Tag: entertainment

ICE Arrests 21 Savage

This morning, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, known as ICE, detained and is in the processes of deporting grammy-nominated rapper 21 Savage in Atlanta. In their report, they reveal that the rapper, who was presumed to be American, was actually from England. The rapper, who’s real name is Shayaabin Abraham-Joseph came to the the US legally as a minor in 2005. However, once his visa expired in 2006, he continued to stay, never renewing it in the process.

The report shocked many 21 Savage fans, who associate the rapper strongly with the Georgia rap scene. In fact, the “21” in his name is in reference to a gang located in Decatur, Georgia. He now currently sits in a detention center in Georgia, awaiting trial before an immigration court.

The most interesting part about this revelation is the fact that this hadn’t been discovered before. Fans tend to go to stalker levels of information diving in order to find out everything they possibly can on a celebrity they follow. It’s surprising that no one looked further than his teenage years, or just followed the assumption that he was born in Atlanta, where he started his career.

Another surprising factor is that his immigration status didn’t come up during his felony drug charges in 2014. Felony charges done by immigrants, whether legal or non-legal, in the US gets the immigrant automatically deported, and they cannot appeal. Once they are deported, they are not allowed to even return to the US, even for vacation. The fact that all throughout his trial his status as an immigrant never came up. He was tried as a full US citizen.

How 21 Savage was able to keep his status a secret, especially being such a public figure, is rather intriguing. As the case stands, there is no certainty on whether or not he will get deported, even with a past felony charge putting him in a disadvantaged spot to begin with. It will be interesting to see how the events unroll.

Things to Note From Rockstar’s Work Conditions

I would have written earlier about this, but was away from my computer and couldn’t get to it. But about a week ago, it was discovered that in order to make Red Dead Redemption 2, programmers and other staff had to work 100 hour weeks over a three week period in order to finish the game. This caused a swift backlash on the Internet about the conditions, with everything from news journals to podcasts criticizing what Rockstar had done. Co-founder and VP Dan Houser argued that these overtime shifts were “optional” to employees in defense of the habits, saying that these people opted-in overtime to finish the newest game.

However, when some employees (granted permission by the company to clear the air) took to Reddit for Q&A, that clearly wasn’t the case. A QA tester from the Rockstar Lincoln studio in the UK clarified that the public doesn’t often hear of the working conditions as a result of employees signing a NDA (non-disclosure agreement), preventing them from taking issues to the public.

He also clarified that the overtime shifts aren’t really optional but expected, as they have to make up an overtime shift if they for whatever reason can’t do an initial one. As for weekends, they have to make it up as a “double” weekend if they miss out on working one. The QA tester does clarify that they are paid for their overtime. He does establish the difference between a typical work shift and an overtime shift, the main difference being about 2 1/2- 3 hours longer. The overtime shifts are usually implemented near the end of the creation of a video game, in order to have it released by the proper date they planned for. While that doesn’t alleviate the issue of exploitation, it does explain that the overtime hours aren’t the norm.

Now, in the midst of this controversy, I noticed that some freelance artists, programmers, ans video game designers took to Twitter and other forums to explain their story. They didn’t center their stories around Rockstar, but rather their experiences as contract workers for other companies. What they explained was rather interesting.

Just about 100% of the time, the people were explaining that they voluntarily took on the hours, for fear of being dropped from their contracts. Despite some being told by their own employers that they don’t need to work so hard, they still overworked, trying to be as productive as possible and thus more valuable. All of these cases end in a nasty case of burn out.

What is burn out? By dictionary terms, it means to completely ruin one’s health or energy through overworking for a long period of time. People will permanently disfigure themselves, or place themselves into life-threatening situations that way, all because they wouldn’t let their body rest. Ever heard of people dying at their desks in Japan from working too much? Yeah, that’s an extreme form of burn out.

As I mentioned earlier, the thing to note in both of these areas is that the overtime is promoted as voluntary or optional in terms of the legal working contract. But workers argue that the “optional” overtime was actually expected, or perceived to be expected, thus feeling the pressure to take up the overtime. It’s a dangerous expectation that can easily result in the damaged health of an employee.

How Science Fiction Works Better in TV

I began watching Westworld recently to celebrate turning in my essay, and quickly got invested in it. The world, character arcs, and dynamism of the hosts intrigues me, especially as more of how the whole thing works slowly gets more developed and explained. Seeing how the show introduced its dynamics got me thinking about other sci-fi TV shows, and how they compare to movies of the same genre. The more I thought about it, the more I thought that sci-fi as a genre does much better in the realm of TV than film.

Why is that? Well, sci-fi often involves complex world/story-building when done right, and needs to be set out in a way that doesn’t seem rushed or boring. In film, there is only a two-two and a half hour span to introduce and develop the story and the world. Often times, that means there are aspects that are underdeveloped, rushed, or simply never explained. Which, when portrayed in a particular, more natural way, can work out.

Think of Mad Max: Fury Road. There wasn’t much actual explanation of the post-apocalyptic world, but there was visual representation, paired with just the right amount of explanation where the audience could understand how things worked. Of course, there were aspects left out; but the most important aspects are understood.

Now, the case of Mad Max is a case of sci-fi in films done well. More often than not, however, it takes a film multiple movies in order to explain itself and the world, sometimes dragging out stories that aren’t interesting enough or good past film 1 or 2. Or, in the case where there is only one film, the world is not explained enough, or simply isn’t interesting. Other times the story line is so bad and rushed that the world suffers as a result, too. In any sense, something is missing.

In the case of TV, however, there is a lot more to work with. Worlds can be properly flushed out and can work as an element of intrigue for the audience as it slowly unravels (in good shows, of course). Shows usually have a minimum of eight episodes to work out their world and dynamics, providing much more time and space to develop everything. The added fact that it usually comes out one episode a week even adds more to the suspense, maintaining greater interest than if it came out once every 2+ years. Sci-fi is a large and infinitely creative genre, and needs plenty of space to exist as a valid genre.

Sci-fi has had a long history in both film and movies, but is notably more prolific in TV, and much more recognizable. In the last decade particularly, sci-fi has been on the rise, after a period of falling behind fantasy. Sci-fi in TV shows also has the luxury of existing for longer, as average great shows can have as many as 9 or 10 seasons without appearing old or run-out, a heavy contrast from film. Shows can take on many more story arcs, as well, adding greater levels of complexity that otherwise couldn’t or wouldn’t exist.

Sci-fi can exist in both film and television, and has phenomenal pieces in both sets of media (Star Wars, Star Trek, Stranger Things), paired alongside bad pieces. However, I tend to notice that TV overall has better sci-fi series than film, particularly in recent years, most likely as a result as the care and space provided through TV. TV has provided sci-fi a grander space, and has lent it greater popularity than film, causing the genre to have an overall better quality.