Kevin+Tarzjan

Journal Entry #5: Open Entry Chuck Norris: The __Man__ and the __Myth __ **Chuck Norris is an 80s action icon, he starred in films such as The Delta Force (1986), Lone Wolf McQuade (1983), and Delta Force 2: The Columbian Connection (1990) and has left a stamp in the minds of Generation X. But, his name has left a different impact on a new generation, mention the name Chuck Norris to an average high school student and their reaction should be a mix of recognition and laughter. Now, Chuck Norris is not remembered for his slew of action movies but for a running chain of jokes poking fun at his reputation, ironicly the jokes have become more prominent in pop culture than Chuck Norris himself, a case of his iconography becoming more recognized than the person behind it. **

** These jokes aptly named "Chuck Norris facts" first started online before they engraved themselves into popular culture. The basic idea of these "facts" are to poke fun/celebrate Norris' tough guy image by claiming impossible feats to him. My decision to write about this topic came from me finding a published book containing a collection of "Chuck Norris facts", it didn't occur to me how popular it really was until now, even though now in 2011 it's not as prominent as it was in the mid-2000's, its still interesting to see how the image of Chuck Norris was revived and how his reputation became separated from the man himself. **

** Chuck Norris himself hasn't benefited much from he re-emergence of his reputation, although it is partly his fault, he hasn't capitalized much on it and has focused more on writing books about Christianity and promoting Republican candidates than really planning the revival of his career. I kind of have respect for how he didn't just jump on the bandwagon and milk any money there was in the revival of his reputation. Anyway, its all in the past now, the name Chuck Norris has once again become an anonymous as it was in the late-90s. **

Journal Entry #4: Celebrity TIFF : The __MOVIES__ and the __STARS__

media type="youtube" key="d2o2pPodPjY" height="315" width="560" align="center"


 * The video above was posted as showing Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie at the premiere of Moneyball, one of many videos about celebrity sightings that came up when I searched "TIFF 2011" on Youtube; the point is that the video isn't about the premiere of Moneyball rather the arrival of Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, the poster couldn't care less about why they were here or who the other actors were. This video is essentially an encompassing of everything about TIFF for the city of Toronto; the movies are just an excuse to have celebrities here. That’s the main difference between TIFF and other more important and celebrated international film festivals. If you go downtown during the festival, you will have a better chance of seeing crowds of people with cameras waiting for a glimpse of someone remotely recognizable or famous than people waiting in-line for the attendance of a film. **


 * I am kind of guilty of some of the celebrity watching too, since I know I can't get tickets to any of the movies I want to see because they usually sell out, I end up just going downtown to see everything happen, so I'm equally as guilty of hanging around that area just for a chance to see a celebrity I know. Even if you look at the news coverage, they usually revolve around when the best time and place would be to see celebrities and how our city will change with their presence, so it's easy to be influenced to drive down there just to "star gaze". And my main issue isn't that there is so much coverage on the celebrities as much as I wish there was more attention put towards the films. Toronto was chosen for the same reason and many of the cities film festivals take place; because it celebrates the arts and it is assumed that their is a love of film by the residences. So lets take our part and appreciate the films because that's why there is a film festival here to begin with. **

Journal Entry #3: Pop Culture ** Ashton Kutcher: ** The __ Celebrity __ and the __ Cynic __  ** Ashton Kutcher is most prominently a TV and movie actor but he also has been recognised for his extensive use of [|Twitter] and other social networking websites, as well as his vast amount of devoted followers. By doing this, as well has his well publicized casting as the replacement for Charlie Sheen in Two and a Half Men, he has ingrained himself into pop culture at the moment. While this is great for his career, this has kind of stabbed him in the back recently, there have been rumors about his infidelity towards his wife Demi Moore by the very media that he is so involved in. I really find it interesting how people are used by the media, they are represented by whatever they need to be. Whether an addict on a downward spiral like Charlie Sheen or a hard-working single mother like Kate Gosselin, your name means whatever will sell more papers or gets more hits online. I think Kutcher now is beginning to feel the downside of being involved in popular culture. **


 * A few days ago, I read something about Kutcher taking a stand against the allegedly false allegations about him cheating on his wife. He has done this from using both tweets and a proper interview to show his disapproval of the rumours. What I love about this that he criticizing the very industry his is simultaneously promoting. The industry he thinks is riddled with lies and driven by money is the same industry he is supporting with every tweet. Although it's good that he is taking a stand, if the rumors are untrue then this is a good method of retaliation, but you have to wonder if this rumor would have even existed if he didn't use he tools that increased his reputation so much. **

Journal Entry #2: Peep Culture Peep Culture: The __Pros__ a nd the __Cons__
 * I think the [|Peep Culture] documentary that I saw accurately portrayed the realities of kind of media that is prevalent now and the notion that we are all fixated on the lives of others to spice up our own. What I really liked about the documentary was how it at least attempted to seem unbiased and telling you to make up your own conclusions about whether this kind of media is either good or bad, which is necessary because like everything it has positive and negative attributes. **


 * Personally I am kind of against (or alienated by) peep culture, I just don’t understand how watching the seemingly true events that occur in someone’s life is remotely interesting, I have a huge sense of curiosity like everyone else but things like whether so-and-so is cheating on their spouse just don’t spark my interest, but their is no doubt their is a public interest in it. Facebook recently had a huge update and because I hardly use my account I didn’t notice until all of my friends told me. Apparently, it’s now more accustomed to “stalker-ish” activities rather than social networking, which is a good example of the growing trend towards peep-culture. The media show TMZ, which revolves around a group of paparazzi stalking celebrities and getting them to spill secrets about their lives is essentially formed on the basis of peep culture. Its popularity has grown to the point where there now is a TMZ tour around Hollywood **** showing spots like rehab centres, where celebrities did various media friendly activities. **

media type="youtube" key="tU1PN5_3fxc" height="315" width="560"


 * In the end, peep culture does as much it doesn’t do any good to the general public, and it doesn’t do any bad either. Its not people are forced to spill their personal secrets, unless you are a celebrity, it’s your own personal choice to partake in and watch it. In the end it’s like pop culture junk food, as long as you have the choice to not watch and there are alternatives, then I don’t really mind it. **

Journal Entry #1: Experiences with Media The  Old Spice Guy: __A new trend in advertising __

media type="youtube" key="owGykVbfgUE" height="315" width="560"


 * <span style="color: black; font-family: Verdana,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">I noticed this ad about a year ago, its specifically targets women and revolves around a man played by [|Isaiah Mustafa] (who will forever be known as The Old Spice Guy) doing incredible and random things like transporting himself to a boat with his shirt off, and claiming that if their man wears Old Spice they will smell just like him. I remember first watching this in a movie theatre and the reaction to the ad was pretty positive, and rightfully so, it’s actually funny, but like everything in the advertising community, if it is received well by the public, it will be repeated to death until all money can be made from it. Within the next week a Youtube page dedicated to this Old Spice campaign was created and a bunch of other adverts began using this brand of “randomness” to sell their product. **


 * <span style="color: black; font-family: Verdana,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Of course within the next few months the shtick was getting old and people either started to get tired of it or caught on to the fact that this was becoming a trend. I wanted to right about this topic because I remembered the new campaign from Old Spice now with Fabio, so either Isaiah Mustafa was getting old or he became to expensive. The funny thing was I saw the new Fabio ad at the same time this year when I watched the Isaiah Mustafa ad last year, so it was impossible for me not to compare them. The main difference aside from not being able to understand what Fabio is saying was the audience reaction, instead of laughter; it was ad was met with sighs and annoyance. In the end, what I think made the first Old Spice ad so popular was that it was original and different. If they wanted to repeat its success, maybe they should have thought of another original idea instead of copying the one the one that was already done, thereby defeating its original appeal. **

media type="youtube" key="H73O8zaHmAo" height="315" width="560"


 * And then this happened....**

media type="youtube" key="HUvBTb-0lH8" height="315" width="560"