State Of Mind - Tumblr Posts

State Of Mind: "Film Unoriginality"

I've begun to notice more and more that there are almost no truly original movies coming out right now. Everything is a sequel, remake, or just formulaic.

I understand that there are only so many concretely original storylines in existence and that everything we see as original is really just a riff on a previously done storyline. If that's the case, why are one movie great and another movie terrible if they are both riffs on the same basic story? There are a lot of factors in that, but the most important is presentation. For example, let's take the movies "Avatar" and "Pocahontas". People berated "Avatar" for being "Pocahontas" with blue aliens in space. That may be true, but there are tons of stories like that. Stories of one man entering a new culture and messing with their way of life have been around forever. People seem to immediately deem a somewhat unoriginal idea or storyline as automatically inferior to its predecessor. However, a quick trip to Rotten Tomatoes reveals that "Avatar" got significantly better reviews than "Pocahontas". This may be due, in part, to our nostalgia filters blinding us to the flaws in one of the movies of our childhood. We need to realize that similar doesn't automatically mean worse. Personally, I don't think the story was what "Avatar" was really meant to be about. It was meant to be an experience that brought you to a completely new world. In that respect, I think it succeeded. I saw the movie in 3D IMAX, and I was completely blown away the visuals. Yes, once you look past that the story is silly and the characters are pretty flat, but I still believe that the movie succeeded in what it set out to do. I'd also like to note that, when looked at in the right light, "Finding Nemo" and "Taken" can be viewed in a similar way.

My main issue lies with the remakes and sequels that are made as nothing more than cash-ins on certain properties. The films that continue or retell stories that were fine the first time. Did we really need a new Freddy Krueger or Jason Voorhees? Do we really need to see an old movie again in 3D? Do we really need another "Transformers" movie? And yet, we continue going to these movies for one reason or another. I don't really understand the attraction. I get excited when I see fresh and new ideas being explored on the big screen in new ways. That's one reason why I love Pixar. They can always be counted on to present an original idea in a fresh way. For example, "Up" is about an old man who uses a horde of balloons to fly himself, his house, and a boy scout to Venezuela in order to set the house in the exact spot where his deceased wife would have wanted it. There are also subplots involving the man's childhood hero and his talking dogs and a giant bird's attempts to escape capture. This movie covers themes such as loss, going on without loved ones, and life going on even in old age. These themes have all been done before, but never like this. Name one movie that has a plot synopsis similar to the one I just gave for this movie. The writing, characters, and animation are all beautiful. This movies shows exactly what a creative spin on an old idea can do. It wasn't the second animated film nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars for nothing.

What I'm trying to say is that unoriginality has its good and bad parts. We shouldn't snub a movie just because it's similar to one we've already seen. It's all in the presentation and execution. "Friends With Benefits" was way better than "No Strings Attached", and they're basically the same movie. It's incongruities like that that prove that movies made based on the same idea can have radically different results. I just think that we need to stop supporting all of the terrible sequels and remakes that are coming out that are trying to cash in on our childhoods and don't deserve our money.

State Of Mind: "'Community': Why I Love One Of The Most Frustrating Shows On TV"

Upon the request of a friend, I watched the entirety of the TV series "Community". It was amazing, and I am now a full-fledged fan. However, there are still certain things that bug me about the show...

The show follows a study group (nicknamed the Greendale Seven) as they come together to take classes at Greendale Community College. This group is made up of seven people (hence the nickname): Jeff, the not-as-apathetic-as-he-seems leader; Britta, the incapable and overenthusiastic rights activist; Troy, the fallen high school football star; Abed, the odd and media-absorbing savant; Annie, the tightly wound, yet sugary sweet, heart of the group; Shirley, the devoutly Christian and secretly rage-filled mother; and Pierce, the racist, homophobic, and cruel old guy.

What makes this show great is that these seeming disparate characters grow together over the course of the three (going on four) seasons. Though each may seem like a cardboard character trope, they grow out of their molds rather quickly. "Community" may seem to be too cool for school on the surface, but its characters always provide a window into its big, warm heart. However, it is these same characters that cause me to have issues with the show. I'll give each character of the Greendale Seven their own section (along with an extra two sections for the incompetent Dean Pelton and the outright insane Ben Chang) to explain my grievances.

Jeff Winger: Jeff is supposed to be the straight man on the show. He's supposedly too cool to be bothered with the problems of the rest of the group, but we all know that, deep down, he cares. The issue is that he keeps regressing to the point that it seems as though the lessons he's supposedly learning at the end of each episode are pointless. Because he's the straight man, he also sometimes ends up being the least interesting (though not the worst) character on the show and the one that it's hardest to get emotionally invested in. I actually don't have many problems with Jeff beyond his occasional blandness and inability to learn lessons, though.

Britta Perry: I may stand in a minority here, but I love Britta. That may come down to Gillian Jacobs jumping through flaming hoops to make the character great, but I just can't bring myself to dislike her as much as the characters on the show (and certain portions of the fanbase) do. I do, however, take issue with her characterization. She started the show as a smart, capable woman who could see right through Jeff's crap. She was the original heart of the group, as well as it's voice of reason. As time went on, however, she got significantly less capable and more idiotic. It didn't make her any less funny, but it did make it harder to take her seriously. She had suddenly become the buffoon character, and she can't do almost anything without messing it up. I still like her, but I do wish that they'd bring back a bit of that intelligence and cunning that made her so appealing to Jeff in the first place.

Troy Barnes: Troy is probably the character I have the fewest issues with. He's funny and ditzy, but he's grown significantly since the series began. If I do have an issue, it's that sometimes Troy just becomes Abed 2 as opposed to staying his own character. That's been becoming less and less the case now, though, as Troy is growing to realize that he has to grow up, not only for his sake, but for Abed's as well. Other than that, though, I don't really take issue with Troy, even if he's not my favorite character on the show.

Abed Nadir: Abed is the resident "meta-guy", the one who points out all of the hackneyed plots and tropes that the Greendale Seven go through. My main problem with him is that he can be kind of a dick. I understand that he has some issues, but, at the same time, he still sometimes recognizes the bad consequences of his actions and continues with them anyway, hurting his friends in the process. The show has begun to address this more, which I like, even if it does seem to be making a bigger deal out of Abed's condition than it was in the first two seasons.

Annie Edison: I really like Annie. She's sweet and tightly wound, which makes her great for certain comedic set pieces. I also really like Alison Brie, who does a great job with this character. My issue with her, though, is that the show kinda forgot what made her great for a bit in the middle. She became not much more than someone to stare at Troy and later Jeff. As with Troy, however, she's begun to grow back out of this through he moving in with him and Abed and her positioning of herself as the heart and matchmaker of the group.

Shirley Bennett: I think Shirley is really underrated and underused. I love Yvette Nicole Brown, and I sometimes feel as though she's being underutilized. That's not my issue with her, though. My issue is that she is probably the least fleshed out of these characters. She hasn't gotten a chance to branch out too much beyond the Christian mother stereotype she started with. The show has gotten slightly better with this with the foosball and marriage episodes, but she stills feels a bit underdeveloped, especially when surrounded by other characters who are as rich and rounded as these characters are. Hopefully, the show will give her a bit more rounding in the coming season.

Pierce Hawthorne: Pierce is in a two-way tie for my least favorite character on the show. He's hateful and villainous and has almost no redeeming qualities. That's my problem with him. His jokes are almost completely one-note (yeah, we get it, he's old and bigoted), and this is despite numerous episodes fleshing him out. To be perfectly clear, he's not a flat character; he's just an extremely annoying and almost infuriating character. He also got a bit better in the third season, but I still don't like him nearly as much as I like the rest of the Greendale Seven.

Dean Craig Pelton: I used to dislike this character a lot more than I do now. The zombie episode almost pushed him off the deep end for me, but he managed to claw his way back into my heart. My issue with him used to be that he was so stupid that he was putting people in danger (and also his one-note jokes, but, for some reason, it never bothered me as much with him as it did with Pierce), but that seems to have been evened out a bit as time goes on. By the time the second fake clip show with the therapist rolled around, I was rooting for him to make it out okay. I even started to like his different outfits after a certain point.

Ben Chang: Here's my other pick for least favorite character. I don't quite understand why this character exists. I almost never find him funny, and he doesn't fit in with the rest of the show's universe. When a character is too crazy for a world as ridiculous as the one created by "Community", you know something is very, very wrong. By the time he was living with Jeff, I had basically decided that this character was pretty much beyond me liking him, and this is one case where the third season probably made him worse in my eyes.

Beyond the characters, this show's writing is impeccable. It mixes intelligence with heart and never talks down to its audience. I know that "Community" is known for its high-concept episodes (and, trust me, "Epidemiology", "Advanced Dungeons and Dragons", "Abed's Uncontrollable Christmas", and "Remedial Chaos Theory" are possibly my four favorite episodes), but I think the show is just as good when it has its feet firmly planted on the ground. I like when the show calms down a bit and really puts its characters under a microscope. For as crazy as this show can get, it's the realness of the characters that keeps you coming back for more.

The reason that the title of this article is what it is is because this show really does frustrate me sometimes. I know that it's capable of so many amazing things, so when it kinda half-asses an episode or does something that was obviously meant to appeal to a wider audience, I just have to shake my head. I understand that it needs more viewers, but I'd honestly prefer a shorter show that was great the whole way through than a show that compromised its ideals for a few more episodes that ended up being only mediocre. There's also the occasional character moment (or character in general, in the case of Pierce and Change) that I just can't get on board with.

For now, though, I'm glad it got a fourth season. I'm interested to see what happens with the Greendale Seven. I'm a bit worried that Dan Harmon is around anymore, but I'm confident that the show can still stay good. While I don't know if the show can (or should) make it to six seasons and a movie, I'll enjoy it while it lasts. "Community" is an experience that should be had by everyone. I can't count the reasons I should stay.

State Of Mind: "Final Fantasy XII"

People who know me know that I make no secret that this might be my favorite in the "Final Fantasy" series of games. However, this seems to be among the most divisive entries for some reason. I'd like to examine why I love it when other hate it.

"Final Fantasy XII" follows the story of a rebellion attempting to put the proper princess, a young woman named Ashe, back into power during a major war between two large countries. There's a lot more to the story than that, including magical crystals (when aren't there magical crystals?), a war against the gods, and several plot twists and reveals. I never quite understood the story. It starts out simply enough, with the story being told from the perspective of street rat Vaan, who lives in the country in between the two warring ones. However, it quickly becomes tangled, as many more characters are introduced and plot elements begin piling up. You find out that this was never really Vaan's story, the bad guy isn't actually the bad guy (this actually happens several times), the war has more motives than originally thought, and something about the gods seeing the future and controlling minds. It all becomes really hard to follow, especially on a first play through.

In addition to the muddled story, the characters are also pretty forgettable. After X did such a great job of creating colorful and interesting characters, it was disappointing to see XII take a step backward in that regard. None of the characters really have any real personalities. They are all pretty much just serious, strong, goal-oriented blank slates that aren't given any defining characteristics apart from whatever goal it is that they are trying to achieve. There are two exceptions, though they are on opposite ends of the spectrum: Penelo, Vaan's childhoos friend, and Balthier, a sky pirate. Penelo, I can only assume, was supposed to be the perky young girl archetype, a role previously filled be characters like Yuffie In VII and Rikku in X. However, to match the game's atmopshere, her "perkiness" is severely toned down, so it ends up just coming off as a couple of random quips and stupid questions throughout the game. To make matters worse, she has absolutely nothing to do with the plot of the game. She is there for no other reason than to give you a sixth party member. It's even worse than the also superfluous Vaan, since he at least has the excuse of avenging his soldier brother. (The original lead character was supposed to be a soldier named Basch, who, while still a major character and party member, had the focus taken away from him when it was thought that a more relatable protagonist was needed.) Penelo is, by far, my least favorite character in the game, both for her "personality" and her complete irrelevance to the plot. On the other hand, there's Balthier. In a game with so few good characters, Balthier is so memorable that it almost makes up for the general lameness of the rest of the party. He is an arrogant, but secretly caring, sky pirate who insists that he is "the leading man" of this story. He's a funny, compelling, well-designed character with an interesting backstory. Plus, in a story where half of the party is along for the ride for no adequately explained reason, he is actually pretty deeply intertwined with the matters at hand (for reasons both obvious and secret). In addition to his countless comedic scenes, he also gets some good tearjerker scenes and some show-stealing moments of heroic badassery. He is easily one of my favorite "Final Fantasy" characters of all time.

So, why do I love the "Final Fantasy" with the confusing story and forgettable characters (Balthier aside)? It's all about the world and the gameplay for me. Ivalice is enormous. You can spend all day just adventuring to all of the corners of the world and still probably miss a ton of stuff. Every corner is teeming with life, both friendly and malicious. There is a well-defined government, environment, social system, and mythos. There are tons of places to go and things to see. You can go somewhere a hundred times, and there's still a chance that you haven't seen everything that there is to see there. I spent over 100 hours on this game, and I still wasn't nearly done with everything it had to offer. Ivalice is a textbook example of building a complete and vivid world.

I may be alone in this boat, but I also love the battle system. I was wary at first, since this was the first "Final Fantasy" I had played without a clear turn-based system. I also feel as though other people hate it because it's so far removed from any previous battle system that the series has used (except maybe XI, which I never played). It definitely took some getting used to, but I ended up finding the new MMORPG-like system very deep and interesting. I loved being able to run around, see enemies on the field, and kill them as they appeared. It helped add to the world that they were trying to build, and it made it feel slightly more real when battles weren't taking place in some random dimension apparently reserved only for stabbing things in the face. Granted, I've heard some people say the opposite, saying that running away wasn't as effective as it would be in reality and that things could hit you when you were obviously far outside of their attack range. I guess those were all just covered by willing suspension of disbelief for me, that and the understanding that that was necessary in order to create a more balanced and challenging battle system. By the end of the game, I loved just running through earlier areas and killing things in one hit, racking up tons of LP as I went. One surefire way of gauging my enjoyment of an RPG is by how much I enjoy grinding in it. By that standard, XII gets a huge thumbs up from me.

So, there you have it. That's why I love one of the most divisive and detested games in the "Final Fantasy" oeuvre. Mind you, I sometimes go back and forth between this, X, and VI, but this one ends up on top more often than not. I love the world, the hunts, the Balthier, and the battle system enough to vastly outweigh any negative thoughts I may have toward this game. So, go forth, and happy hunting!

State Of Mind: What Makes A Hipster?

For whatever reason (I can’t exactly pinpoint why), I’ve been very intrigued lately by the concept of the hipster. More to the point, I’ve been wondering what makes someone a hipster. Is it clothes? Taste in music/TV/movies? Personality? Lifestyle? I know that there are bits and pieces of all of those things that come into play, but I want to dig a bit deeper than that. I want to know exactly what divides a normal person with some odd and obscure tastes and tendencies and an out-and-out hipster.

(A note before we really dig in: I’ve been thinking about this in terms of me, so, if it comes across as me asking questions about myself, that’s probably why. I will use myself as an example for a lot of these arguments, just for the sake of having a real world example without having to implicate any of my friends, but I’ll try to keep it as hypothetical and objective as possible. Feel free to throw in your two cents with by inboxing me or reblogging this with some thoughts attached. For the record, though, I don’t consider myself a hipster.)

Now, the first thing that a lot of people think of when they think of a hipster is a sense of pretension. Hipsters tend to look down upon things that aren’t traditionally hipster as “too mainstream” and beneath them. What if someone liked very similar things and didn’t have that sense of pretension, though? For example, I love cult classic and so-bad-it’s-good movies and TV so much that I would consider myself something of a connoisseur in that regard. However, I would never look down upon someone just because they didn’t like a movie that I liked or because we don’t have the same tastes. Does that automatically exclude me from being a hipster?

Another important aspect to the hipster lifestyle is the aesthetic. Unneeded glasses, bright colors, ironic shirts, and various other fashion statements have all become staples of hipster closets, and antique, out-of-date possessions have become mainstays of hipster living spaces. It is said that this style developed from people appropriating things from other subcultures and using them for themselves. The end product is both a form of artistic and ironic expression. What if you do all of these things without a sense of ironic detachment, though? I’ve been wearing ridiculous T-shirts and bright, clashing colors just because I like the way that it looks. I’ve also been known to wear fake glasses simply because I’ve wanted to wear glasses since I was about 6-years-old. I also have records pinned to my bedroom wall, and I’ve been trying to find space for some old film reels, a foghorn-like speaker, an old music mixer, and a mini record player. I don’t have all of this stuff because I don’t like listening to the man or mainstream culture; it’s because I honestly think that it’s cool and interesting looking.

Last up (at least for the purposes of this thought piece) is the hipster personality and lifestyle. Like I said before, hipsters are known for their condescension and ironic detachment. This applies to their taste in music, movies, clothing, humor, etc. However, does enjoying irony automatically add points to someone’s hipster score? Irony is the source of almost all comedy. What kind of irony, then, is exclusive to hipsters? Does it have to be mean-spirited? Can a hipster enjoy some unironically? I always make extremely racist, misogynist, homophobic, and generally nihilistic jokes with my friends, but I always do it with a metaphorical winking eye and lack of any mean intentions. (This relates to my beliefs about political correctness, both in general and how it is filtered through comedy, but that’s a topic for another thought piece.) Where, then, does that type of well-intentioned ironic humor fall on the hipster humor spectrum? Is it less hipster for not being mean, or is it just as hipster because it’s irony pointed at social norms?

The lifestyle is probably what I have the least to say about, since it involves having money and being over 21 (neither of which apply to me). From what I understand, it involves being somewhat aimless after college and basically living in certain types of bars/restaurants/record stores and at concerts. While I can admit that my life after college will be somewhat aimless (simply because what I’m studying doesn’t really match up to what I really want to do with my life), I can’t say for sure until I get there, so I guess my stake in this article is over.

Reading it over now, I realize how much this whole thing comes off as me either really trying to prove my hipsterdom or trying way too hard to disprove it. You know what, though? So be it. I just really wanted to write something like this and get it off of my chest. Am I a hipster because I listen to some bands that no one has heard of? Because I dress weird? Because I like certain types of movies and TV? Because I like a retro aesthetic? Because I have an ironic sense of humor? I can’t say for sure, and everyone has a different opinion on what makes a hipster. I just know that, no matter what, I would never put someone else down for not liking the things that I do or lord my tastes and opinions over other people. Negativity begets negativity, and isn’t there enough of that in the world? And maybe my positivity and enthusiasm is the only thing keeping me from truly being a hipster. I don’t care. I’m going to do what I like because I like it, with or without a label.

“What this power is I cannot say; all I know is that it exists and it becomes available only when a man is in that state of mind in which he knows exactly what he wants and is fully determined not to quit until he finds it.”

—Alexander Graham Bell

“The monotony and solitude of a quiet life stimulates the creative mind.”

—Albert Einstein

“Our minds influence the key activity of the brain, which then influences everything; perception, cognition, thoughts and feelings, personal relationships; they're all a projection of you.”

—Deepak Chopra

Inside this head

WE

Have formed a government.

A way for each of us

To find

A way to exist.

Transitioning

A kind of election

Where all those tiny fragments comprising this body of thought

Move towards

Which one of us

Will exist

As the voice.

That one of us who interacts

With the waking world.

Me, we, Andrew

Since beginning hormones

I would not say I am more emotional

But it is easier to experience my emotions.

Before there was a violence to them.

An intense repression which felt and was toxic.

Now I know them

Let them run their course

And possess a greater well-being.

vivre dans le résultat du désir obtenu

si vous viviez vraiment dans le résultat du désir obtenu, vous ne ressentiriez pas du tout le besoin de vous plaindre de votre manifestation. vous vous sentiriez calme et satisfait·es qu'elle soit déjà là. vous avez juste  à vous mettre dans l'état d'esprit que c'est déjà fait et vous vous sentirez tellement comblé·es que vous ne voudrez même plus de résultats dans la 3D.

(vous les  désirerez toujours évidemment,  mais ce que j'entends par là, c'est que ce sera tellement ancré dans votre esprit que ce sera devenu une évidence: plus besoin de "chercher" des résultats ou de vous en inquiéter.) je suis passée par là et bon nombre de mes abonné·es aussi, et c'est assez étonnant de voir à quel point  parfois,  on garde une attitude neutre lorsque la réalité se conforme.

n'oubliez pas : la réalité/3D n'est que le reflet de ce qui se passe dans votre imagination/4D.

RAPPEL

Même si vous avez l'impression que rien ne change dans votre 3D, il y a TOUJOURS du mouvement. Vous ne pouvez juste pas le voir.

Comme l'a dit Neville Goddard, il faut accepter de fermer ses sens (je sous-entends par là la perception physique des choses, les 5 sens) et ne se concentrer que sur votre 4D. Si vous changez votre discours intérieur, alors la réalité n'aura pas d'autre choix que de vous refléter vos attentes... Mais ça, vous ne le verrez probablement pas venir !

Alors ne vous inquiétez pas ♡

Sono qui.

Ehsan Darderefshi 🎧 Antinomy - State of Mind

One morning I woke up and was plunged into psychological shock. I had forgotten I was free. ~ Jack Henry Abbott

Polar

She yells and she cries

She tells me I am not right

Then begs me to hold her at night.

She’s all in my head

Won’t leave me alone in my bed

I want to crumble instead.

I’ve felt love, I’ve felt warmth

But never from her

I think she’s misinformed.

I think im addicted, while she’s obsessed

Some days, I truly feel blessed

“it’s so Closter phobic” I express!

She says “breath breath

You’re doing just fine,

Come here, let me help you clear your mind”

-Lea 

Victory is a state of mind.