. ugly, decrepit hag and turned it on
art of what makes The Craft stand apart its head. Now the image of the witchfrom other witch films is its authentic approach was a young woman figuring out herto real witchcraft. Pat Devin, a practicing witch, self. Coming into one’s witch powers
was a consultant for the film and helped write was meant not as a hindrance, but amany key scenes and lines to make the witch- metaphor for coming into one’s own
craft rituals authentic yet approachable. Pat personal power, such as building conDevin recounted writing the scene in which Sar- fidence, embracing sexuality or standah is being initiated into the witches’ coven, ing up to the ones who would mean
stating, “My goal for the rituals and chants was them harm. Protagonists like Sabrithat they be authentic, if generic, and that they na from Sabrina the Teenage Witch
contain nothing that could not be easily found or The Craft’s Sarah were meant toin at least two books, or plausibly created by be relatable and desirable, a far cry
teenage girls….I consulted with both of my co- from the Wicked Witch of the West.
vens extensively, running my ideas and concerns In today’s era of film, one film stands
by them and getting input. The idea that the out as the heir to The Craft as a
girls wanted “a fourth” so that there would be revolutionary depiction of witchcraft.
one to call each Corner was mine - often, in my
Women’s circle, we have a different Priestesscall each Corner.”(3)Devin’s involvement and input being shown on screen displays Hollywood’s
evolved attitude toward witchcraft. Instead ofbeing demonized or parodied, witchcraft was
shown as a tool for growth and empowerment for young women. How witchcraft wasused was up to the individual, such as Rochelle wanting to stand up to her racist bully,or Nancy wanting to escape her abusive stepfather. Their reasons for using witchcraft are
grounded in reality, and are relatable to many.  
53

In today’s era of film, one film
stands out as the heir to The Craft as arevolutionary depiction of witchcraft.Anna
Biller’s 2016 film The Love Witch succeeds
like it’s predecessor The Craft in portraying
realistic witchcraft and womanhood. The
Love Witch follows Elaine, a witch whouses love spells and sex magic in order
to find a man who will love her. Yet her
spells and potions come with deadly consequences for her male suitors. Elaine ishighly sexualized and yearns to be seen bymen, yet the film is viewed through Elaine’seyes, and therefore a female perspective.

Witchcraft is also treated with respect by
the film, with Elaine defending her practice
to skeptics stating “Do you know what it’s
like to really suffer? You have to fight andfight until you’re too exhausted to go on.
Witchcraft is my religion, sergeant. And thisreligion, which is older than your Christianity, saved my life.”(4).  This treatment ofwitchcraft as a religion is a far cry fromit being viewed as purely demonic anddangerous. The film aims to show witchcraft as a tool for empowerment, yet one
that should be used carefully. This treatment of women and witchcraft by the film
comes courtesy of it’s director Anna Biller.

Coming into one’s witch powers was meant not as a hindrance, but ametaphor for coming into one’s own personal power.
Since the beginning of Western
Christianized society, white Anglo Saxon men have held witches’ stories intheir hands. They controlled how society
treated witchcraft and its practitioners,
and ostracized countless women for notconforming to white Christian ideals.
Witchcraft has been branded as evil anddemonic, and women associated with thepractice deserve to be burned. Western
society attempted to disillusion the public of witchcraft’s true nature by spreading fear and lies. For too long, witches
in cinema were meant to represent thefear of witches through characters being
abhorrently evil like the Wicked Witch.
However, progress is being made.

The Craft was one of the first films to depict witchcraft in a serious matter, as wellas portraying witches as relatable female
characters and having a witch contribute to
the production. Today, a witch and womanof color holds a witch’s story in her own
hands. The accurate representation of women’s desired sexual freedom as well as accurate witchcraftpractices in The Love Witch
is a huge step forward in feminist and witch
cinema. While there is still much progress
to be made in cinema’s depiction of women and witches, Biller’s The Love Witch isa step forward to accurate and powerful
portrayal of witchcraft in mainstream media.

54					

Endnotes:

1. Sollee, Kristen. “The Secret Feminist History of Witches, as Told by a Practicing Witch.” YouTube. New York Magazine, October 31, 2017.
2. Yarrow, Allison. Essay. In 90s Bitch: Media, Culture, and the Failed Promise of Gender Equality.
New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers, 2018.
3. Yohalem, John Brightshadow. An interview with Pat Devin, March 1998.
4. The Love Witch. Oscilloscope Laboratories, 2016.
5. Patterson, John. “The Love Witch Director Anna Biller: ‘I’m in Conversation with the Pornography All around Us’.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, March 2, 2017.

55

Operating Under
the
Influence in
X-Files’“Sanguinarium”
T

by Rowan Lester

his week on The X-Files Sanguinarium:
Agents Mulder and Scully investigate a series ofmysterious and gruesome deaths in the cosmetic
surgery ward of a hospital in Illinois. Following
the discovery of a pentagram on the floor of theoperating theater, the agents begin to suspect
witchcraft may be at play in a world motivated byprofit, speed, and vanity.
As the investigation proceeds, the agents’suspicions fall mostly on two figures: Nurse
Rebecca Waite and Doctor Jack Franklin. Nurse
Waite is our episode’s underdog, a woman whose
magical powers seemingly outclass her status at
the hospital. In contrast, Doctor Franklin is a member of the hospital’s board who, despite his obvious corporate sleaziness, is seemingly uninvolved
with the murders’ occult elements.
The placement of a possession episode ina hospital is a fantastic idea. Gone are the spin-

dly tree branches and eerily lacy curtains of otherpossession features. Here, the sickly green tilingand too-clean lines of the hospital are just as successfully off-putting, and they open a door into awindowless world that feels fittingly like purgatory. However, this episode stops short of falling into
the trap typical of hospital-based horror stories.
The space is inhospitable, but the horror is neverfound in the threat of the patients, or even reallyat the hands of the doctors. Ultimately, it is the
exploitation at the hands of the rich members of
the hospital’s board which is the real horror.
The surgeries in the episode aren’t routine
either. Instead, they operate as opportunities forthe literal boundary crossing of the body, while thepossession is a metaphysical transgression. The
experiences of the victims parallel one another:
the surgeries are the physical manifestations of thepossessions. In this way, the surrendering of the56

body to the doctor parallels the surrender ofthe doctor to the possessor, and the power
dynamic between doctor and patient is corrupted by the possession. Despite this, it isstill the patients who suffer when the power
dynamic is transposed onto the doctors.
One of the most terrifying sequences ofthe episode doesn’t even result in anyone’s
death. As Nurse Waite uses leeches to put
a pentagram on a woman’s stomach to protect her, her patient groans and mutters, “I
can’t feel my feet... I’m getting a chemical
peel... Why can’t I feel my feet?”3 The agony with which the line is delivered epitomizes the horror of the loss of control. The
confusion in the woman’s voice is almost
naive, emphasizing the power which Nurse
Waite – and certainly her superiors – holds
over her. Even in her attempts to help thesepeople, Nurse Waite crosses boundaries andfurther (or even preemptively) victimizes
the patients. It’s easier to dismiss whenthese trespasses are followed immediately
by a brutal scene of murder-by-laser, but it
is still worth examining as an extension ofa system whose failings seem to fall unerringly on the person at the bottom of theproverbial food chain. The person you musttrust the most is turned against you througha system which is out of your control.
This transgression is turned into
exhibition by the incongruous televisionmonitors above the doors to each operating
theater. These screens were likely placed
there for the ease of telling the story, giving

57

other characters insight behind a locked
door that they would not otherwise havereason to question and providing security
footage for a typically private and routine
moment. Here, they become the encroaching surveillance state manifested in grainy
black and white. The monitors add anotherdimension to the scenes, blurring the line
between the audience and the charactersthemselves, both stuck watching in horroras the doctors succumb to their possession.
The exhibition of both pain andbeauty isn’t exactly unique to this episode,either. In the early 1990s, the performance
artist ORLAN underwent multiple public
plastic surgery procedures. The photographs of the procedures have a similar
green tone as the episode, lending themthe same sickly atmosphere. A spectacle
is made of ORLAN’s bloodied face andpresumed pain. The episode itself carefully
shows the audience the gruesome details ofpatient deaths, to the point that Gillian Anderson (the actor who played Agent Scully)
couldn’t stand to watch some scenes of theepisode. We see fat turn to blood and get
close-ups of both a disintegrated face and afully removed one. ORLAN’s work and theeffectiveness of this episode demonstrate
our enduring fascination with the transgressive qualities of physical procedures,
especially cosmetic ones. They demonstrate
the paralleled experiences of baring boththe emotional and physical to the outside
world. In an interview with The Guardian

in 2009, ORLAN describes her first filmed
surgery (one undergone to remove anectopic pregnancy) in religious terms. The
surgeon becomes a priest, the operating table becomes an altar. She says, “...So when
I lay on the operating table, the parallels
between the operating theater and the Catholic mass were not wasted on me.”2
This is a common theme: there isa sort of spiritual ecstasy associated withcrossing the boundaries of the physicalform. The fact that Doctor Franklin cancontinually use these people’s own willagainst them is one of the most timeless transgressions in history.
By co-opting the patients’attempts at building
their “ideal” bodies, he gains thepower tocreate his own.
In a similar vein,
there’s conjecture that Viking berserkers
wore the pelts of bears and wolves into
battle as a way of channeling the spirit ofthese animals.1 Doctor Franklin performs
a rather similar procedure when he fully
removes his face in the penultimate moments of the episode. He literally inhabits
a new body and becomes a new person
through this act. Doctor Franklin intends
to transgress the boundary of self, withresounding success. He reinvents himself
the same way that artist ORLAN has manytimes over. We have an eternal ambition totranscend our physical bodies, and there is
a common obsession with the evolution of

beauty. It borders on reverence.
The episode explores this fascination with the constructed self through shotsof characters shown through a dizzying
amount of mirrors. They distort and reveal
the characters in equal measure. One of the
only scenes which show outright witchcraft – specifically witchcraft in the way
we’ve been taught to recognize it, completewith candles and murmured incantations
in a dark room
– is shot so thatthe caster is only
seen through thereflection of two mirrors. Just like the agents, thecamera doesn’t know what to makeof Nurse Waite’s intentions. This disorienting fake-out with mirrors is also usedduring a tense chase scene between Nurse
Waite and Doctor Franklin, where thenurse’s unseen presence is replaced by thedoctor’s own reflection as he stalks throughthe halls of his home. The use of his reflection, rather than cross-cutting between thenurse and the doctor, helps build the suspenseful tone of the scene. It also calls tomind the doctor’s own (quite literal) twofaced nature. As a result, the viewer cantrust neither the characters nor their owneyes.
The tension between the self andthe other carries through the entire episode. Technology is slowly encroachingon the world of this hospital. But despite
its taking place in the ultra-modern, sickly

58

sterile world of the hospital, the episode isrooted in age-old motivations which anchor
the witchcraft to a reliable throughline.
Attempts to create a “perfect” or improved
version of the body speak to the longevity of the core ideas ofthe episode, and themethods of attaining
perfection help tobridge the disparities between viewsof witchcraft aspart of along-pasthistory andthe world of modern medicine.
Our two magical characters embody the tension of thistransitional time period very well. On
the one hand, Nurse Waite’s run-down,
Queen Anne-style home is filled with themore stereotypical implements of witchcraft: dimly lit by candles, perfumed bydried herbs hung from mirrors, with asoundtrack of low chanting. On the other
hand, sleek, modern lines make up Doctor
Franklin’s McMansion which is filled withsharp glass and pale, neutral tones. He
administers influential doses of belladonna through antacid pills and gains power
through cutting-edge medical procedures.
In contrast, Nurse Waite calls back to theoriginal meaning of the pentagram, falsely
implicating herself by planting them in the59

surgical theaters to protect the patients. In
fact, it seems as if the only element of classical witchcraft that Doctor Franklin uses
is intended to spite Nurse Waite after she
directly attacks him for what he’s been doing. After a rather gruesome scene in which
a blood-soaked Rebecca Waite convulses
and coughs up straight pins, Agent Mulder
gives Scully a short history of a phenomenon called allotriophagy, or pica. He claims
this is a term for when objects which
couldn’t physically be inside the humanbody are found there anyways. In reality,
he just rephrases the exact phenomenon
Scully gives as her scientific explanation
for the appearance of the pins. Mulder isactually likely thinking of the relatively well-documented phenomenonof objects appearing out of thin
air during cases of supposed
possession or haunting,which is called apporting.
While Mulder
offers many faith
or intuition-based
reasonings for his
jumps to supernatural
phenomena, this one particularly sticks out
because of the surety with which Mulder
proclaims it to be true. Rather than being
an impressive intuitive leap, the deduction
joins a long list of self-assured moments offailure which illustrate the ways the people
with the most power can so easily falter.
The role of human error and fallibility (andthe maneuverability which would counter
these errors) is dismissed in favor of inefficient speed. The doctors regard theirsurgeries with the same kind of bored resignation found in workers on an assemblyline.
While the possessions and murders
are committed for the age-old goals of
personal gain and eternal youth, the hospital’s board of directors is able to aid andabet Doctor Franklin through the way theirvery system is constructed. The deaths ofthe patients are grisly yet the deeper horror
is found in the hospital board’s disregard
for the lives of their patients in the faceof profit. Greed and vanity are mainstaysof classical witchcraft narratives, but inthis episode, the two are separate dangers.
There’s nothing wrong with cosmetic
surgery, but there is something wrong withthe way the doctors treat these proceduresas mundanely routine even after the first
patient’s death, sacrificing safety in theface of the doctors’ own greed and vanity.
They are more concerned with the profit
of cosmetic procedures than maintaining
the operating quality of the hospital. Agent

Scully even points out that while hospitals
as a whole have seen their profits decline,
the doctors in this hospital have only seen
their salaries rise. The timelessness of boththe characters’ motivations and the harmthey do to achieve them helps reconcile thedisparate forces at play within the episode.
Many X-Files episodes end ambiguously, but this one ends with the express
acknowledgment of the fact that Doctor
Franklin will continue his behavior. This
ending is a prescient reminder of thesystemic underpinnings which enabled
the hospital’s problems in the first place.
Within these structural power imbalances,
it is the people at the bottom who are worst
affected by the failings of the system. As
the episode shows, surrender is the circumstance most easily exploited.

designbyskylar smith

ENDNOTES
1.

2.

Heath, Michael, and Max Cooper. “Wearing theWolf Skin: Psychiatry and the Phenomenon of
the Berserker in Medieval Scandinavia.” History of Psychiatry 32, no. 3 (2021): 308–22.
		
Jeffries, Stuart. “Orlan’s Art of Sex and Surgery.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, July 1, 2009.				

3.

Mayhew, Vivian, and Valerie Mayhew. “Sanguinarium.” Episode. X-Files 4, no. 6. FOX, November 10, 1996.

60
7

To Dream
In The Dark:

The Work Of David Lynch
Written By: Evan Ambrose
In 1967, a young man by the name of David
Lynch found out that he was going to be a father
while studying at the Pennsylvania Academy ofFine Arts (PAFA) to become a director. At the time,
he had just finished creating his first short film
ever: Six Men Getting Sick. Following this, Lynch
would make experimental, animated/live-action
hybrid short films that revolved around the idea offamily and childhood. His crisis of understanding
parenthood felt heavily journaled in these pieces
of unusual media, a necessary decadeof build up to his infamous directorial
debut, Eraserhead, an oddball film
quite literally about the terrifying
yet comical experience of being afather. He spent five years making
the picture while simultaneously
working a side job delivering
The Wall Street Journal, often
fluctuating between shooting
sequences and earning enoughmoney to continue shooting thenext. When the film was finallyreleased in 1977, critics at thetime despised it. What would
becomeLynch’strademarkquality of “uncertainty” within
his storytelling may have come

Design By: Andre Dal Corso
off as too disturbing for Hollywood at the time.
Nonetheless, this dreamy yet ominously hystericalnature of narrative was bound to make its way into
the mainstream because of these initially concerned
reactions.
It wasn’t until Lynch directed a picture
for Paramount in 1980 – a safe but incredibly
effective feature-length retelling of the real life
Elephant Man – did he finally win over therespect of critics. What later followed, however,
was his notoriously known blockbuster failure,
Dune: the first ever cinematic adaptation ofFrank Herbert’s celebrated science-fiction
novel. Naturally, this sent Lynch back intorather experimental surrealist territory again

with a follow-up featurelength he based heavily
off of a blueprint that hewould later on continue
to reuse throughout his
career: Blue Velvet. This is oneof the first obvious examplesof David Lynch’s musing of
Hollywood’s The Wizard ofOz, where he implores key
elements of that movie into his
own such as innocence enteringa new world, same characters
existing within different realities, andthe conclusive plausibility that some – if not all –of it was a dream or exaggeration of what reallyoccurred from the perspective of the protagonist.
Unlike The Wizard of Oz, Blue Velvet exercises
these traits within a much more unsettling context
than the family-friendly flick. Lynch’s movie
is a coming-of-age drama about a young man
learning about sudden urges for sadomasochistic
relationships with women and thebattle he takes to overcome giving
into this new sector of a world henever knew existed. Lynch would
later follow up this cult classic
four years later with Wild at Heart,which is arguably his most literalremake of The Wizard of Oz (iteven has a good witch appearing
at the end to send the protagonist“home”). Like, Eraserhead, this wasanother movie of his that revolved
around themes of fatherhood and- like Blue Velvet - one interested
with the choices we make as young
adults discovering new thingsin the world. These discoveries
either lead us into righteous orsinister directions that we could
define the rest of our lives by.
It’s easy to agree that theshow Twin Peaks was David Lynch’s
biggest breakout work. It’s Lynch’s

most blatant example of him exercising light anddark elements; the series is always alternating
between its charming humor andsinister themes. There are simple teenromances and family dramas that are
built upon, but as we learn more,
the dark underbelly progressively
unraveled in Twin Peaks helps
deconstruct the stereotypical highschool sitcom we’ve come to expect.
The pilot episode of the show sets up
the central premise that will define
the show for its next two seasons:high school homecoming queen
Laura Palmer has been mysteriously
murdered. This inspires the Twin
Peaks police department to send
over an investigator of the FBI tolook into the murder. This elementof uncertainty is what got the series
to become such a hit on television;
people were tuning in week after
week in hopes of learning more about
who could be the killer. Although it
was never Lynch’s intention to reveal
who the murderer was, nagging

executives began to pressure him otherwise whenviewership for the show’s second season began todecrease. It’s funny to think that this would be thestart to the rise in edgy high school shows such as
Riverdale or Euphoria. While these shows possessa kind of darkness and perverted disturbanceof innocence that make them popular amongst
young audiences, it’s interesting to note that thedemographic of Twin Peaks was always widely
diverse. The absolutely hypnotic approach Lynch
took was something that almost everybody wasinterested in witnessing, as neither the old nor
young had ever seen this kind of program before.
The dreamy nature of his established style innighttime television was revolutionary at the time.
About a decade after Twin Peaks (momentarily)came to a conclusion, Lynch made what many
consider to be his masterpiece: Mulholland Drive.
This movie, however, was meant
to be a pilot episode to a new TV
show Lynch had in mind, until it
was rejected by a single executive.
In light of this, Lynch found a way
to reconstruct it into a movie. Outof all of the movies he had made,this would be his biggest love letter
to Los Angeles. However, it was also
his opportunity to display the deathof dreams he often witnessed within
the city throughout his entire life;
those false beacons of hope that only
a minority of people ever accomplish
within its promises of stardom.
Ironically, this happened to be thefilm that made actress Naomi Watts
big in Hollywood, who quite literally
plays the lead character who fails to
make it. She especially connectedto the role, because it reflected theprevious twenty years of her acting
career before taking the part when
she was never able to get on the mapof fame; it wouldn’t be surprising if
this coincidence is what gave us the
one-of-a-kind performance she puts

forth in the film. Still, despite the clarity of themes
such as fame, disappointment, and the unsettling
duality between dreams and reality, Mulholland
Drive is still being analyzed to this day when it
comes to plot specifics. Lynch, like most of hiswork, has been very quiet about saying anythingthat may allow the audience to see the film fromany vision other than their own.
As one could imagine, dodging the feedback
towards his work has always been a huge staple
in David Lynch’s career. Yet, more often than not
throughout his 50-year career, he stood ground byrefusing to expand upon the nebulous comments
he’s made about his films or the interpretations madeby others on what they could mean. David Lynch
once said, “As soon as you put things in words, no
one ever sees the film the same way. And that’s what
I hate, you know: talking – it’s real dangerous.” Hewould go on to expand upon this quote by specifying
how the act of an artist explaining his art is a crime
because it disenfranchises the unique language ofthe art with vernacular. In a sense, it strips the artof its individual nature, and furthermore strips

the viewer of their potential to consume more
subjectively. But this is likely why his work appeals
universally despite it not catering to comforting
clarifications: its draw is seeing something you
don’t know or, in other words, haven’t seen before
to the point where you can’t just define it; it begs ofyou to dissect it, and spend longer time with it toreally do so. For example, Lynch once said: “If you
don’t know what it is, a sore can be very beautiful –but as soon as you name it, it stops being beautiful
to most people. But if you took a picture of it, aclose-up, and you didn’t know exactly what it was,it could be a great beauty of organic phenomenon.”The removal of definitions for things in life is what
can make things more interesting to people.
The success and incredibly supportive
fanbase of David Lynch is important to consider
because it’s unusual for such ambiguous content
to have the recognition that it does. His reignof popularity should be an indicator to future
generations of filmmakers to overcome the fearof letting one’s imagination roam for one’s self
rather than for the satisfaction of what an audiencealready expects. The admiration for Lynch is only abyproduct of his freedom, something he had the least
amount of during his days of Dune or Twin Peaks
season 2, which are arguably his most criticizedpieces. Whenever he let go of the expectations ofothers, Lynch was unintentionally making the artthat people would love the most. He helped makecinematic dream-logic appealing in the UnitedStates, a country not necessarily well-known for
their own surrealist feature-lengths like countries
abroad have been since nearly the beginning. He
convinced everybody like he convinced himsef: “Ilike to make films because I like to go into anotherworld. I like to get lost in another world. And film
to me is a magical medium that makes you dream...
allows you to dream in the dark. It’s just a fantastic
thing, to get lost inside the world of film.”
In many cases, Lynch can then be considereda pioneer of the embracive nature avant-garde
experimental cinema has gotten over the past
half-century, as well as its progression into being
more prominent within mainstream media. He

spent decades getting polarized attention from themasses in order to teach a world of filmmakers
that it’s all just a part of the process. He’s now
perhaps one of the most celebrated living American
filmmakers out there next to Martin Scorsese or
Quentin Tarantino. I mean hell, Santa Cruz’s local
The Landmark Del Mar plays a movie of his every
couple months! There’s no escaping his impact
on cinematic culture, especially today. Therefore,
it’s crucial to realize the power of longevity, andhow the pieces of media that still seem to defy
conventions even decades after they’re released
are often the ones reappearing within generations
onward. As a young filmmaker myself, all I want
to do is dream as intensely as possible like Lynch
was doing throughout his career; being abstract isa benefit when working with art that my personal
relationship with reality often prohibits. Not tomention, dreams bring about an endless abyss ofcontent so detached from reality that we often do
not see them displayed out in the open. But that’s
probably why people love watching movies somuch, right? It’s that escape back into dreaming even when our eyes are wide open.

Endnotes
1. David Lynch and Naomi Watts on Mullholand
Drive. YouTube. Accessed March 7, 2023.
2. David Lynch: The Treachery of Language.
YouTube. What’s So Great About That?, 2018.
3. IMDb. “David Lynch.” IMDb. IMDB.com.
Accessed March 7, 2023.
4. Parker, James. The Atlantic (blog). The
Atlanatic, June 2017.

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . . .
. .. ...... . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . .
.................. ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ................ .......... ........ .. .. .. .. .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... . . .
................
...............................
..............................................................................................................
..................
.
.
·.•...
• ·•.
..........................................................................
... ..
•

•

•

•

•

+

•

•

•

----��

........... ...
............................................................................................................
...............................................................':"'::---...........,,..
.,......................
...................
........................
.............................................
...................
............
..................
.......................................................
.............
.........
............... .

'
'
'
'
'
'

'

'

'

'

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .
.
.
.
.
.
.... .
.
.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . . .
.. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
........
.
.
.
.
.
. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .... .. .. .. .. ... .. ... .. ... ..... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. ... .. .. .. .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. .. . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... . .. . .. . .. . ..... . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
......................................................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................................................................
............................ ......... .........................................................................................
............. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ....
..............................................................
..............................................................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................................ ...
....................... . ........ ........ ....................................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................................

.

'...••••.... ... . .
..-·-·······························································································································..
...................................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................................
.
................................................................................................................................
........... • _,:,.;..-�--...................................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .....
..........
...............................................
....
·•••..•••..•••••••••••••••..•••••••..
.. •""!ii;;iioii•""l-:"� ...........
..............................
...••..•••.••...•.•••..••...•.•••.•••••••...••.••••••••.•••••••.•••.
.......................................,................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................
............................
.........................
.
......................
...................
..................
...
.......................................................
.
.............
.-.-.-.-.-.-..........
.
..............
.........
..........
........
..................
..

••••••••••••••••••••••••

0

0

0

0

•

0

0

0

0

•

0

0

I

O

I

O

O

O

I

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

I

a

I

■ • •

0

I

O

•

•

0

■ • • a

0

0

I

a

O

•

•

e

O

e • e a a e e a

O

O

O

I

O

O

O

• • a e e •

O

O

I

O

0

0

a • e

O

O

e

I

e

O

O

•

O

O

O

O

O

e e a • • e a • • a a • • e

O

O

I

O

O

O

I

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

a • e a a • e a

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

• 0 0
0
0 e O
• • a a • • e

O

O O O
O O
e O O O • e O O
e • e a a • e a a • • a a

•

0

0

0

0

0

•

0

0

•

O

O

•

0

a • • eOa • e a

e

O

O

•

•

0

0

�=;:;: ;:;,:;: ;:;:;:�:;,:;:;:;.:;:;:;.:;:O_______ ______________________________

•

0

0

0

e O O
• • a

••••••••••••••••••••

O

•

0

0

0

•

0

0

0

O

•

•

e

O

O

• e a

0

O

• 0 0
0
e O O
• e a a • • e

O

•

0

0

O

•

0

e