Video games make us all losers

In the article Jesper Juul discusses how losing in video games affect people and how is a sort of human instinct to want to win in the game no matter how many times one loses. he discusses how games are set up where players tend to prefer games that are somewhat challenging, and for a moment it can sound as if this explains the paradox players like to fail, but not too much. Juul also talks about the feeling that losing in a game is. that is that feeling in a game makes one feel inadequate.  a feeling of inadequacy is unpleasant for a person, and it is odd that we choose to subject ourselves to it. on the other hand even though video games give us a sense of  being inadequate they also motive us to play more in  order to escape the same inadequacy and the feeling of escaping failure. over all he talks about the way video games work in our mind and why. When I was reading this article I thought about my little cousin he is a gamer and he loves playing destiny. at time he would get at so much into the game that he wouldn't rest or sleep until he beat the level or the entire game. moreover, when he failed certain task on the game he would feel disappointed and wouldn't rest until he past the level. is crazy how much control over someone's emotions and mind a game can have.

Piracy is a route to Freedom

While I realize piracy has become a bigger phenomenon over the last two decades, I think it'll become even more problematic. After this week's discussion, I didn't realize that piracy overseas isn't exactly the same as it is here. On US soil pirating a film is economical. People do it to avoid the 13 dollar movie tickets that are deemed insane. However in other parts of the globe it's a matter a little deeper. America is lucky to be built upon certain values,including freedom of speech and no restriction on our media content (besides the FCC). Other countries don't have that sames views as the US, therefore there are government and cultural stipulations that don't allow the same freedoms that you and I have. American culture maybe frowned upon and seen as another source for imperialism but for those under certain oppressive systems its a chance for self-expression.
When domestic films and fandom find themselves among international audiences, it becomes more than just profit and entertainment. It's a look into another culture and another life so far away. I think thats why American action and adventure films are so popular around the world. More than just thrills are being offered,this sense of escapism through film comes to light. Our films like Avatar and Hunger Games mean more to international audiences, because there's another world on screen. Piracy gives those this experience. So while its illegal and problematic in its own way, in the end I think it breaks boundaries.

Video Games Makes Us All Losers

Jesper Juul explains that no matter how much we may lose in game we still have the urge or better yet the desire to keep trying to beat the level you are on. This is due to the fact that humans can't stand the fact of losing. Losing makes us feel less of ourselves and we must succeed in winning to feel better about ourselves. The point Juul was making is that we all play video games and the whole point to video games is to overcome the obstacles thrown in front of us. To succeed pass these levels we will have to lose a few times to get use to the level and get the feel of what needs to be done to move on to the next level of the game. Losing in a video game makes us all losers because we must lose to win. Failure is what drives us to want more. God of War for the Playstation2 was one of the most challenging games that I have ever owned in my entire life. The game took me 3 months to beat. No one knows failure until they have played this game.

The Common American Pop Cosmopolitan

        The Jenkins text describes the idea of the Pop Cosmopolitan, and builds on the concept which was first introduced by a University of California, Berkeley, text in 2004. Jenkins himself writes that Pop Cosmopolitan is "someone whose embrace of global popular media represents and escape route out of the parochialism of their local community" (Jenkins, 1). I enjoyed the article and agreed with many of the points made by Jenkins within the text, but I cant help but notice that he seems (at least, in my interpretation) to present the pop cosmopolitan as somewhat of a rarity, or as if such a person was an anomaly within the general public.
       This was somewhat surprising me, as I would actually disagree with Jenkins in this aspect, as I would assume that the vast majority of the general public, specifically the American general public, would embody this image of the pop cosmopolitan. Jenkins noted the girl in the convenience store as a pop cosmopolitan, and the middle eastern teen using an American Photoshopped photo as anti-American propaganda is a pop cosmopolitan. But I would classify the man questioning the girl, and the people wearing the shirts as pop cosmopolitan as well, and why wouldn't they be? They have still been effected by, of have embraced some aspect of another culture at one time as well most likely. Even something minor or something the average American would consider civilian like ordering Chinese or Italian food, or watch some sort of content containing subtitles, could be considered, at least so some level, pop cosmopolitan. I quite frequently eat food of other cultures, occasionally watch foreign movies, speak a mostly broken mangled form of Spanish, traveled out of the country, and have fond childhood memories of playing Pokemon and Yu-Gi-Oh with friends. I don't feel like any of these things are unusual in the slightest, and is fairly typical American male behavior. American culture itself is built on the cultures of those who first arrived here before us, so I feel it should, in fact, be assumed that the average American is, at least to some level, a pop cosmopolitan, and that this kind of person is in fact not a rarity or far from the norm, which I got from the Jenkins article.

We Are Only at the Beginning...

Whether we like it or not, America is a capitalist society, so naturally when we speak of any American industry (especially the film industry), we can assume that they will want to make as much money as they possibly can, as fast as they can. They want to appeal to as many people as they possibly can, while still appealing to mainstream idealistic standards (which are the real demons here), regardless of the repercussions to any individual or group. Unfortunately, that is capitalism. (Sigh...)

Beltran would probably not agree entirely with my opinion that the American film industry is reflective of it's society, and would likely rather address the problem within the industry itself rather than with those who consume the media in their respective audiences, but as stated earlier, the film industry wants to make money, and as such they must give people what they want. Therefore is it not primarily the fault of the audiences?

As proof I believe that we as a country are only now starting to become socially conscious and accepting of a more cosmopolitan representation in media, which is why this question is being raised, and why there is a continued effort within the film industry to increase ethnic representation, and no longer make it ambiguous.

Beltran does quite a bit to critique the system and demonize an industry, but offers little suggestion as to how to fix the root of the problem. Still, at least the topic is discussed and can lead to a further understanding of the matter as we are still only approaching the next stage of our societal consciousness... and as that continues to expand, so too will our representations in film and other media.

Racial Ambiguity

Stars are often known to be who they are because of the roles they play. This is due to the fact that stars do not have their own identity. Stars are forced to live how people would view them to live. This subject reminds me of the game "The Sims"  because in the game you can create a life of how you want the person to live and react in everyday life. For example: Colin Kaepernick is a racially ambiguous icon because even though he was adopted and raised by a white family, the NFL still views him as a black man. Kaepernick is known to bring more black quarterbacks and create a golden age for them. Kaepernick to some has been viewed as a Latino man but after finding out his father is African-American the view if him changed. People started to treat him differently and Kaepernick was trying to hold on to his identity of being his own individual. People don't view him as a black man but a mixed man. This shows that him being a famous quarterback, people will view him however they want. Kaepernick may fight the fact to stand up for his own identity but he still has to appeal as something great to the world.

Jackie Chan as Pop Cosmopolitanism

In Jenkins article on Pop Cosmopolitanism, he talks about how American pop culture draws off of and incorporates cultures worldwide but more specifically, Asia. One culture that Jenkins mentioned briefly was Hong Kong action movies, and I want to elaborate this a little more using the example of Jackie Chan movies. Jackie Chan was a Hong Kong actor and most of his movies were aimed towards being action films. Even though the culture of these movies fed from Chinese culture, they were also very "American". One of the most notorious aspects of Jackie Chan movies was his kung-fu which is an important part of Chinese culture. A good example of American and Japanese cultures clashing is in Jackie Chan's movie "Rush Hour". In this movie, Inspector Lee (Jackie Chan) comes to LA from China to find a Chinese girl who has been kidnapped and ends up becoming partners with James Carter, played by Chris Tucker.  This movie demonstrates how the two cultures kind of clash in some ways. The character of James Carter at first has a hard time understanding what Chan is saying because of his Chinese accent, also Chan's character is portrayed as being more serious and as being smarter than the American guy. I think that this movie "Rush Hour" portrays ways in which American culture uses Asian culture in media.