All posts by redrosie2010

Feminism and Buffy The Vampire Slayer


When it comes to horror movies, there are a number of trends that have become traditional and the norm. There is usually a young girl who, despite her best efforts, ultimately becomes the target of whatever creature it is that lurks in the shadows and places her in a position of vulnerability where she needs to be saved.


Playing on this stereotype and turning it on its ear, creator Joss Whedon created a show for the WB network called Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

buffy titles

Buffy Summers is a powerful woman, instilled with ancient and powerful forces in order to become the chosen one, the one person in all the world with the power to fight the vampires, demons, and forces of evil that threaten mankind. Buffy is an important and unique figure in popular culture because she is a woman who is self reliant, strong willed and able to take care of herself in a tough situation, often saving a number of male characters in the show. Buffy breaks the mold of the woman as the damsel in distress and offers an interesting alternative. The character of Buffy Summers and her friends, including the fascinating and dynamic Willow Rosenberg, reflect the growth of modern women in relationship to a number of feminist ideals.

One only has to watch an episode or two of Buffy the Vampire Slayer to determine that Buffy Summers is a very different role model for young women than those normally presented in the media. Buffy is strong, fast, and willing to fight any number of opponents to protect the world. Through her actions and decisions Buffy, in the words of Dominic Alessio, shatters “restrictive female stereotypes” and singlehandedly reverses the historical tradition of women needing rescue from dangers that she cannot face on her own (Alessio 731). Because of these traits, Buffy stands next to Wonder Woman as a figure of feminine strength and potential: she is a superhero, one that is able to both defend herself and others.


But the problem that faces both Buffy and other female superheroes is that their trials for acceptance are much more difficult than those of male superheroes. In the public eye “femininity and aggression” are very different traits, which tend to skew the usual abilities and drive of superheroes towards masculine traditions (O’Reily 280). Women with power, such as Buffy Summers, have to not only struggle against their adversaries but also the public perception that these abilities and traits naturally belong with men. This makes the feminine hero at a disadvantage if they want to fit in as both individuals with extraordinary prowess and as a woman.

Despite the disadvantages that she faces and the extra work required of feminine heroes in our culture, Buffy manages to persevere through it all. Because of this tenacity, Buffy is seen as an important figure and role model for young women that they can connect to. According to scholars such as Frances Early, Buffy’s adventures resonate with young women because she not only undermines the image of warriors being associated with men, but she is also able to confront the challenges before her and do the right thing, whether it is confronting a demonic invasion of her hometown or ignoring the petty squabbles and clique formations that are prevalent in her high school (Early).


Buffy is a unique and positive role model for women because despite her youth, she realizes the sacrifices that need to be made and she is willing to do what needs to be done. Buffy is one of the few examples of women in popular media who are able to stand on their own when confronting their enemies without having to be saved by some knight in shining armor.
One of the most inspiring aspects of Buffy the Vampire Slayer is that Buffy is a woman that does not fit into the molds that she is expected to by society. She carefully walks the line that is usually reserved for more masculine heroes and is written in such a way that none of the characters alienate the audience despite their blend of femininity and masculinity.


However, our concept of what is masculine and what is feminine is largely determined by how we perceive each category. According to R.W. Connel’s selection in our text, there are a number of different societies in which there is not a concept of “masculinity” as we know it (Connel 232). If this container for masculinity is subject to interpretation depending on the culture, then it should be possible for heroes such as Buffy, Wonder Woman, and Xena to follow through with their deeds without having to hide or sacrifice the fact that they are women too. The writing for the women of Sunnydale, ranging from Buffy and Willow to many of the secondary characters, reveal a great amount of detail and strength that allows for an audience to relate to them while still accepting the supernatural elements.

What truly makes Buffy the Vampire Slayer an entertaining and engaging program is that there were many female characters besides our heroine who were fleshed out and given dimension that would have likely not have been anywhere near as developed on other shows. A prime example of this is the character of Cordelia Chase, Sunnydale High’s most popular (and obnoxious) student. She is depicted as mean, spiteful, and willing to do anything that it takes to get her way without a single thought about who her actions may hurt. Although the writers of the show could have left Cordelia as a simple background character, they instead added depth to her and revealed that she, like Buffy, transcended her role in order to become something more.

cordelia-alone (1)

It is revealed that Cordelia, despite being oblivious to many of the supernatural occurrences that take place around her, is actually very good at standardized testing. When Buffy and her friends look at her in disbelief, she asks “What? I can’t have layers?” (Hendershot). This statement, although not a major feature in the episode, reveals that the women in the show were designed to be more complex than simple caricatures to fill the scene. These are women that, like Buffy, are much more than meet the eye and have their own strengths and weaknesses that are unrelated to their social status.
Although Buffy the Vampire Slayer is a television show that expresses the power of women and their potential individual strength, even Buffy is not completely immune from the influence of men. Although she herself has been gifted with this incredible power to combat the forces of evil, Buffy is expected to adhere to the wishes of a group of men known as the Watchers Council. Each slayer, when chosen, is assigned a Watcher who is supposed to train her and educate her in the ancient ways of tracking and killing vampires. For Buffy, this Watcher is a man named Giles who works as the librarian of her High School when he is not training her.


What is interesting is that it is the women in this series control the actual powers and abilities, such as Buffy’s ability to identify vampires and Willow Rosenberg’s gradual education in witchcraft, but men still play a role as authority figures that confine their potential (Owen). It can be inferred from the established relationship between Watchers and Slayers that women need some sort of masculine influence in their lives to control them, and the writers of the show address this in later seasons. Fortunately for Buffy, Giles does not see her the way that other members of the Watcher’s Council view her, leading him to ultimately become less of a mentor to her and more of a father figure in her life.
Whereas Giles presents Buffy with a great deal of freedom as they become more accustomed to one another, the remaining members of the Watcher’s Council soon speak out against this decision. While Giles takes Buffy under his wing as his daughter, the other members see her as a soldier in their army against evil. This is an important distinction because Giles’ method of training is designed to ultimately leave Buffy in charge of her own actions and take charge of her own life, while the rest of the Council does not wish to grant her this freedom or autonomy.


As one member of the Council tells Buffy that it is they who are actually battling the forces of darkness and evil and she is nothing more than a tool to be used until her death (Miller 46). Although this perspective was respected by the Slayers that came before her, Buffy proves herself as a true hero by standing up to the members of the Watchers Council and rejecting their instructions. She demonstrates her prowess as a powerful woman by choosing her own destiny and defining her own position in the world. Although the source of her power comes from men, Buffy ultimately becomes a stronger woman by turning her back on them and making her own decision. In many ways, this action reflects the feminist ideals that we have covered in this course as Buffy defines who she is as both a hero and a woman on her own terms, not on those of men or even other women.
Although the Watcher’s Council would use her as a weapon, Buffy’s true strength comes from her emotions and her humanity.


In the early seasons of the show, we are introduced to two other Slayers who lack Buffy’s individuality or her humanity. Whether it is Kendra, the Vampire Slayer who is more than willing to do what the Council demands, or the rouge and dangerous Slayer Faith, neither of them succeed against Buffy because she remains grounded in the world and remains in touch with her humanity. Although she possesses the same powers as Buffy, Faith ultimately becomes an antagonist to Buffy and her friends because she enjoys the rush and power that she gets from slaying vampires, stating that if Buffy does not enjoy the emotional high she gets from the violence, then she is doing something wrong (Forster 14).


Throughout season 3, Buffy and Faith would break from being close friends to mortal enemies because of their different outlooks. Ultimately, Buffy proves victorious because she resists the temptation and does not let the power that she wields go to her head.

Despite the differences in social status found between the many women in Buffy the Vampire Slayer, most of them are depicted as stronger and more self reliant than women in other media. In her selection from our textbook, bell hooks writes that feminism is not the united cause that is popularly portrayed in the media. To hooks, feminism is not the quest for woman to gain the same rights as men, but rather to end the oppression that they face based on their sex (hooks 52). The women in Buffy do not desire to gain equal rights with men, but instead grow beyond that to the point where they transcend this goal. At the very end of the final season, when the gang is facing their greatest opponent yet, Buffy and Willow cast a spell that grants the power of the Slayer to all of the young women in the world who have the potential to become the slayer.

chosen1 chosen2

This power provided to them gives them strength and purpose to accomplish their goals. Being a strong woman becomes the norm, and the message of the show is once again reinforced.

When one is looking for examples of feminist growth in the characters of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the one woman in the show who experiences the most dramatic changes is Buffy’s best friend in Sunnydale, Willow Rosenberg. Willow begins the series as one of the unpopular girls at the High School. She means well, but she is shy, has low self esteem, and is a self confessed nerd who prefers books and computers to the stresses of interacting with others.


She has a crush on her longtime friend and companion of Buffy’s, Xander Harris, and goes out of her way to try and earn her romantic affection. However, this Willow of season one bears little resemblance to the woman at the end of the series. This Willow is strong, confidant, and a powerful magic user after she accumulates many months of study in the mystical arts. It is interesting to analyze the growth of Willow from the shy girl of season one to the powerful and outspoken woman that she becomes.
One of the most dramatic and somewhat controversial changes that Willow goes through the course of the show is her gradual shift in sexual orientation. She confessed to having a crush on Xander very early on in the show, but she eventually did find a relationship with the musician and friend Oz.

willow and oz

Yet when she was either pursuing or in a relationship with both of these men, Willow defined herself by her relationship to men. She was always the submissive one, always willing to play the role of the lackey or the sidekick. She was one of Buffy’s friends that suffered from Whedon’s depiction of high school as hell…literally. The very mouth of hell was located under the high school, bringing the metaphors of high school as a living hell to life (Ramet). In this first season, Willow was often the one in danger who needed to be rescued by Buffy.
All of this changed in season 4 when she met a woman named Tara McClay. Tara, like Willow, had an interest in magic and they awoke a passion in each other. Gradually embracing the fact that both she and Tara had feelings for each other, Willow stepped out of her shell and the two of them began to develop a relationship.

tara and willow

Yet with everything that her new relationship brings her (increased skill in magic, affection, and power), Willow still suffers from a great deal of psychological pressure that she was burdened with throughout the show’s run (South 140-141).Although accepted as a lesbian by her friends, Willow begins to dabble more and more in the mystic arts. In essence, once she began to identify herself as a woman and not through the men she was with, Willow was able to flourish into one of the most powerful characters in the show, capable of rivaling almost anyone.

willow and tara
Willow’s newly discovered power did come at a high price. She soon began to use magic to solve her relationship problems with Tara, prompting the two to split up and driving Willow into a deep depression. When the pair did finally reconcile and come together, Tara was abruptly killed by a stray bullet fired by one of Buffy’s enemies.


This death not only sent Willow over the edge to the point where she turned against her friends, but it was highly criticized by audiences and seen as a very tragic moment in the show. The relationship between Willow and Tara was largely positive, and many fans criticized the choice to kill off Tara because it seemed to send a message against lesbian relationships (Burr). Although writers of the show did not intend for this to be a message of the episode, many viewers felt that killing off Tara and Willow’s decent into dark magic in her quest for vengeance was punishment against Willow for accepting a lesbian lifestyle and for taking on more masculine traits, breaking traditional gender roles.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer is a multifaceted show that provides a very different take on women and gender roles. Buffy Summers is a girl whose life closely reflects a teen slasher movie, but she breaks the stereotype of the damsel in distress by single handedly combating the forces of evil that no one else could. Her best friend, Willow, also defies the traditional gender roles by embracing a lesbian lifestyle and becoming much more powerful and successful without having a man in her life. However, the resulting death of her girlfriend and her development into the villain for season six does send some contradictory messages. Both women manage to throw off the men who would seek to control them, serving as strong role models for young women when much of what they watch on television does not portray strong women in such a positive light. Although the series has been off the air now for almost 8 years, there are a number of similarities between this show and the feminist theories that we have covered this semester. In my personal opinion, we need more shows like Buffy the Vampire Slayer to overturn the stereotype that women are unable to take care of themselves and stand up for their beliefs.

buffy last shot

Peter Parker and Clark Kent: Unethical Reporting in the Superworld


“…with great power there must also come–great responsibility” -Amazing Fantasy #15 (1962 Marvel)

Those words concluded the very first comic to introduce Peter Parker, aka Spider-man, to the world. They have also served as a moral compass for his acts of heroism in the comics that follow. The young teen should also have been told that the pen is mightier than the sword. Maybe then he would have been a little more ethical in his day job as a photojournalist. But he’s not the only one. DC comics’ Clark Kent, otherwise known as Superman may be faster than a speeding bullet and more powerful than a locomotive, but when it comes to journalism he is also just as transparent.

It’s not surprising that these two moonlight masked vigilantes were drawn to reporting in their daily life. Superheroism and reporting both embody a do-good spirit and are useful in effecting change through words. Reporters, like superheroes are seen as a voice of the people, and a symbol of hope for the population at large. The media is held to high standards by their public and ideally should be relied on for unbiased, honest reporting. However in recent years, public opinion and trust in journalists has decreased greatly. According to the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago and Pew Research Center, in 1985 only 16% of the public gave low credibility to their daily newspaper; by 2005, that number had risen to 45%. Also in 1990, 74% of Americans said they had confidence in the press; 2000 saw that figure fall as low as 58%. With the recent “rise of the nightly cable shout fest”, those numbers should be expected to lean even farther negatively. Even though Kent and Parker do make the attempt to be good journalists, for a reporter to create an alias and roam the streets in a disguise, lying to pretty much everyone they know, their ethics definitely should be called in question.

For 50 years, Peter Parker committed repeated acts of fraud against The Daily Bugle and its editor-in-chief J. Jonah Jameson. His most egregious transgressions include selling staged photos of himself as Spider-man and attempting to use his position in the media to positively spin the public’s perception of Spider-man. He frequently tries to argue with Jameson about Spider-man’s intentions, trying to persuade him to print articles that will show Spidey in a positive light.

During the Civil War 2006-2007 miniseries, Peter reveals his identity to the world, much to the shock of Jameson, who has long regarded Peter as a trusted, close friend.


After he exposes himself, Jameson tried to sue Parker for “misrepresentation, fraud, breach of contract and several other related charges.” If the status quo was not returned, and Parker’s identity made secret once again, the lawsuit would have been difficult for Parker to crawl out of. According to the website Law and the Multiverse:

“Clearly, Parker had superior knowledge of Spider-man’s identity. Jameson had no clue who Spider-Man was and certainly didn’t suspect Parker. The information was not readily available, as demonstrated by the fact that quite a few people, Jameson included, had tried and failed to determine Spider-man’s identity. And it can reasonably be assumed that Parker knew that Jameson wouldn’t have bought the photos if he knew they were staged and being sold to him by Spider-man.

So Parker’s misrepresentation by omission will suffice. It’s also definitely a material representation (i.e. it would have made a difference in whether a contract was agreed to) because Jameson would not have bought the photos if he knew the truth.”

In 2010, Parker’s unethical reporting finally is called into question in a storyline “about Parker sacrificing his journalistic integrity–getting caught red handed.” Now mayor, J. Jonah Jameson is accused of being involved with the creation of the super villain, The Vulture. As Spider-man, he knows the accusations are false but as Peter he has no proof. To clear Jameson’s name, Parker doctors a photo.


Jameson can’t stand by this misrepresentation and calls Parker out during a press conference. Parker is immediately fired, blacklisted from every news organization in town and shunned by many of his friends in the media. However even though he finally gets his just deserts, he still feels vindicated morally. The staff of the Daily Bugle thanks Parker for saving their jobs and he feels that even though he did something wrong, it was for the right reasons.


During his time at the Daily Planet, Clark Kent constantly reports on himself as Superman. He also gave privileged information to Lois Lane, who has not disclosed her relationship with Superman. His best friend, Jimmy Olsen has also consistently sacrificed his independence as a journalist to become a glorified PR agent for Superman. Clark is putting the entire paper in an ethically compromising position.


It’s unethical for a news publication not to disclose relationships that could be grounds for a conflict of interest with the subject matter. For example, NBC News always mentioned it was owned by General Electric whenever they did a story about their parent company. If it came to light that Kent is Superman, every story the Daily Planet had written about Superman could be called into question and any awards his colleagues or the paper received could be revoked. To make matters worse, Clark frequently uses the privileged information he learns as a journalist to aid his crime fighting.


In DC’s New 52 universe, Kent quits The Daily Planet to become a blogger. At least now in this new online form, he won’t be held to the same ethical standards that could have put his whole workplace in jeopardy.

These transgressions haven’t really been remarked upon in any of the film series based on these super-journalists thus far, although with the recent rumors that director Mark Webb wants JK Simmons back as Jameson in Amazing Spiderman 3 (Oh please, please, please! No matter what criticisms there are for the Remi series, Simmons is literally cartoon Jameson brought to life) and Kent donning his trademark glasses at the end of Man of Steel, its very possible this ethical dilemma could be approached in an upcoming film. Especially with the critical lens that our real-life media has been put under recently, it’s hard to be charmed by a trusted source of “truth” who lies to the public for his own perceived version of truth. It wouldn’t be surprising for the media of today’s fictional counterparts to get a lesson in the responsibility expected of them in the newsroom as well.



That’s right media lovers, the boys are back in town! The Canadian mocumentary cult classic, Trailer Park Boys, will be returning to Netflix with two all new seasons in the works. For those of you with your collective heads in the sand, let me catch you up:

Trailer Park Boys is a mocumentary-style sitcom created and directed by Mike Clattenburg. It follows the residents of the fictional “Sunnyvale Trailer Park” in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia (many of whom are ex-convicts), mainly Ricky (Robb Wells) who, after learning from a fortune teller that he’s going to die soon, decides to document his life so as to ward people off from a life of crime/drugs/alcohol. With him is his good friend Julian (John Paul Tremblay) and breakout character Bubbles (Mike Smith). The series premiered on Showcase television network in 2001 and the final season aired in 2007, followed by Trailer Park Boys: The Movie (2006) and Countdown to Liquor Day (2009).

Since the end of the show, the boys have made several appearances in character or as homages to their alter-egos, including 2009’s “Ricky, Julian and Bubbles Community Service Variety Show” tour, 2010’s “MashUp Piece Theater: The Wire/Trailer Park Boys” on Funny or Die and a 2012 guest appearance on the FX animated series Archer episode “The Limited”. With all of these appearances, it was hard not to wish the boys would make a return to the trailer park life in some way soon.

That wish was granted May 2012 with the announcement of Don’t Legalize It (Released in Canada April 18, 2014 to coincide with 4/20 celebrations), the 3rd TPB film. Also they announced that Wells, Tremblay and Smith acquired the rights to the series from producers (Mike Clattenburg, Barrie Dunn and Mike Volpe) and planned to release a new season of episodes on their own internet channel Don’t worry, there weren’t any bad feelings between stars and creator, Clattenburg, “While the three of us have moved on to different TV and film projects, the Boys are the only ones with the intimate knowledge and love of the show to keep Trailer Park Boys alive and well.”

It worked out better than expected, as a recent deal resulted in season 8’s 10 all new episodes and plans for a 9th season premiering on Netflix later this year as part of their Netflix Originals. Also the original series will now be available for the first time in the UK, Ireland, Netherlands, the Nordics and Latin America. As Ricky would say, this deal can “get 2 birds stoned at once”, by both introducing the series to new fans worldwide and bringing brand new content to those who already love Bubbles and his cats. “There’s no trio quite like Julian, Ricky and Bubbles and we’re thrilled to be the new home for these beloved hellraisers, our US and Canadian members love Trailer Park Boys and we’re excited to take their unique brand of humor to our markets throughout the Americas and Europe” says Sean Carey, vice president of Netflix.

Even more to be excited about: the company will also release three new standalone specials: “Community Service Special”, “Swearnet Special” and “Trailer Park Boys Xmas Special” The boys, ever playing the part, haven’t been the most enthusiastic about these new developments. “Julian’s pretty happy about it. We’re not as happy,” said Wells at a promotional stop for Don’t Legalize It. “I think it was just Julian saying, ‘I’ve got so many black T-shirts and I worked out really good, I think the cameras should come back.”

No word on exactly when the new episodes will premere, but as soon as I know I will pass it along. For now, here’s a sneak peek!





Gamestop moving to take the “Game” out of their name?


Even though it’s estimated that the gaming industry will total $18 billion by 2015, beloved video game retailer, Gamestop, is reportedly closing 120 to 130 of its worldwide stores by January of next year. CEO Paul Raines made the announcement at Gamestop’s 2014 Investor Day on Wednesday, with the excess unsold merchandise likely to be traded for a low cash payout. On the surface, this doesn’t seem to be that major of a change, since that’s only roughly 2% of their total 6,457 retail locations, but the closures are just a part of the overall broadening of the company and a step away from the sale of physical game disks and refocusing toward expanding its subsidiaries in the mobile market.

In addition to closing their gaming stores, Gamestop, already “the 3rd largest and fastest-growing AT&T retailer in the US”, also plans to open between 200-250 Spring Mobile Stores, which is an AT&T retailer recently acquired by Gamestop (more than doubling the 164 stores currently open). Another subsidiary, Simply Mac will open 20-25 new stores (adding to the 23 operating today). Gamestop will also increase the 31 Cricket wireless locations it’s operating to well over 100.  The company is calling this change “Gamestop 3.0” and Raines described the change as “a new phase of the company’s lifespan that will see it aggressively expand its footprint into gaming-adjacent tech fields”

What concerns me is that this diversification seems to be motivated by the likely collapse or at least downsize of the physical-media gaming market. If you take PC games as any indication, there are far less physical disks being purchased and gamers are instead turning to Valve’s Steam Store for their new games. Also used games, which are a cornerstone of the Gamestop market, seem to be dwindling as a source of revenue as the trend towards online game purchases continues. This begs to ask the question: Is Physical Media, particularly video games, a dying industry?

In my opinion the answer is no. Digital media has quite a few advantages, (it enables users to purchase and play games fairly quickly and conveniently, doesn’t require physical storage, is far easier to organize and locate and eliminates the risk of wear and tear damage to your disks) and I have purchased quite a few digital games myself, but I still don’t think that digital is ready to completely replace physical media and I don’t think it should. For one, a new game will require about 15 gigs of storage on a hard drive in order to play, which would limit the amount of different games you can have installed at one time unless you spring for larger storage. Another concern is the time it takes to download these games over wifi, with some games averaging about 8-10 hours to download on a strong signal. There’s also always a risk of electronic blackouts, like what we saw with  the Playstation Network back in 2011. The thing that turns me off the most about digital only media is that you do not own digital media, you just pay for the privilege to use it. I’d much rather have access to the disk and be able to do what I want with it, like let a friend borrow it or even resell it to get money for the next game.

So there you go, fellow media fans. Gamestop may soon be “GAMEstop” in name only, but hopefully this rebranding doesn’t speak for the future of all physical media just yet.

BOOK REVIEW: Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn

gone girl

“There’s a difference between really loving someone and loving the idea of her.” -Gone Girl

Readers of The Media Chick, I present to you a typical morning in the marriage of Nick and Amy Dunne.  We join them at their mansion on the Mississippi river at 6:00, the morning of their 5th wedding anniversary. Nick wakes up and walks down the stairs to see his wife, already in the kitchen humming the M*A*S*H theme song (“Suicide is Painless”) and making crepes. Nick leaves for work and goes about his normal day and when he returns home that night…Amy is gone.


The facts were these:

Nick and Amy met at a Brooklyn party. Eight months later they run into each other again and date for real. They eventually get married. Life is good until Nick and Amy both lose their jobs (Gillian Flynn used her personal experience getting laid off as a writer for Entertainment Weekly) and have to move to Nick’s hometown of North Carthage, MO to care for Nick’s ailing mother. Amy hates having to leave the city and everything about the small town she’s relocated to. This leads to fights, infidelity, and money troubles and all of the basic staples of a failing marriage. When Amy goes missing, Nick quickly becomes suspect #1.

This is the normal plot flow of a basic crime story, but please don’t let that fool you. These facts are simply the foundation of the elaborate game of chess that author Gillian Flynn has penned. The story is told from both Nick and Amy’s points of view, and each narrator talks directly to the reader. Nick’s story starts in the present and the day she disappears while Amy’s passages are grounded in the past, thanks to a secret diary.

Amy’s diary starts when she first meets Nick and tells a very idyllic history. You can see that Amy and Nick really loved each other in the beginning, and they seemed to have the perfect life. When the fights start, Amy tries her hardest to keep her husband happy. But the worse things get between the two she grows fearful of her safety from her abusive husband, to the point where she thinks she needs a gun to protect herself.

Things don’t look very good for Nick. He’s a classic “unreliable narrator”, lies of omission that begin so subtly at first that you don’t even notice. However during the first few chapters, you start to realize he’s only telling everyone what he thinks they need to know. “It was my fifth lie to the police. I was just starting.” Even the things he does let slip are unsettling: he has a hot temper, he just increased the life insurance policy for Amy recently, and not to mention the young woman whose calls he keeps ignoring.

Nick’s life seems to be full of unhappiness that he can’t seem to escape from. He owns a bar with his twin sister and used what was left of Amy’s trust fund to pay for it. He resents for this but needs to stay with her if he wants to keep it. He works as a teacher but can’t get over the loss of his career in New York. He has a terrible temper and imagines doing horrible things to Amy in his dreams. He also has a habit of grinning in a very uncomfortable way every time the media interviews him, and admits that there’s something darker going on under his friendly surface. “I often don’t say things out loud, even when I should. I contain and compartmentalize to a disturbing degree: In my belly-basement are hundreds of bottles of rage, despair, fear, but you’d never guess from looking at me.”

Amy has her own puzzling history too, her parents wrote a series of children’s books called “Amazing Amy”, starring their fantasy version of their daughter. Their constant pushing towards perfection may have been too much for Amy to take. The books brought fame and fortune to Amy’s family but Amy had to grow up with a constant threat of stalkers, and when her parents fell on hard times in her adulthood, they took back her trust fund and any money she was given from her identity being used. She planned a treasure hunt on every anniversary with Nick, which was more of a test than a gift. Each clue leading to some special place that they shared to see how much Nick remembered. He always failed and she was always upset.

READER BEWARE! You can’t believe everything you read in this novel. Amy and Nick are extremely experienced at the art of deception and lies.It’s these twists and turns that make Gone Girl so interesting. I won’t spoil here the big reveal that happens in the book, nor the ending because it’s much better if you just read for yourself.I got through the novel in less than a week, which is definitely the sign of a great read. What I really loved, besides the captivating plot, is the writing style. You may agree or disagree with what Flynn’s characters are saying but no matter what, you will have a strong reaction.

The one criticism I have for Gone Girl is the ending. It seemed like Flynn had just run out of twists and didn’t know how to end the book. It was completely unsatisfying to me but wasn’t enough to ruin the entire book. And FEAR NOT reader! In the movie version of Gone Girl (Due out 10/3. Directed by David Fincher, starring Ben Affleck, Rosamund Pike, Neil Patrick Harris and Tyler Perry) will have a different ending! The script is also written by Gillian Flynn and it seems she agrees with her fans’ complaints. We’ll have to sit tight until October to find out, but for now, here’s a link to watch the trailer:

Favorite Quotes:

“There’s something disturbing about recalling a warm memory and feeling utterly cold”

“It’s a very difficult era in which to be a person, just a real, actual person, instead of just a collection of personality traits selected from an endless Automat of characters./And if all of us are play-acting, there can be no such thing as a soul mate, because we don’t have genuine souls./It had gotten to the point where it seemed like nothing matters, because I’m not a real person and neither is anyone else./ I would have given anything to feel real again.”

“Tampon commercial, detergent commercial, maxi pad commercial, windex commercial– you’d think all women do is clean and bleed.”

“Friends see most of each other’s flaws. Spouses see every awful last bit.”

“My gosh, Nick, why are you so wonderful to me?” He was supposed to say: ‘You deserve it. I love you.’ But he said ‘Because I feel sorry for you.’ ‘Why?’ ‘Because every morning you have to wake up and be you.'”

I hope you enjoyed my review, and please let me know what you thought of the book.

TV Review: Game of Thrones Season 4/Episode 2 “The Lion and the Rose”



It’s Joffrey Baratheon’s wedding, but Cercei Lannister is NOT having a good day.

(Please be advised that The Media Chick has only seen episodes of Game of Thrones and has not read the book series for which the show is based. This review is free of book spoilers and will refer only to the events of the current TV show plot.)

When the Red Wedding took place at the end of last season, it came as quite a shock. I, and many other viewers had been lead to believe that the show’s central conflict was that between the arguable protagonists,  the Starks in the North and House Lannister, currently occupying King’s Landing. By wiping out most of the contending players from the Stark family and at least temporarially ending the War of the Five Kings, we were left wondering what could possibly take that conflict’s place. (Well, at least until Danaerys marches in with her army and dragons, annihilating everything in their path) But that’s one of the great things about Game of Thrones. No matter how much you think you have figured out, it only takes a second for everything to be turned on its head. From the moment Ned Stark’s head was swiftly seperated from his body in season one, this show has been able to reinvent itself over and over again. Tonight was no exception. 

A theme I noticed tonight is that of identity crisis. Nearly every major character seemed to be going through some sort of internal struggle. Who is the kingslayer without his fighting hand? Can Cercei give up her power to the new queen? Can Ramsey overcome the circumstances of his birth and truly be a Bolton? Is Theon even still a person? The scenes with Theon, Ramsey Snow and his father especially drive this point home. His father is so disapointed with Ramsey for harming Theon that he tries to take any delusion that he’s a true son away from him. Pretty much the only hope Ramsey has of getting back in his father’s good graces is for the (non)Bolton son can try to kill the (non)Stark son and find Bran and Rikkon. I’m looking forward to watching the two “Snows” go head to head.

The episode began with the unlikely dining companions, Tyrion and Jamie. Now that Jamie is down to one hand, the brothers have never been on more equal footing. It’s almost as though they are equals throughout this scene, and I have to admit…I like this new humbled version of Jamie, even if Cercei doesn’t. 

Joffrey, Joffrey, Joffrey…we knew it had to end sometime. He was just too much of a sadistic chicken to remain seated on the iron throne, but he also was the character everyone loves to hate. There was absolutely no chance of redemption for the character either. It was even more unsettling to watch him try to act civilized during the gift presentation before his wedding than when he acts like his old self. He almost seemed to actually appreciate Tyrion’s gift of a book. There was the briefest of moments, when Margery announces that the leftovers will feed the poor, where I actually thought that the marriage could have had a positive effect on Joffrey but just like his fake-nice act it didn’t last long. With the announcement of “There’s been too much amusement here today” suddenly it’s midget theater! If I get a chance to rewatch before next week it might be fun to do a count of all the people in attendance that this “show” is meant to offend. And despite everyone’s best efforts to keep up this illusion of “peace” in Westeros, (“Look! The Pie!” Very nice effort, Margery. Its a shame that most of those doves of peace are sliced in half.) Joffrey just can’t help himself from subjecting his uncle to more public humiliation. There probably aren’t many people left in the kingdom who doubt that Joffrey deserved to die, but Cercei is damn sure going to make sure someone pays.

Other Thoughts:

-Breaking up is hard to do , Shae. Let’s just hope you’re on a boat and sailing away. Although something tells me that a very unhappy ending is in store for these starcrossed lovers. Moulin Rouge anyone?

-It’s ironic that the witch is burning people at the stake. Also, Stannis’ story is probably the strangest and the one I care the least about. 

-I’m totally shipping Granny Tyrell and Tywin Lannister

-Never in a million years would I EVER consider attending a wedding in Westros

Album Review: Run River North


I’ve picked this band as my first review simply due to being in the right place at the right time. The California based band just performed at the Richard Stockton College this past weekend in Pomona New Jersey as the opening act for the Goo Goo Dolls. Now normally, I don’t pay opening acts much attention. The endless stream of generic garage bands that never end up getting anywhere usually don’t manage to spark my interest, but the second that this sextet began to play, I knew I was listening to something special. Once I got home, I immediately purchased their self titled debut album on iTunes. (I would have done so sooner, but unfortunately iPhone battery life and 4 hour concerts don’t mix. Go figure.)

The traditional sound of folk songs has been given a modern update recently in popular music, thanks to the popularity of bands like Mumford and Sons, The Lumineers and Noah and the Whale.  At first listen, Run River North has a similar sound to many of their contemporaries in the crossover folk genre. I immediately thought of the indie-folk band Of Monsters and Men, also recently formed, with their blend of male and female vocals and emotion evoking harmonies.

What sets Run River North apart, however, is that the musicians (Daniel Chae, violin and guitar; John Chong, drums; Joe Chun, bass; Alex Hwang, singer/songwriter; Sally Kang, keyboard; Jennifer Rimm, violin) are all Korean-American and use their own personal experience, and that of their ancestors as inspiration. Most notably, their song “Foxbeard” speaks of the harsh limitations of their immigrant grandparents. My personal favorite song is “Lying Beast”, which begins quietly with hushed verses sung in unison, with a simple hummed melody that serves as its chorus. From there the intensity of the instruments build and when the simple melody repeats, it is sung in full voiced rich harmony and crescendos that crest and fall.

Produced by Phil Ek, the songs don’t have as much polish as the Of Monsters and Men album, but that isn’t necessarily a setback. Instead, I find the acoustic, stripped down sound to give the album a much more intimate feel. It shows that they have the raw talent and sound just as good live as they do recorded. All in all, it’s a fantastic debut album from a band I will be watching closely in the future.