GAMBIT Film Announces Screenwriter and Treatment Writer

Welp. There you have it. My favorite of the X-Men played by one of the hottest actors on the planet.

Gee. Gee.

Another Castle

20th Century Fox’s Gambit spin-off film in its X-Men franchise, due to star Channing Tatum, has both a screenwriter attached as well as a finished treatment by X-Men writer, Chris Claremont. The report from Newsarama cites a Deadline article which says that Josh Zetumer, who wrote the Robocop reboot released earlier this year, has been hired to write the screenplay.

The Deadline piece also states that Claremont, who has penned various X-Men comics for over 40 years and is lauded as the franchise’s key creator, has finished a treatment, or basic plot outline, for the film. Gambit (previously played by Taylor Kitsch in 2009’s X-Men Origins: Wolverine) was created by Claremont and artist Jim Lee (currently the co-publisher of DC Comics) in 1991, and became a fan favorite through his role in the 1990s animated series. Tatum will make his debut as Gambit in 2016’s X-Men: Apocalypse.

Source: Newsarama

View original post 3 more words

Advertisements

Cinderella 2.0: Transmedia Storytelling – YouTube

See on Scoop.itMedia Psychology Goodness

This short film, created by our Madrid office, is a tutorial for storytelling, brand content and transmedia. It illustrates Draftfcb’s commitment to creating… (A ‘Cinderella 2.0’ short film explain to you what is Transmedia Storytelling.

Melody Stotler‘s insight:

Transmedia storytelling is fascinating and powerful. This is a great depiction.

See on www.youtube.com

By Melody Stotler Posted in General

Benefits of Gaming: What Research Shows – KQED (blog)

See on Scoop.itMedia Psychology Goodness

Games and learning advocates often come up against the video game stigma…

Melody Stotler‘s insight:

Plenty of research suggests there are benefits to gaming. What do you think?

See on blogs.kqed.org

By Melody Stotler Posted in General

Christmas Shopping (a repost from Judgemental Gay)

Christmas Shopping.

This article is super cute, and totally accurate, imho. Also, I don\’t have to write a holiday related post now, cause this is more or less how I do my shopping (though I suppose I may as well anyway…. idk).

ANYWAY. Check it out. KAWAII!

Link

The NEW HOME of Gaming Psych

Hey gang! I TOTALLY love the follows! Make sure you follow the new site (that’s where I’ll be posting from now on). You can subscribe there to get more ginger psychology gaming nerdy happiness! Just what you ALWAYS wanted! ❤

By Melody Stotler Posted in General

The Blog Has Moved!

psych of gaming preview

My blog has moved! I am proud to announce that (due to a miscalculation on my part with my posting abilities to the PhD page) I have decided to make the leap from wordpress.com to wordpress.org. All the same content is available, and new content is coming all the time (school and motivation are back in session)! All in a fresh, pretty, Melodyesque wrapping! Make sure you bookmark it! ❤

 

http://www.gamingpsych.com

By Melody Stotler Posted in General

To Degree or Not to Degree: A Rant

(NOTE: Yes I appreciate the irony of this post immediately following one about critical thinking and argumentation. I said this was a rant, and I meant it.)

So I’m watching a stream today. I LOVE this stream. The person who does it is one of my favorite people on the planet. He’s smart, funny, kind, generous, etc. Today he said something on his stream which sparked a conversation with his more than 300 viewers that upset me. Now granted, he didn’t say it to be offensive, and he isn’t feeling well, but the conversation bothered me. A lot.

Let me start by saying that I have told my daughter numerous times that she doesn’t have to go to college if she doesn’t have to. I realize that in a time where people are convinced that the smartest and most successful go to college this is not a normal thing to say. However, I think it is important that she follow her dreams, loves what she does, and doesn’t let the creativity get smooshed out of her. The below video is my favorite TED Talk describing and speaking to exactly what I mean (Thank you, Ken Robinson. You’re an inspiration).

apple vs orangesThat being said. THAT BEING SAID… just because there are those who are educators, academics, therapists, doctors, and others our society considers “the most educated”, who get things wrong, are socially awkward, or like to one-up everyone, doesn’t mean that ALL of us are like that. Yes, D is for degree, so you don’t have to pay a ton of attention to get a piece of paper, nor do you have to learn all that much. Yes, there are tons of people who get degrees and then go work at Taco Bell for the rest of their lives. Yes, there are people who pay tons of money for 30+ years after school getting a degree in something they HATE cause their parents expected them to. And on and on. But in this conversation I saw people effectively defecate on education as a whole; the higher the degree the harder they raged against it. Only one other person bothered to say that he went to school for himself and he loved it… that social smarts and common sense are not the same as book smarts. I absolutely agree.

My opinion, which I expressed in chat but which I’m sure no one saw (hence my frustrated post here) is that a degree is not always just a piece of paper, just as those who do not have degrees are not always idiots. But, by ripping on those who have chosen academics as their path, regardless of the reason, these people are lowering themselves to the place those that degrade them live. You are no better. It is a choice. There is no “right” choice. There is only a “right for you” choice. People without degrees one-up others too. People without degrees can, and will, correct a statement with an inaccurate remark that is maddening. So what you’re effectively telling me is that if I have a degree, I can’t be human? Isn’t that the attitude you’re fighting? I’m not perfect, but I’m not claiming to be.

All I’m saying is I LOVE learning. I am STOKED to get my PhD because it will allow me to do the thing I want to do; teach graduate school. And WHY do I want to teach graduate school? To avoid, as much as possible, those who do not WANT to be in school. Here, the atmosphere is peaceful, we disagree without contempt (for the most part), and while we have the assholes who make everyone furious with their pompous nature, THEY’RE EVERYWHERE. And I’m okay with that. I like a little bit of pompous with my cereal.

Also, to the one in chat who said that he ragequit college because his English teacher told him that ’empirical evidence’ is NOT just something you can observe with your five senses, she’s right. Good grief.

A Definition of Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is a way of considering information in order to form an opinion which is based in logic, humility, and research.

Critical thinking lets us decide how we feel about things. It is a practiced set of skills that helps us consider things thoroughly before drawing conclusions about them, and saves us from the assumptions, inferences, and irrational conclusions of anyone who isn’t considering all sides of an argument. Just as we would when forming an argument, we start with our opinion then look into why we think what we do, what others think, why others might think the way they do, and what other questions could possibly be asked about the topic. Then we go about trying to answering those questions (Weston, 2009).

QuestionsCritical thinking takes humility. We have to be willing to honestly consider the possibility that others have valid points, and ultimately be willing to admit that our initial opinion was wrong and adjust accordingly. And, what’s more, we have to be able to either trust that our sources are able to do the same or know how to sift through what in their argument is opinion and what is fact (Browne & Keeley, 2007).

We must either know, or be able to figure out, where to get information. We have to be able to sort through sources, deciding what is reliable and generalizable and what is not (Dowden, 2002; Paul & Elder, 2001; Weston, 2009). We have to understand what our sources are talking about and whether the context fits what we are researching. For example, when John Locke (1689) talks about human understanding, it helps us put his words into context when we know the zeitgeist. Another example is our need to take into consideration the effect that Richard Paul (2001) selling a product has on his discussion of the importance and nature of critical thinking. And when Dr. Dowden (2002) discusses skills needed for critical thinking, is he only targeting those seeking to go to college. Does that change the meaning of the argument for rest of us?

EternalA definition of critical thinking is only the first step in determining whether it is important to us, how to use it, and when to use it; as discussed above, progress requires questions. When researching critical thinking, is it important to know what the end goal is? In other words, does it matter why you want to be able to think critically? Does the definition of critical thinking change when considering media messages as opposed to considering what to eat for lunch? Is there a time when critical thinking becomes unnecessary or overly complicated? Is there a basic formula for critical thinking that can be followed? Does the way in which someone goes about applying critical thinking change the results of their analysis? These questions and more may lead us to making more well-rounded conclusions about critical thinking.

References:

Browne, M. N., & Keeley, S. M. (2007). Asking the right questions: a guide to critical thinking (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Dowden. (2002). A summary of critical thinking skills. Retrieved from: http://www.csus.edu/indiv/d/dowdenb/4/ct-def/ct-skills.htm

Locke, J. (1689). An essay concerning human understanding. In L. Pojman (Ed.), Classics of philosophy (pp 653-689). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Paul, R. & Elder, L. (2001). Modified from the book by Paul, R. & Elder, L. (2001). Critical Thinking: Tools for Taking Charge of Your Learning and Your Life.

Weston, A. (2009). A rulebook for arguments. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub.

*Cartoons can be found at http://faculty.spokanefalls.edu/InetShare/AutoWebs/jimp/Cartoons/arethere.gif and
http://faculty.spokanefalls.edu/InetShare/AutoWebs/jimp/Cartoons/questions.gif respectively*

Escaping Into A Good Friend’s Head

This is definitely less about gaming and more about personal reflection, but everyone gets one of those blog posts every now and then, right?

So I’ve been reading a good friend’s blog most of the day today. To be honest, I’m trying to “solve” something of a “puzzle” and he hinted the answers “may” be there. That’s a lot of maybes, but I digress.

My friend is not unlike me. In fact, I’ve never really met anyone quite as emotionally driven as I am; until him. I call him Cupcake, so let’s go with that here too. Cupcake feels strong emotional connections to things like songs and poems, random people who give him hope for humanity, games, stories, and so on. He is also really sad. But not sad in that pouty, whiney, “But I don’t WANNA go get my shots, Mommy!” kinda way. Sad in the lost, alone, anxious, “Make the sounds go away” kinda way. The serious sad that can’t be fixed by just ice cream (that means something special to him).

But while reading Cupcake’s blog, especially the sad posts where you can tell he’s hurting for no particular reason, it is clear that his depth of emotion is what makes him amazing. The fact that he’s willing to share his thoughts, however aching and nearly intolerable, his perfect, tactless disclosure to the world… it’s awe inspiring and it makes me want to be a better person. I realize it doesn’t make a lot of sense, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned from him, it’s that making sense is over rated, and that pouring out the contents of your head, however flowery or sterile they may be, is what truly matters.

I love you, Cupcake.

Define ‘Scholarly’

Chris Nitz Photo: Crushed by Knowledge If we objectively define ‘scholarly’ as “concerned with academic learning and research” (Dictionary.com,  2012), we find ourselves with a vague definition. We may be tempted to immediately think of left-brained academics. However, discrepancies in what must be considered academic may change that definition. If, for example, we define academics as pertaining to sciences or literacy, we end with a very different result than if we define academics as pertaining to any subject which facilitates the further development of a particular skill. Sir Ken Robinson (2006) notes that a major short coming of academics now is that we define academics much like the former, but would be served better to treat it as the latter.

Chris Nitz: A Keyboard Kind of LifeHowever, in writing, the target audience is the one that matters. As such, if you are writing to a group of social scientists, the expectation is that the prescribed protocol will be followed (Polkinghorne, 2007), and so on. In this way then, scholarly writing should be defined more along the lines of writing which facilitates the communication of critical thinking and rhetoric within a given field, using the prescribed masteries of that field. This allows for all subjects regardless of the paradigm currently subscribed to in academia.

References:

Dictionary.com (2012). ‘Scholarly’. Retrieved from: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/scholarly?s=t

Polkinghorne, D. E. (2007). Qualitative inquiry: validity issues in narrative writing. Qualitative Inquiry13(4), 472.

Robinson, K. (2006, February). Ken robinson says schools kill creativity.. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html