Virtual Reality Scene

Virtual reality scene script for Ready Player One film

[Scene: Parzival Explores the Tomb of Horrors in search of the Bronze Key]
The scene is dimly lit, with a fiery red tint. The floors are made with stone and the walls are covered with grim paintings and other similar surroundings which are described in the actual DnD play module. The sounds around the rooms are still, with a slight echo that instills an eerie feeling. Each of Parzival's steps echo off the stone floors and walls. The dungeon map and guide book are kept in the bottom right corner of the display, and can be interactively be pulled up to be viewed over the film footage, while pausing the movie.

The action in the scene follows the book's description with Parzival exploring every trap and room carefully. The viewer's range of vision follows what the characters range of vision would be, somewhere around 180 degrees. Even if the character was not looking specifically in that direction, if it is 180 from where there body is facing, it can be within view for the player. If the character were to turn, the field of vision changes slightly with the character's movement without jarring the viewer too much.

As traps are activated, they make hissing or crashing noises depending on the kind of trap involved. Pings and alerts spawn in the center of the viewer's field of vision over the film when items or powerups spawn for Parzival. as he collects money and items, they appear in a separate intractable inventory and wallet that can be pulled up like the map.

[The scene ends as Parzival comes upon the Lich Kings throne room]

What could it mean? Oh bother...

The Writer's Hand in Sight

After having watched the play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, I can say that I find myself along with most others who have seen it, which is to say I am very confused. How do you define the meaning of a play which has so many different meanings running through it? The play is like a ragged old carpet; it has so many loose threads to pull on that will all unravel differently.

But what does the play mean? This question is a hard one to answer, but I have my own idea of the meaning behind it that I have been thinking about for a while. I believe that this play is about minorities and how they are viewed and affected by the majority party. I know it’s kind of a stretch, but hear me out.

The two main characters in this play are a minority in themselves. Within the play Hamlet, they are minor characters with minor action and focus. The purpose of the play we watched in class was to show how not only did the major characters not consider what affected the two or pay much mind when there were consequences, but also that the pair could not escape what had been written for them if they tried. No matter what they do, they can’t escape everything that is happening around them. Even more, they hardly seem to exist outside of the action.

This is ultimately the message that the leader of the performers impresses on the two men. He walks above the casualties and confusion undisturbed. He knows that whatever will happen will happen regardless of his action.

Week 6

        For this week's assignment I spent some time reading through Hitting Budapest by NoViolet Bulawayo. In hitting Budapest I found the environment quite interesting. Some things weren't explained fully, but in all it gave a good sense of the surroundings. Paradise is a run down lower class area, while Budapest is a quiet well endowed city. Budapest is laden with nice houses and streets, and trees hanging with ripe fruit. It is a dreamy contrast to the town of paradise that the children come from, as if it is in a postcard.

      The children themselves essentially represent this environment. They are poor and hungry, and most of all they want change. Some children dream of it, having faith in one thing or another that they believe will change their stars in the long run. Yet there are also characters like Bastard who is tired of the place, but is resigned to the fate of most of the people who live there. It seems to me like the author wants you to think both parties are wrong.

     I believe that Bastard wants to be wrong. With a name like his, one can only wonder what his life has been so far. He has a very pessimistic outlook, but its clear that he only feels that way so he can protect himself and feel as though he is stronger than the others. He wants life to prove him wrong. Darling and Sbho however, are vivid dreamers. They hold onto anything they can that helps them believe things will change.

Through these different expressions in beliefs the author shows what paradise is really like through the characters. It can be downtrodden and seem hopeless, but there is always something there to encourage its people.

Reading from positions

   

       For my writing this week, I would like to discuss the two part short story "Planet of the Amazon Women" and apply a feminist criticism to the story. The main topic I would like to discuss is how male and female roles are defined in this short story. The answer to that is, most plainly, there aren't any.

If you were to discuss most literature and narrative works, you would probably assume off the bat a sort of standard set of roles for men and women. There are "feminine roles" that are primarily occupied by women and occasionally men like mothers, sisters, teachers. Similarly for men there are roles like fathers and leaders, and those too can be occupied by the opposite gender. One could assume then that in a world where men don't exist, male type roles would be carried over in females. This short story has so many successes because that is not the case.

In this world without men, there are no more "roles" for genders; In fact, with only one sex surviving on the planet, one could say gender disappears altogether. These roles are unnecessary because they are trivial. The women on Hippolyta express themselves through their religion, culture, or however they please. They don't have any need to represent masculinity, or even femininity. I think that at a standard level, this is how people are. No one really fits into these roles without being taught them, and the women on the planet certainly survive well enough without having to be more or less like any gender.

     
  For my discussion this week, I will talk on comparisons between Wes Anderson's "The Grand Budapest Hotel" and Stefan Zweig's "24 Hours in the Life of a Woman". Prior to this weeks readings, I had no experience at all with either of these two creators. Zweig's writing was older and very differently phrased from the passages I had been used to reading. In a similar way, I found Wes Anderson's films strikingly different from films that I regularly enjoy. In these cases different did not mean bad. I am not here today to discuss differences, however. In actuality, the two works that I experienced carried many similarities between them, though most of these were probably intentional. In his script writing, Wes Anderson speaks about how he drew a lot of inspiration from Zweig's work, so these comparisons are not completely unfounded.

The first similarity that stuck out to me between the two works was the fact that the narrator of these stories was for the most part unexpected. The old woman in 24 Hours, and Zero in Grand Budapest were not the conventional main characters and weren't particularly involved in the set up of the story. This kind of set up is very different from general storytelling and caught me off guard as a viewer. Another similarity that I felt drawn to was the fact that most of both stories, and most of the action involved, was told entirely through flashback. This is not completely unheard of in terms of storytelling, but it is certainly the most obvious comparison between the two.

Finally, the most compelling similarity between these two stories, for me, was the melancholy mood of it all. The narrators were very unexpected unusual characters with extremely compelling back stories to tell. They told their exciting tales which didn't resolve in the "perfect ending," but rather a realistic one that somehow still managed to be happy despite everything. This tone of the stories is what I found most inspiring.

I can see why Wes Anderson drew so much inspiration from Stefan Zweig. I now finding myself intrigued to write a similar story with inspiration from both of these creators.

The "True" Grit in True Grit

           
         I would like to focus my discussion of my thoughts on this book on the meaning of the title throughout the work.  The term "True Grit" is a description used often by characters within the book, especially by the narrator, the young Mattie Ross. In her search for someone with this rough and tough quality, Mattie uses the term most often to describe the Marshal Rooster Cogburn whom she hired to help avenge her father. In my own reading of the book, however, it seemed to me that each character seemed to show their own form of "True grit"- suggesting that despite the name, there may not be a true form.
        As is characteristic of westerns, most characters had there own strong form of determination and will. From the wild outlaws with their rebellion and determination to stand against the law despite their shortcomings in the robberies, To the stand-offish tale-telling LaBoeuf, who just wanted the reward for Tom Chaney's death. Even though Mattie may not recognize it herself at first, she herself has true grit. Despite her age and stature in society, Mattie refuses to stand down until she receives the justice she wants and on her terms. Her stubbornness and persistence against the difficult odds shown to her, even as she continues through life after their adventure, in the end, show her own true grit.
      I believe that as Mattie journeys through the book, she comes to see the true grit in many of the other characters, and eventually within herself. She learns of her own strength. Although she loses a lot and doesn't physically gain much she grows tremendously in this definition by the end of the book.

Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice

Oh, Pride and Prejudice. The classic tale of two not so ordinary people misunderstanding each other's feelings, making snap judgements, and eventually overcoming themselves as they fall in love. This is the book, many say, that started it all. Romance in storytelling has never been the same since readers everywhere discovered the brooding Mr. Darcy and Snippy Ms. Elizabeth Bennet. The couple's popularity lead to over two hundred years of reader’s intrigue, and it is no surprise that the book survives to this day. Such a relatable and modern story (despite its age) is not one readers give up easily.

I have personally danced around this story in it’s many forms all throughout my life. Everyone has seen some story or other whose love interests quarrel until they realize how much they truly love each other. It’s arguable that most of the stories take a huge part of their inspiration from this classic novel. My first time ever experiencing a rendition of the book, was in a modernized version which took place in the form of fictional video diaries made by the main character, Lizzie Bennet, and the other characters that interacted with her. It was fairly faithful to the book, with a few alterations here and there to allow for the more modern feel. I thoroughly enjoyed the series.

Naturally when I was assigned to read the original book in my literature class I was excited to see what the book would hold for me. I was very pleased to find that my enjoyment of the characters and the narrative had not changed at all. It was an enjoyable read that I will probably come back to read again in a year or two. I’m sure I will also continue to be delighted by this timeless tale in it’s many new and different tellings as the years go by.

Image taken from The Lizzie Bennet Diaries series on youtube, Episode sixty.