Arthurian Myth VS BBC Merlin Semiotic Analysis

Morgan le Fay was treated in an unfair, sexist way in Arthurian mythology, and this has also bled over into the more modern series, BBC Merlin (as much as I love that show).  Of course, the reasons behind the sexist/unfair treatment of this character stem from very different between the versions of her character, because there are like, 1000 years between the two Arthurian tales. In the first version, Morgan le Fay’s actions are very clearly influence by the culture Arthurian times. Women’s role in society is to have kids by as early as 15 and dedicate their entire life to tending however many kids they have. Morgan’s original depiction was a superpowered protector of Arthur (similar to Merlin) and sister figure to him. It makes sense that this character wouldn’t have gone over super well in a society like that one. Also, Christianity was rising. Morgan was a relic of paganism, and increasingly with Christian culture, which condemned witchcraft as “of the devil”, was an “inappropriate” power figure due to being female. Just look at Merlin—he was a magic-user too, and while he was occasionally referred to as having some relation to the devil, was still generally depicted as a good guy who used magic to help Arthur. This culture is what generated Morgan’s shift from benevolent healer to conspiring hag who hits on men (also seen as an inappropriate thing for a woman to do. Skipping over to 2008, BBC puts Merlin on for the first time. Things are at least better than they were for women, with them being able to get jobs and not having to spend all their time on babies and whatnot. Feminism had become a widespread movement. BBC tried to address this shift by initially depicting Morgana Pendragon as kindhearted and classy yet powerful, and generally depicted this as being a fairly accepted thing in their fantasy Camelot. However, they try to stick extremely loosely to the original mythology in Merlin, so they still develop her into a bad guy. They began developing her in a sympathetic tragic-backstory sort of way, which was still good character development, and an interesting way of working with her character. My issue is that they cast her aside as soon as this phase of her character is over. They strip her of every trait that made her such a cool character. The tragic backstory arc she followed made her aspirations to take what she believed to be her rightful place on the throne. It didn’t make sense for Morgana to suddenly lose all empathy when her motives, even as a villain, were based around her empathy for others and the choice to love and embrace herself and the fact that she was born with magic, even when she had been raised in a fantasy culture that would have seen her dead for it. It felt like the writers had just used seasons of development as an excuse to make her the ultimate evil, whether or not it made sense. Dr. Vrooman has discussed the internalized views that are brainwashed into us from an early age. Among racism, homophobia, and transphobia, one of these views is sexism. Perhaps these under-the-radar views could have led the (6/8 male) writers to not question the choice to go this direction with Morgana’s character. (Although that possibility may not actually be well-founded enough to explore in my presentation.)

Hercules 1997 vs 2014

Adaptation: Between the 1997 cartoon and the 2014 live-action, Hercules is still the great hero we all know him to be but face two different challenges in their film. The biggest difference between the two is the plot wherein the carton he is on a journey to find his place in the world and in the live-action he is trying to move on from the past and continue to be the hero. Also, instead of having the wisdom of Philoctetes and the support of his flying Pegasus he is followed by a team of mercenaries who are talented in some form of combat. What viewers may have also noticed is that in this film Hercules is more violent and there is a lot more killing action.

Ideology: The 1997’s the plot, is about Hercules’s journey trying to find his place in the world while he faces challenges with the mortals of earth and the betrayal of his Uncle Hades who attempts to kill him many times. What makes this film great for the family is that it gives children a great image of the life of Hercules. The film is filled with creatures like Pegasus’s and centaur, giant Titans, and the wonders of Olympus. In 2014, there is a twist to the child-friendly story. Hercules is said to be the demigod of Zeus, yet it is not clear whether that is true or not. Hercules completes the twelve wonders which turn out not to be the great wonders everyone expected to be. Instead of facing God hates, Hercules must face his past where he was betrayed and tricked to thinking he killed his wife and family and into helping a king who turned out to be a murderer driving for power. This film is a lot darker than 1997 one and has a lot more violence.

Genre: 1997 is an American musical fantasy comedy film, 2014 is an action, adventure, epic, fantasy

Semiotics: 1997 Hercules doesn’t know where he belongs and doesn’t know how to control his powers

                      2014 Hercules has succeeded in completing the 12 deeds and had everything he could ever want in life until he was tricked and lost it all. Now he is faced with moving on from the past.

It (1990) vs It (2017)

The original movie of It was filmed and released in 1990. This was all based off of Stephen King's novel. But as time went on another film was released in 2017, a remake of the original film. Aside from the films being made 27 years apart, they both share the same general plot. A killer clown that comes back to the town of Derry every 27 years comes back to haunt and terrorize a group of kids known as the "Losers club". But although the general ideas are the same, there are many differences between the film. A couple examples could be Pennywise (the clown) and how his look and personality is different, the fate of characters change, and also changes in society in both movies.

Syntagmatic relationship: I'm still trying to find this in the movie, but right now I believe there is a syntagmatic relationship between Pennywise and the Losers club. Because the losers club is so low in popularity and are at the lows of society, pennywise sees them as easy targets, and keeps coming for the members of the club.

Adaptation: From the book written by Stephen King.  The novel and the movies differ to an extent with added characters and also some characters fate are different in the movie compared to the book.

IT Movie Differences

1: Pennywise look

1990: traditional clown look, nothing out of ordinary.

2017: clown with red lines connect mouth and head, more of outcast demon look, still clownlike but not traditional.

2: Pennywise personality

1990: Charming for his evil deeds, looks like society outcast.

2017: looks out of place and speaks danger. Obvious evil bad guy,

Filming differences:

1990: more pennywise scenes, a lot of angles and far away clips of killer to where audience can see full body and get full clown/circus thought.

2017: less pennywise scenes, but when he is shown he installs fear while he can. A lot of the scenes involve a closeup of pennywise for the audience to think about the killer more.

 

Thanos: 1977 Comics vs. 2018 Movie

   Thanos’s original motivations started in Avengers Annual #7 (1977). Thanos was obsessed with death, so much so that he falls in love with the physical embodiment of death, Mistress Death (who is a skeleton that somehow has boobs and wears a tight-fitting silk robe. You can’t blame the man, really). The actions he takes in the comics are all motivated by his desire to impress Mistress Death.

The writer and artist who originally came up with the idea of Thanos was Jim Starlin. Jim Starlin served as an aviation photographer with the U.S. Navy during the Vietnam War. When he wasn’t on active duty, he would draw comics and send them in to Marvel and DC Comics. Between serving and writing comics, Jim also was taking a course in Psychology. It was in this class that he says he conceptualized Thanos.

   So Thanos was conceptualized during a time where a counter-culture developed that rejected consumerism, materialism, and capitalism in favor of a more spiritual and grounded existence. War was bad, because war caused death. Meanwhile, Jim Starlin is immersed in an environment of violence and death and is simultaneously studying the workings of the human mind. Nihilism and mortality were likely to be on his mind, and what better villain for a time like this than one that glorifies death ultimately and above all else? As people shout, “Make Love, Not War,” Thanos takes his love and uses it to justify a mass genocide of all life.

   Move forward to 2018, where Marvel’s Avengers: Infinity War is released. It features a familiar Thanos, but here his motives are somewhat different. Director of the film Anthony Russo stated that they struggled with incorporating Thanos’s original character into the more modern Marvel Cinematic Universe. They didn’t want to try to introduce the metaphysical being that is Mistress Death into the context of the MCU, as it would have pulled attention and precious screentime from telling Thanos’s story. As a solution, they opted to interpret Thanos’s obsession with death as an obsession with balance of life and death. Thanos speaks of there being a finite amount of energy and resources in the universe, and that there is an imbalance in the consumption of said energy and resources.

   This concept can be attributed to the increase in popularity of environmentalism within the younger population of America in the 21^st century. This itself can be attributed to the relatively recent inclusion of environmental studies in classroom curriculums. Whether they intended to or  not, they made Thanos into something of an anti-villain to younger audiences. A perfect example of this is the subreddit “/r/ThanosDidNothingWrong,” where Reddit users post forum topics and memes regarding the noble motives and truth behind Thanos’s mantra.

It (1990) vs It (2019) Semiotics

*Clown Warning and Spoilers for It: Chapter 2 ahead*

In the original film adaptation of Stephen King's It that came out in 1990, the characters aren't explored as deeply as they are in the two-part remake of 2017 and 2019. Richie Tozier is one of the main characters of the film, being a part of the "losers club". It is shown in both films that Richie is bullied by his peers and often called slurs towards gay people. The relationship Richie Tozier has with his sexuality in the 1990 version of the film is subtle and not ever explicit within the text but in the 2019 adaptation of the film, it is explored a lot more. Pennywise feeds on the fear of the "losers club", and Richie's biggest fear is for others to know his true self. When Pennywise chases Richie and tells him "I know your secret, your dirty little secret" it becomes more clear what exactly Richie's secret is. 

The syntagmatic relationship between Richie and his best friend Eddie also plays into how Richie's discomfort with his sexuality affects the way he builds relationships. The fear of having someone know his true self causes Richie to keep people at arm's length and use comedy as a way to cope with his internal conflict. The articulation of this is shown when Eddie dies, and Richie has this moment of intense emotion as he comes to realize the fact that the only person he has ever loved just died.

Semiotics: Karate Kid 1984 vs 2010

The Karate Kid Semiotics 

Reboots also allow directors and producers to cast a new set of younger actors for the familiar roles of a film series to attract a younger audience. Unlike a remake, however, a reboot often presupposes a working familiarity on the part of the audience with the original work.  The director of “Karate Kid” (2010)  Harald Zwart, made a reboot of the classic “Karate Kid” (1984)directed by John G. Avildsen. Their were many changes in the most recent film. I will be comparing 2 scenes from the original ( 1984) and the reboot (2010).
   
The first scene i will be comparing is actually at the very beginning of the movie. You can spot something different right off the bat, the main characters race. In (2010) version the main character Dre is a 12 year old african american from Detroit whereas in the (1984) version the main character is a young itailian teenager from New Jersey. In the 2010 version you can see the african american culture is different then the 1984 version. For example, Dre is wearing his cornrows, which is normally worn by african americans. Also his mother is wearing her natural hair whereas, in the original version, it is the classic hollywood “white “ main character.

The next scene i will be comparing will be whenever the main characters finishing move in their last fight, “the crane kick”. In the original version, Daniel performs a one legged kick to win the tournament. whereas , in the reboot, Dre still does the crane kick but with much more style. He does a one legged backflip kick to knock down his opponent and win the tournament.

semiotic Analysis of 17 Again vs. Seventeen Again

        There is obviously a huge difference in the two if you just look at the cast. Ones a predominantly black cast and the other is white. But the even bigger difference would have to be the plot in “Seventeen Again” made in 1999 instead of the kid’s parents being set back to being seventeen, it is their grandparents. Because of this soap made by the younger brother that turns you younger and now the grandchildren are stuck trying to find a way to reverse them bac. Its not as simple because the grandparents do not want to be reversed, they like being young. Also, since the time is different you can tell by the slang that is used throughout the movie it is 1999. But the slang is definitely culture based in my eyes. From the actors to the way they talk you just get a whole different feel.

      Now, with “17 again” the one with the beloved Zac Efron. It was definitely for the kids because it was at a time were, he was at the height of his career. And the plots are so different on each. Zac has to find a way to reverse the future to get his family back as he is going through a divorce. And he does so by getting knocked off a bridge into a river only to wake up and find out he has gone back in time. He is given a second chance to make his family right, but he has to figure a way to get his ex-wife back and he is a seventeen-year-old kid.

     To bring them both together in both movies there is a divorce going on. In “Seventeen Again” the kids are sent to go live with their grandparents because their parents are getting divorced. And in “17 again” the parents are getting a divorce as well, but it is told from the dad’s point of view instead of the kids point view like “Seventeen Again”. But both films do introduce us to traveling back in time as well too just in different forms.

Semiotics Superman (1978) vs Man of Steel (2013)

Superman (1978)

 Man Of Steel (2013)
Syntagmatic-There are certain differences in Superman (1978) and Man of Steel (2013) the origin stories for the most part stay the same with certain tweaks happening within the story. Although after the origin story,  the movie deviates and takes a different path with many noticeable differences.The Hero retains the same powers for the most part although time travel is not one of the 2013 Superman's known abilities. The main idea of Superman to give people hope still remains the same although, how Superman is represented has changed to a degree

Ideology:Superman in the 1978 film  version, is shown to be a symbol of justice and peace trying his very hardest to establish his place in the world as a peacemaker for the U.S. In the 1978 version Superman is first shown as a symbol of hope. This changes in Man of Steel (2013) when Superman becomes a figure comparable to God. Superman is still shown to be a symbol of hope but certain aspects of the story still have similar parallels with Jesus Christ. 

Social History/Genre: Superman (1978) came out in a time where comedy and horror movies dominated the movie theaters with movies like Jaws, Halloween,and even Grease coming out the same year. Superman was one of the only action movies a the time and Superman the movie pretty much  birthed the superhero movies. it was the first one to have a large budget and attractive stars making people more interested in the movie. It had breakthrough special effects and the movie costed around $55 million dollars. The Film was released in 1978 which was toward the end of the cold war but still within the time period. Superman was released in a time that gave Americans a symbol of hope and patriotism in a time where the threat of nuclear war was still looming. In 2008 Marvel had effectively began setting up their Marvel Cinematic universe With Iron man and going on to release Thor and Captain America in 2011. The Avengers came out in 2012 and was a giant success within the box office breaking records within the first week. Dc had to capitalize on the Superhero success that was breaking out so they began setting up their DC universe. DC started out with one of their most attractive well known Superheroes Superman at a time where Action/Superhero movies were rising rapidly in popularity. 

Adaptation-Superman in the 1978 version was birthed on Krypton just like the 2013 version but there is one key difference. In the 1978 version the Red Sun was going to explode threatening the planet but in the 2013 version Krypton was going to explode due to the Kryptonian's exploiting Krypton's core which could reflect Earth's reality and the excessive use of natural resources. In the 1978 version Jor-El parts with Kal-El or Superman by saying "You will make my strength your own, and see my life through your eyes, as your life will be seen through mine. The son becomes the father, and the father the son. This is all I... all I can send you, Kal-El" In the 2013 version He says "

"You will give the people an ideal to strive towards. They will race behind you, they will stumble, they will fall. But in time, they will join you in the sun. In time you will help them accomplish wonders" and he also says "He will be a God to them" this simple statment shows how Kal-El or Superman went from a symbol of hope to being symbolized as a God. Kal El is also infused with a codex in the 2013 version which is basically the Genetic Code for all the Kryptonians. Kal-El is truly the last hope of Krypton which can be compared to Jesus being the last hope for the humans 

Semiotics (Fat Albert and The Cosby Kids/ Fat Albert)

Semiotics (Fat Albert and The Cosby Kids/Fat Albert)

The original 1980’s comedy cartoon Fat Albert and The Cosby Kidshas a very strong importance to cultural history. The 2004 remake Fat Albertdoes its part to keep us with the social culture of its time. The roles and the characters stay the same with the edition of a female lead in the 2004 remake. Also, the same issue about weight and obesity are still being stressed. Its different to see how during two different generations and genres. 

.

Syntagmatic: The idea of Fat Albert being a hero in the black community hasn’t changed. In both he remains the one who can put everything back together and save the day. The new version has made it where the majority of the characters are slower functioning. This is because they are TV characters who have never been in the real world before. So they all are experiencing thing for the first time, where the other characters have to do more of the teaching. Another important anchorage point was that the original Fat Albert and the Cosby Kids was made to be educational to kids in lower income families. They did this with episodes’ discouraging kids to not use dope and other drugs. To practice not using violence to prove your point. Awhile getting lessons out throughs songs and slight jokes.

Another anchorage point is that the remake has a female lead along with fat albert. This was very much needed. The 80’s already had few comedy educational cartoons With A girl as the lead. The remake made sure to add one who could push through boundaries. By add this female character the audience grew from little boys watch on the couch on Saturday mornings to a much different setting. Now boys and girls have a character who they can relate to.

Semiotics for Mamma Mia!

Semiotics Mamma Mia!

Mamma Mia!: The Musical

Syntagmatic Relationships:

• Sophie’s Dads- In the musical Donna knows who Sophie’s father is the whole time. She chooses to keep his identity a secret from everyone until they are getting married. Sophie then finds out that Sam is her father. Donna’s reasoning is that she wanted Sam to want to marry her regardless of if he was the father. 
• There are more songs in the musical that show Donna’s struggle with her past actions and her desire to be accepted because of these choices, these songs include; Mamma Mia, Dancing Queen, One of Us, and The Winner Takes It All. 

Articulation:

• Outfits- Donna and the Dynamo’s wear the same over the top 80s clothing but it is mostly white. It isn’t until the end when the Dynamo’s all are happy and content with their lives again that they wear more colors. 

https://officiallondontheatre.com/news/mamma-mia-in-london/

Mamma Mia! The Movie

Syntagmatic Relationships:

• Sophie’s Dads- Donna has no idea who Sophie’s father is and that’s why it is never revealed. 
• Donna has a monologue where she struggles with her past decisions and musical numbers as well: Mamma Mia, Dancing Queen, and The Winner Takes It All.

Articulation:

• Outfits- Donna and the Dynamo’s clothes are very 80s. They wear multiple colors with lots of fringe and layers. They are stuck in the old fads of their glory days of their girl power band. 

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lists/mamma-mia-cast-now-meryl-streep-cher-amanda-seyfried-more-1125773

Conclusion-

Overall, Donna kept power in her relationships in the musical by keeping information to herself. This comes at a time in America where it is still inappropriate to have children out of wedlock and it is amplified by her not knowing who the father is. Feminist movement is around at this time but women are still not treated equally. Mamma Mia! Is a mostly female cast who struggle with female related issues. This is one of very few musicals where the two main focuses are two women. When is is remade into a movie during a bigger revolution for women. The feminist revolution continued to progress which made the remake movie a huge hit. People loved seeing strong females on the screen sing ABBA’s greatest hits.

The Lion King 1994 vs 2019

Maximilian Schaar

Dr. Vrooman

Media and Pop Culture

The Lion King

            The evolution of movie making since the 1990’s has evolved considerably; clear evidence of this change is marked by movies such as Disney’s remake of “The Lion King” by John Favreau. The kind of impact a “mega-hit” movie brings to the theater is massive and not only brings in a new audience but also brings back the first generation of kids who grew up with the 1994 original film. Disney’s new movie keeps many of the already existing plot but adds subtle changes that enhance the film, especially when using comical actors such as Seth Rogan which stars as the voice of Pumbaa.

            While the film has largely remained the same, the most notable characteristic that makes the new film stand out is the use of photorealistic CGI technology which helps immerse the audience into the film. The use of what Disney likes to call “life-like” film is completely revolutionizing the film industry as we speak. There is no need for cameras and performance capturing devices because the film is largely produced with technology in a 1:1 interaction between producers and computers. With this being said it is no surprise that the movie is smashing the box-office.

            When analyzing the difference between the original and remake the first point of comparison is noted by Rafiki’s painting of Simba. In the original film Rafiki is seen painting a picture of the young cub while sitting on a tree. In the remake film, a group of glowing insects take part in the drawing of Simba which creates a sense that Simba’s role in the movie is part of a higher prophecy. Additionally, the occurrence of Rafiki is mystified by depicting the character as more reserved and spiritual. This is contrasted by the original film because the character is seen as more verbal and not as reserved. Later on, as time passes, we see that Simba is no longer a young cub but a full-grown lion. Simba’s absence from the Kingdom is shifted as a small piece of Simba’s hair sets drift into the wind. The piece of hair embarks on an interesting journey, from being digested by a giraffe and being rolled up by a dung beetle the hair miraculously makes its way to Rafiki. This amazes Rafiki because it signifies that Simba is alive. In the original film the fur floats in the wind and gets picked up by Rafiki. However, the adventure of such a minute detail is not as exaggerated as seen as depicted in the remake.            

Semiotics Original Aladdin vs. 2019 Aladdin

Aladdin 1992 vs. Aladdin 2019 Semiotics 

Aladdin 1992

 Aladdin 2019

While most see the original 1992 version of Aladdin and the 2019 version of Aladdin to be pretty much the same, there are definitely some changes that play a big part in the development of different messages that the new movie provides the audience with. One of the biggest differences between these movies is that Jasmine definitely has more of a plot in the newer movie. In the original movie, she is barely seen as more than a sex object in many parts of the film, but, in the 2019 version, she is much more vocal and is even able to become Sultan herself (even if that isn't extremely historically accurate). While her goal in the original film was to have the marriage law changed so that she could marry Aladdin, her goal in the new film was much different, with her wanting the marriage law changed so that she could become Sultan. The law is changed so that she can become Sultan, and then she rewrites the marriage law herself so that she can marry Aladdin. She even has her own song in the remake, compared to only having a duet in the original. 

Adaptation: Both films have pretty much the same plot. The only major differences in the outcome of the movie is that, in the new film, Jasmine becomes Sultan and Genie gives up his powers and becomes completely human for love. The newer film is definitely more comical with the first, which is expected with Will Smith playing the role of Genie.

Ideology: Both versions deal with Western ideology and dream, a sort of rags to riches story. It also holds the important message that it is important to be yourself and stay true to who you are because who you are is what makes you special and unique from everyone else. 

Genre: These movies belong to many genres. They fit into the genres of music, comedy, romance, fantasy, and adventure. There is definitely more comedy in the 2019 version compared to the 1992 version, and, due to the continual development of technology, it seems to be more adventurous. When Aladdin is in the cave, you can almost feel like you are there, as well. 

Social History: There is a great deal of controversy going on as to where Aladdin is based from. Some say China, while others say the Middle East. The original story of Aladdin is actually just one story in a collection of over a thousand that comes from 1000 Nights, which is said to have originated in Persia in the eighteenth century. 

Semiotics: The pragmatic relationship would probably have to be how in the first film Aladdin becomes Sultan, but in the second film Jasmine becomes Sultan. While it is a major change, we may not see it as such at first because we are just happy that the characters have a happy ending. The syntagmatic relationship would have to be Aladdin's relationship with the other characters. Especially in the 2019 movie we see that he has a closer bond with Genie, which saves him in several different situations. 

Semiotics (Twelfth Night vs. She's The Man)

Twelfth Night by William Hamilton (1797)

She's The Man (2006)

Plays and films are very different, many aspects go into making sure actors can perform an entire play in one take. Movies can retake scenes until perfection. The adaptations are good segways into modern text. In William Shakespeare's "Twelfth Night", he writes a story of a brother and sister who are in a shipwreck and the sister obtains a new identity to fit in with the men. In "She's The Man", directed by Andy Fickman, the same plot carries over except Amanda Bynes' character just really wants to play soccer and just so happens to find love. The play was written in the 16th-century and the film was released in 2006. There were different social issues and history happening at these time but with similar themes. The goals of these two texts were similar, but the 2006 adaptation was not take as seriously as the 16th century text. The argument I am going to pursue is the adaptation of gender ideology between the texts. In the photos attached we see the female lead characters battling against their stereotypical societal oppressions.

Paradigmatic- In Comparison, "She's The Man" substitutes some pieces of the text to adapt it to modern times. For instance, the film replaces the idea of marriage with the idea of a fun teenage romance rather than a hope filled forever. Twelfth Night places us in the early 16th century, where people found love through courting one another formally and settling through religion. Whereas "She's The Man" indicates that love is calling each other after school to hang out at the local diner and burn CDs for each other. In the Twelfth Night, Viola creates Cesario so s/he can gain respect and be prepared for an eligible bachelor since she lost her brother and there was no left to care for her. S/he is struggling with gender ideology after the shipwreck, Viola is looking for a place in society but the only places in society were saved for the men. We still see this issue recently as we transition into the mid 2000s, when women are struggling with the pay wage gap.

Syntagmatic- There are universal signs as to what masculinity and femininity are. As of 2019, we have adapted gender-neutral signs and associations. The social history between the two text adaptations is still construed with women's rights, once married they essentially become property. Ironically enough, women could not purchase property in their own names. In the mid 2000s, women's rights problems were centered towards the pay wage gap. The central problem is being in comparison with males constantly. In both of these texts, women were told they are not able to complete tasks as men in the same realm due to the physicality's of their sex. We see the same level of misogyny through two different texts and time.

Ben-Hur 1959 vs 2016 Semiotics

Ben-Hur (1959) was arguably one of the most impactful and well performing movies of the 20th century. It had the largest budget at the time, $15.175 million, won numerous awards including 11 Academy Awards, and broke many records during its production process. With the movie being a classic and it doing so well why would anyone what to step up and remake it? Well Timur Bekmambetov decided that exactly what he wanted to do but he claimed that the new movie would be a completely different take on the old story. And while some might disagree with his statement I’m here to see how true he was to his word. 

In this analysis I am going to be looking at two key differences between Ben-Hur (1959) and Ben-Hur (2016). The first key difference I’ll be looking at Messala’s death in 1959 and Messala’s survival in 2016. In the older movie Judah Ben-Hur and Messala are involved in a chariot race to the death near the end of the movie. Judah is out to seek revenge Messala because he betrayed him, his mother, and sister and he believes that Messala killed his family. Judah’s motives in the first movie are all centered around revenge and he ends up killing Messala during the race. Messala’s last words let Judah know that his family is alive to spite him and this begins his search for them. In the 2016 movie this goes differently. The chariots race concludes with Messala being extremely wounded and he loses a leg, but he survives. After his mother and sister are headed of their leprosy during the rainstorm after Christ’s death and eventually Messala forgives Judah and he accompanies Judah and his family as they leave Jerusalem in a caravan. The main theme of this movie in contrast to the older one is the theme of forgiveness versus revenge. 

The second key difference that I’ll be looking at is Ben-Hur and Esther’s relationship. In the 1959 movies Esther, the family slave’s daughter, and Judah fall in love but Esther has an arranged marriage already set for her by her father. Judah and Esther are forced apart when Judah is forced out of Rome and becomes a slave. Near the end of the movie they are able to reconnect and Judah finds out Esther’s marriage fell through and that she still loves him. In the 2016 movie Esther is the family slave and when Judah finds out that her father wants to marry her off Judah proclaims his love for her and takes her as his wife. This change affects Judah’s character as in the first movie he does not have a wife and so he doesn’t have this to keep him going. In the newer movie he has her to keep him going and I think this also contributes to his forgiveness because he knows love. 

Semiotics Child's Play 1988 vs Child's Play 2019

Child’s Play- Horror over time

There is a huge difference in the horror genre that was seen in the 1980s then what is seen today. In Child’s Play 1988 you see a lot of voodoo that is used, but in 2019 you see that technology could be the next big thing to fear.

Child’s Play 1988                                                                                                     Child’s Play 2019

          

 Adaptation: The difference between these two movies are how we view horror, and what we would see like a logical thing to be afraid of. The main ideas that both movies deal with is consumerism and the need for an attachment. Both movies also include new topics because each movie talks about the things that were the hot topic at the time.

Ideology: Child’s Play deals with the idea consumerism. In 1988, when Reagan came into to Office there was a bigger hit on the way people spent money. He wanted to remind Americans that there is an assortment of good and services out there for them to buy. Then Madonna came out with a song called “Material Girl’ where she sings “We are living in a material world, and I am a material girl,”. The 1980s was a time where shopping turned into Americans’ favorite leisure activity. Moving to 2019, consumerism is at an all time low. This means that millennials are trying to spend less money. For example, although we try to get the newest, we tend to hand on the phone for as long as possible. We only try to replace things we they are close to the point that they won’t work.

Genre: For Child’s Play 1988 and 2019 the genres are horror and comedy. The reason for this is because most scenes in the movies are mostly just jump scares. The 1988 version of the movie has less humor, but a few scenes goes along with how violence was displayed in 1988. In the 2019 version has less horror and more humor. In the 2019 version you get comments like “Hobbit motherfucker”, and “This is for Tupac”. In both movies they have the same genre.

Social History: The movie that Child’s Play is based off another movie that was made in 1975 called Trilogy of Horror.  Trilogy of Horror goes over 3 different all about women that are being tormented. The last one to play deals with a woman getting tormented in her own apartment by an African tribal doll. Chucky which is an American doll who torments a single mother and her son. *a man comes to the rescue*.  Charles Lee Ray was the name of the serial killer who put himself inside the Good Guy doll. His name is a combination of Charles Manson, Lee Harvey Oswald, and James Earl Ray. Charles Manson was convicted along with three other girls for killing roughly 35 people. Lee Harvey Oswald was accused of assassinating John F Kennedy. James Earl Ray was convicted of assassinating Martin Luther King Jr. Child’s Play 2019 was based off the original Child’s Play, but the doll was based off the Furby toys and Robosapiens. Robosapiens were robots that were created so they can be easily hacked. So, if someone really wanted to create a killer doll they could.

Semiotics: The Pragmatic relationship would be changing the characters around and some of lines from original to the remake. The articulation that connects both movies is the words “This is the end, friend” Although in each movie a different character says it you still get the same effect. With Andy saying “This is the end, friend” you know that he is done with the toy and wants all of this behind him. With Mike saying “This is the end” you know that Mike is done with the doll stuff and wants all of this behind him. Each character conveys a different feeling, but the words have the same feel to them. The Syntagmatic relationship would be the relationship that Chucky shares between each character. Since Chucky creates a relationship with Andy by opening up to him and keeping him safe until Chucky needs him for something. Chucky takes him to an unsafe place but instead of using Andy as bait he waits until Andy is distracted and then runs into the house. The mom doesn’t matter as much because right when the mom tries to interfere with Chucky’s plan, and he goes berserk. If the mom would have left Chucky alone, and just took Andy’s words as a form of his own imagination she might have been left alone. Andy would have lost his soul, and his body would have been inhabited by Charles Lee Ray soul. This would have changed the course of the first movie by providing Chucky with the ability to go on with his life. The new movie would have change if Andy would have not made any friends. From the point Chucky had to share him was the point that Chucky started to kill. If Andy was a girl brings in the idea would Chucky have learned all killer type things he learned when he was under the care of Andy. Chucky shares a relationship with everybody in the movie through Andy. If Andy didn’t associate himself with them Chucky would have been perfectly fine. But Andy made friends and started acting which brought out the mom giving him a little more attention and the detective’s attention.