Lots of great projects! Congrats everyone! Here’s a few of the many strong pieces:

Week 3

1-7 Feb

  • Discussion: Future Now: Sight & World Builder
  • Art Experience: Drawing 1: Snapchat
  • Conversations: Thursday @SOA Galleries

SOA Galleries

Joshua Vasquez, Drawing & Painting – Gatov West

Joshua Vasquez investigates imagery associated with life and death with a mixed-media salon-style drawing exhibition of flowers and skulls.

Isabel Avila, Photography – Gatov East

Haley Toyama, Drawing and Painting – Merlino Gallery

Haley Toyama contemplates the expansive and overwhelming cityscape of Hong Kong through small-scale oil paintings and paper cutouts.

Art Education Student Association Group Exhibition – Dutzi Gallery

The CSULB Art Education Student Association will exhibit a collection of works that represent a different California Content Standard, as listed in the Visual and Performing Arts Framework for California Public Schools.

Art Education Group Exhibition – Werby Gallery

Faculty member Carlos Silveira highlights Photography by Art Education students who have participated in CSULB study abroad classes.

Wk 3 Discuss!

  • Sight by Eran May-raz and Daniel Lazo
  • World Builder by Bruce Branit

Group 1

  1. Christine Kim
  2. Anthony Estalilla
  3. Jonathan Behzadian
  4. Danielle Garcia
  5. Crysta Tim
  6. Kyu Jung Lee

Group 2

  1. Amber Bolden
  2. Tyler Kedis
  3. Florenz Francis Baltazar
  4. Christopher Moore
  5. Bianca Dominguez
  6. Vanentina Ramirez

Group 3

  1. Madison Braverman
  2. Leslie Echiveste
  3. Adilene Leon
  4. Xiomara Barnes
  5. Valerie Laslo
  6. Tiffany Tran

Group 4

  1. Nicole Chovit
  2. Justin Marquez
  3. Jing Huan Ooi
  4. Jennifer Lee
  5. Hunter Mervosh
  6. Haley Anderson

Group 5

  1. Erick Diaz
  2. Enrique Plascencia
  3. Elizabeth Moledo
  4. Destiny Farihi
  5. Cynthia Esquivias
  6. Christian Aguirre

Group 6

  1. Cheryl Peng
  2. Catherine Chin
  3. Brianna Hastie
  4. Ashley Batres
  5. Alyssa Castro
  6. Aaron Dela Rosa

Group 7

  1. William Luna
  2. Vanessa Betancourt
  3. Tiffany Van Gilder
  4. Tareena Woods
  5. Symone Pallett
  6. Shayenne Prasad

Group 8

  1. Shannon McGuinness
  2. Rosa Velazquez
  3. Reuben William Dyce
  4. Rejina Hernandez
  5. Regan Cameron
  6. Rebekah Johnson

Group 9

  1. RaVen Montgomery
  2. Ramtin Yousefi
  3. Peter Bay
  4. Patrick Dong
  5. Oscar Alvarez
  6. Ngozi Ekwedike

Group 10

  1. Natalie Guevara
  2. Nancy Tran
  3. Molly Poyer
  4. Mia Miller
  5. Marilyn Try
  6. Martin Diaz

Group 11

  1. Maria Barreda
  2. Maison Chiu
  3. Lorena Rubalcava
  4. Leon Phung
  5. Leah Perez
  6. Lainie Le

Group 12

  1. Kyle Shishido
  2. Kordell Tan
  3. Kimberly Gutierrez
  4. Katherine Shinno
  5. Katherine Pantoja
  6. Julio Garcia

Group 13

  1. Joshua Hyun
  2. John Stouras
  3. Jhonatan Ramos Lopez
  4. Jesus Viramontes
  5. Jessica Addonizio
  6. Jazlyn Tabar

Group 14

  1. Jayson Fields
  2. Jamie Filosa
  3. Hilario Saucedo
  4. Helen Lee
  5. Hannah Mandias
  6. Gina Householder

Group 15

  1. Gabriela Hernandez
  2. Francisco Miranda
  3. Enrique Vega
  4. Elijah Yee
  5. Elida Ramirez
  6. Eduardo Castillo

Group 16

  1. Dorothyrose McMahon
  2. Dominique Gomez
  3. Daniella Galindo
  4. Colleen Siongco
  5. Christopher Williams
  6. Charles Watson

Group 17

  1. Cassandra Topete
  2. Carlos Nava
  3. Carlos Cucufate
  4. Bez Middleton
  5. Anthony Sanchez
  6. Annie Ronning

Group 18

  1. Alfonso Madrigal
  2. Alexander Lucero
  3. alanna Godinez
  4. Aaron Satterfield
  5. glenda Castillo
  6. Andrew Andrade

Group 19

  1. Margarita Reyna
  2. Devon Carus
  3. David Brown
  4. christopher Chadwick
  5. Brandon Nhem
  6. Aaron Valenzuela

Group 20

  1. Meng Chu
  2. Marlon Fernandes
  3. Jennifer Garcia
  4. Gregory Plantenga
  5. Francesca Butler
  6. Carlos Madrigal

Group 21

  1. Daniel Bursch
  2. Megan Stevens
  3. Sam Tan
  4. Sean Hernandez
  5. Jerry Pleitez
  6. Ciprian Robielos
  7. Andrew Hana

Written by Glenn Zucman

BA, Psychology, University of Hawaii, MFA, Intermedia Art, Long Beach State. Host of American Public Media's "Border Patrol." Host of KBeach Radio's "Strange Angels." Interested in Identity Art that explores our Oracle-at-Delphi-like straddling of corporeal and virtual realms in our new media century. Civil rights in online space. 10 years...
Read more



Group Members:
Jayson Fields
Jamie Filosa
Hilario Saucedo
Helen Lee
Hannah Mandias
Gina Householder

We thought they were both interesting. The first video we thought was more dark and a little disturbing. We thought the technology was definitely believable and that it could be possible in the next 50 years, but the fact it was in their eyes we thought was a little trippy. The second video we thought was much more positive and we thought it had a much brighter message. We thought it was endearing that this man worked so hard to create this world for this woman he cared about, even though it only made her happy temporarily. We could also see this technology being created in the next century.

Glenn Zucman

Thanks guys!
What’s your group #?
This “analysis” is mostly a summary of the videos. Yes, one was more dystopian and one more hopeful. Try to go beyond this to think about how Technology & Culture intersect today, and how they might intersect tomorrow. What kind of world do you want to live in? Are there compromises? Tradeoffs? Surprising situations?


-Group 4-
We thought the first video was interesting in the way where everything was controlled by sight and how he was able to manipulate the date. At first the girl didn’t even like him, but since he could read her, he was able to change his approach. It almost gave him an unfair advantage. It was especially surprising in the end where he could override her system and change her feelings. The second video was a little confusing and hard to follow. We know in the end that she was in a coma, but weren’t sure whether that was his or her memory, or a memory that he was creating for her. We also weren’t sure why he was hiding from her throughout the scene.

Nicole Chovit
Justin Marquez
Jing Huan Ooi
Jennifer Lee
Hunter Mervosh
Haley Anderson

Glenn Zucman

Good ideas guys. Can you take them further?
He could “read” the date because of an app… but what about people today who are just more Sensitive/Manipulative, vs those who aren’t? Is that an unfair advantage? The setup of the film makes him out to be pretty creepy, but she was just as quick to jump on social media and declare him a lousy date after 60 seconds. Perhaps they’re perfect for each other?

What kind of world do you want to live in?
Are we already living in the world of “Sight”?


The two videos had dual aspects to technology. Our group felt that in Sight by Eran May-raz and Daniel Lazo technology controlled every aspect of life to the point where it was extreme. The technology in the video stimulated our lives today, connecting to our Facebook profiles and what we display to the outside world and how others perceive us as. In World Builder by Bruce Branit we found that technology was seen in a positive aspect, bringing life to a “different world” through a bittersweet tragedy, creating something out of nothing. Although for a good cause, the creator made her believe she was in a stimulated world, the situation being, her in a coma with an active mind.
Group 16
Dorothyrose McMahon
Dominique Gomez
Daniella Galindo
Colleen Siongco
Christopher Williams
Charles Watson

Glenn Zucman

Nice summary of the films… but can you take it further? Yes, the stories are as you describe, but what are the Cultural ramifications of living with such Technology? Is this a world you want to live in? Do you already live in this world? How could you create a different world? How do these experience shape or modify or define reality?


Group 6

“Sight” and “World Builder” utilizes technology in two drastically different methods. Eran May-raz and Daniel Lazo’s piece portrays technology in a negative tone. The cold scenery in the beginning of the video foreshadows a bleak meaning for technology. Although the film portrays the innovative use of technology, its purpose is seen in a negative light as the guy attempts to “hack” into the innocent woman’s mind. 

As opposed to the first video shown, Bruce Branit’s work shows technology in a positive direction. The main character is seen building a “utopian” scenery for his lover who is experiencing a coma. This is evident when the timer drops to zero as she appears out of thin air. The way in which she admires the rustic town reflects on the man’s intentions to please her in a time of despair. His intentions are obvious when the audience sees him “kissing” the screen of her with the blooming flower. 

Two great videos: two different meanings. On on hand, technology is seen as a form of manipulation as opposed to the other one as it’s use benefits a sick person. The videos portray the extent to which technology can be used: good or bad. 

Cheryl Peng
Catherine Chin
Brianna Hastie
Ashley Batres
Alyssa Castro
Aaron Dela Rosa

Glenn Zucman

Thanks guys!
This is a good summary of the films, but can you take it further? Can you do an analysis? How would such “future” technology change culture? Life? Reality? Is it “future technology”? Or are we already living in such a world? How would you opt in or opt out of such an existence? Is the future inevitable?


We thought that the first video, “Sight” by Eran May-raz and Daniel Lazo was a portrayal of just how easily our lives can be consumed by advances in technology. It represented the ease at which one can change the reality that we dwell in and access things that should be kept private in a normal society. The technology transformed the world into a dystopian lifestyle in which it is completely dependent on technology, and can lead to the demise of independence and free-will . The second video, “World Builder” by Bruce Branit is portrayed in a more positive way by the use of technology for the benefit of others. The man in the video created an alternate, somewhat utopian reality in which the woman seemed to enjoy. However, both of the videos are conveying a sort of isolationist lifestyle that may or may not be a prediction into the future of our society.

Group 8
Rebekah Johnson,
Rejina Hernandez
Rosa Velazquez
Reuben Dyce
Shannon McGuinness
Regan K. Cameron

Glenn Zucman

Nice analysis guys. Can you go further? Is this the “future”? Or the present? Can you draw any parallels to the tools you use today? To Facebook or Instagram or Foursquare?


The first video displays how technology can be used in both positive and negative ways, but more importantly negatively through manipulation. The second video displays the positive things technology can do. We felt both videos emphasized the power of technology and what it is capable of in both good and bad ways.

Group 11:
Maison chiu
Lorena rubalcava
Maria barreda
Leah Perez
Lainie Le
Leon Phung

Glenn Zucman

Hi guys. I’d like to see you go a lot further with this. You’ve only stated the obvious of the videos. Can you dig deeper? Do we already live in that world? Is it 50 years away? 5? How would you help bring it about? How would you avoid it? How does technology create art & culture? Try to go beyond stating the plot and think about what it means and how Tools or Platforms or Apps like the ones in the videos, or the ones on your phone, can shape Art, Culture, Reality, Perception, and Life.


Sight was a little more darker, while World Builder was more warm. When she was in a medical room it looked like she was in a virtual room. We thought that Sight was more interesting because we can see that happening in the future. We find it to be a bit scary because when he was he on the date, there were so many tips given to him. At the end, when the girl found out that he had a dating app on his achievement wall, she got mad and wanted to leave. He ended up hacking into her system and erasing what she had found out. For World Builder, we thought that the guy was trying to make his loved one happy while she was in the coma. It was interesting how so much can be done with technology. For example, choosing outfits, paying the bill, building trees, and etc.

Group 10
Natalie Guevara
Nancy Tran
Molly Poyer
Mia Miller
Marylin Try
Martin Diaz

Glenn Zucman

Good statement of the plot guys. Can you go deeper? Try to think about how technology creates art & culture. Is this a chicken and egg situation? Do Art & Culture envision the technology we create? Like the Star Trek communicator being the prototype for the flip phone and smart phone? Or does Technology drive art & culture? Do we live in a world where how we live and what we value are affordances of the technology we live with?


We found that the Builder video was much optimistic than Sight. In that video they used technology to give her positive memories while in the coma. You can also find that builder was much more sad since it was about losing a loved one. But in sight the male used technology to exploit the female and see what she wanted. Visually Sight seemed much better. It was clearer and seemed to have more effort put in to it. Both had good sound effect qualities. So in summary, Sight shows the dangers of technology and how it can hurt society, while builder put a much more optimistic look on technology and how it can help human relationships.
-Sean Hernandez
-Jackson Bursch
– Andrew Hana
-Ciprian Robielos
-Jerry Pleitez
-Sam Tan

Glenn Zucman

Good summary of the plots of these 2 videos. Can you go further? Can you think about how Technology creates Art & Culture? Do tools like these define our reality? Is what we saw in these films inevitable? Desirable? In a world where Hollywood creates desire, Silicon Valley defines relationships, and both define culture, do you have the opportunity to create your own reality? Or are WE like the girl in Sight, ultimately being hacked by the technologists of our age?


Group 9

RaVen Montgomery
Ramtin Yousefi
Peter Bay
Patrick Dong
Oscar Alvarez
Ngozi Ekwedike

Sight, shows the bad side of technology and how it can be abused and how instead of technology just being a tool that we can use, it becomes a part of the human body. The second video shows that the technology was used as a tool for a man to still have an interaction with his wife while she was on life support or close to death. We seem to agree that technology in the first video Sight was over thew top and that it is bad for society because it makes everything more dull. The technology in the first one was more for personal gain while the other was not. Sight also makes it seem that that is how society will inevitably become.

Glenn Zucman

Good insights you guys! Can you go further? When you say “makes everything more dull”? Can you describe further? As opposed to?

When was life less dull? When we had Child Labor? When we had Slavery? When Women couldn’t Vote? Which “less dull” history are you thinking is better?

Can you talk about ways to foster or prevent life becoming dull?


Group 19
The videos we watched revolved around the potential uses of augmented reality in the future. They both explore the different spectrums of a relationship through the use of virtual reality. In our first example, it reaches more into the dating world involving the things people will do to have something go their way. In the second, it touches more on the concept of the lengths people will stretch themselves for another.

Margarita Reyna
Devon Carus
David Brown
Christopher Chadwick
Brandon Nhem
Aaron Valenzuela

Glenn Zucman

Yes! You guys are off to a good start. I realize we don’t have much time for these discussions, but try to take your good start and go further with these ideas. Are these things inevitable? Is it already this way? Can you draw parallels to technology you use now? How could you shape a different Art / Culture / Reality if you wanted to? For yourself? For your neighbors?


Group 18

We thought that he was trying to create a perfect world for his love and was trying to get every single detail perfectly. Along with a technological advance to help him do that.
We also thought that the futuristic video was trying to create a perfect world for himself with the use of technology. More of how technology can help advance what he wants.
Both mainly represent how technology is taking over both in a good and bad way.

Alfonso Madrigal
Alexander Lucero
alanna Godinez
Aaron Satterfield
Glenda Castillo
Andrew Andrade

Glenn Zucman

Good start you guys. Can you go deeper? Is this the world you want to live in? Is this the world you already live in? Can you draw parallels between these scenarios and the technology we already live with now? Is Technology destiny? Does technology shape art and culture? Do art & culture shape technology? Is it a dance? Do you have any choice? Or can you only live in the world as defined by technologists?


Both films depict futuristic ideals; however, the first short film was more open ended compared to the second one which evoked more emotion. Sight was more open ended in a way that the intent of the characters were unclear and it was more difficult to understand the situation. On the other hand, World Builder involved more human characteristics where the characters were able to literally build a world of their own based on how they felt despite the more advanced technology involved in contrast to the technology involved in Sight where the people were being manipulated by technology.

Joshua Hyun
John Stouras
Jhonatan Ramos Lopez
Jesus Viramontes
Jessica Addonizio
Jazlyn Tabar

Glenn Zucman

Good ideas guys! Is this the “future”? Or the present? Do you see any parallels to the way we live now and the technology we use now? To how things like Points and Grades and Diplomas and Paychecks and Annual Salaries shape our values, desires, and behaviors? Are you inevitably a slave to the machine? Or can you control your own destiny? Can you define your own reality? Do you love your cell phone? Could you turn it off for a week?

Destiny Farihi

Group 5:

After watching the two short films, the film “Sight” focuses on the subject of the rising impact of technology. Also, unlike “World Builder”, “Sight” was used mostly for personal gain, while the main male character is trying to figure out everything about the woman on the blind date. With his admin privileges, and the way the film ended, it leaves the viewer wondering how much of her “system” he can take over.
In “World Builder”, the film focuses mostly on love and how the man is trying to give the woman memories and happiness while she’s in the hospital. He’s trying to care for the woman to reassure her that everything will be okay.
Both films focus on the future of technology and in the end, it all depends on what you do with this technology.

Erick Diaz
Enrique Plascencia
Elizabeth Moledo
Destiny Farihi
Cynthia Esquivias
Christian Aguirre

Glenn Zucman

Nice ideas guys! Can you go further? How does technology effect YOU? These films feel a little futuristic. But are they? Are these kinds of forces working on you right now? Is the perfect World Builder world just a fancier version of the “manufactured reality” of Instagram? Who are you without your cell phone? What is real? How do you choose your reality? Your values? Your desires? Can you choose? Or do the Cultural Technologists of Silicon Valley & Hollywood choosing for you?


Both videos were executed very well. Our group thought they differed because one was filmed from an arial view and showed everything in a distance perspective, where as another was more close up. We believe both videos deal with futuristic and technologic advancements in our world. The first video” “Sight” seemed as if the man was in a game system or his life was based on different apps. The video was thought provoking and we believed he lived with a purpose and goal of getting points! He seemed to be more interested in gaining points than actually living in the moment. The second video: “World Builder” was definitely more sad than the first video and was more based on technology as he built a second world. In both videos there were major technological advancements and we pondered if these advancements, and having societies lives based off of apps and 100% technology could be very beneficial and negative to our society. Both videos relate to how our society is becoming 100% technological world and how many people overuse their technology on a daily basis!

Madison Braverman
Leslie Echiveste
Adilene Leon
Xiomara Barnes
Valerie Laslo
Tiffany Tran

Glenn Zucman

Nice insights guys! You talked about Apps, Points & Technological Advancements… that sounds like your world right now! Are these films about the future? Or the present? To what degree do you live through apps? To what degree do you work for points? To what degree is your reality shaped, defined, and afforded by technological advancements?


Group 2
Amber Bolden
Tyler Kedis
Florenz Francis Baltazar
Christopher Moore
Bianca Dominguez
Valentina Ramirez

Comparing and contrasting the first and second video on more of a visual level, Sight was far more sharp and focused on a storyline. World Builder seemed to be more of a fantasy, dream-like state (maybe because of the woman in the coma). Sight occurred to us as a very near future as the obsession with technology in culture continues to grow and take over daily activities while World Builder involved creating a completely original world digitally, something that seems like it may be further into the future. On an emotional level, Sight aimed to warn or scare us of the powers of technology. World Builder took more of a sentimental approach, making technology out to be a useful and purposeful medium. Lastly, we found it interesting that in both videos the male characters were portrayed as the “creators” and the “dominant” characters of the stories being told.

Glenn Zucman

Good ideas guys! YES, interesting that it’s the “future” but it’s still driven by one gender? Is that realistic? Are there alternatives? Do men care more about technology than women?

Good insights that Sight isn’t so futuristic. It’s kind of like the mobile phone you already have with Google Glass. But is World Builder so far off? Isn’t World Builder pretty much the virtual world of Second Life, which launched 13 years ago!?


Group 1: Christine Kim, Anthony Estalilla, Jonathan Behzadian, Danielle Garcia, Crysta Tim, Kyu Jung Lee

Similarities: Both use a lot of editing to emphasize that the stories are set in the future. Both male characters are pursuing female characters (but for different reasons.) Both male characters seek validation, SIGHT’s character seeks validation in the form of points and acquiring dates while World Builder’s character seeks validation in the form of his wife’s smile/happiness. Both regard private life, but in different ways. SIGHT’s regard of private life is that technology will make it impossible to keep life private. World Builder illustrates the ability to preserve private virtual memories with people who are unable to communicate in reality to create those memories.

Differences: SIGHT is dystopian, showing the negative effects of what technology can come to. World Builder is more optimistic, showing that we can bring people together through virtual worlds to create memories when it is impossible. SIGHT alters the real world while World Builder creates a completely new virtual universe.

Glenn Zucman

Interesting insights guys! Sight mods RL, and World Bulider creates an alternate reality! Nice!

You say both use editing to emphasize that the stories are set in the future — what does this mean? How does “a lot of editing” make something feel “set in the future”?

Yes on your gender observation. Does it have to be this way? Can you visualize anything else?

Is Privacy already over? Do you care? How much privacy do you want? How much privacy can you have? Is privacy the reason you like Snapchat so much more than Facebook?


Group 7:
As a group we thought the first video showed how technology can take over our lives. We felt that technology turns everything into a game and makes you solely dependent on it. We creeped out by the possibility of that being our future. The second video was more emotional and it was silent so it left it more open for interpretation. He used technology to impact others and not just improve his life.

William Luna
Vanessa Betancourt
Tiffany Van Gilder
Tareena Woods
Symone Pallett
Shayenne Prasad

Glenn Zucman

You said,

We felt that technology turns everything into a game and makes you solely dependent on it. We creeped out by the possibility of that being our future.

Is it your present?

Is the high tech of these films actually pretty close to the “tools” we use today? Isn’t everything already a game? In Art110 I get hundreds of emails about points and none about Art or Ideas. Is CSULB already a “points game”?


Group 17:
Cassandra Topete
Carlos Hava
Carlos Cucufate
Bez Middleton
Anthony Sanchez
Annie Ronning

Our group discussed that the first video had a dystopian theme to it that showed a potentially negative side of technology. We agreed that with the rapid advancements of technology, the only private realm that remains in our world is inside our own head/mind and the fact the man gained control of the woman’s “software” is fairly scary. The first video gave off a feeling of discomfort and invasion to personal privacy. It makes the viewer look at technology from a new perspective that may be threatening to society. Without real and interpersonal reactions, the world we live in would be completely changed.

The second video showed the positive advantages of technology for society. The man showed his dedication and love for the woman by creating an entire world she can be happy in, despite the fact it only existed in her mind. This video makes the viewer feel like there is hope for the future as technology rapidly advances around us.

Glenn Zucman

Good insights guys!

Do you think the past had more privacy? When you were a slave in your master’s house, was that more privacy? When people lived in very high densities in a single home, was that more privacy? When everyone in your small town knew everyone’s business, was that more privacy? When you could go to jail because of the gender of your sexual partner, was that more privacy?

Interesting idea that privacy is only what we keep in our own minds. But don’t we post “everything” on Social Media? Don’t we willingly give away all of our privacy for the sake of social cred? At least the girl in Sight knew what she didn’t want. Do we have that much control? Or are we already being “reprogrammed” by our sexy devices?


Group 15
Gabriela Hernandez
Francisco Miranda
Enrique Vega
Elijah Yee
Elida Ramirez
Eduardo Castillo

Both videos showed similarities where technology is prevalent to the future in trying to create the perfect world, but each pictured a future that was either utopian or dystopian and how each uses technology to impact society. In the World Builder, we can see how technology to create an afterlife. In the Sight, we can see how life may be in the future if we keep continuing being dependent on technology. For example, Sight portrays how real social interactions becomes replaced by games and levels. We are not in control anymore, but controlled by the technology we have created.

Glenn Zucman

Good insights guys. Is this the future? Or the present? You talk about social interaction being replaced by games and levels. Hasn’t that already happened? Can you go out with friends without looking at your phone once?

Group 20

The first video was quite interesting. Although the material of the first video is considered sci-fi, it did not seem far fetched seeing the way that technology is progressing. The eye-gadget would seem distracting in a real life since it would constantly update humans on non-essential information, or the analysis it was producing of the surrounding environments throughout the film. The film did portray a dark side to technology and how far it should go, since the female actor was able to be controlled and investigated against her will.

The 2nd film displayed a nostalgic feeling since the man in this video was producing a perfect setting for his wife/companion who seemed to appear in a coma. The usage of the software helped the man make a connection to his wife so that his companion would be able to stay in “better place”. Part of this film is realistic in the near future in the sense that virtual reality is currently being designed in order to be used by architects and engineers to create prototypes and models for their work.

Overall both videos depicted a future where technology can play a strong role in our lives, whether it’d be a positive or negative role.

Carlos Marvin Madrigal:
Greg Plantenga:
Francesca Butler:
Marlon Fernandes:
Jennifer Garcia

Glenn Zucman

Good insights guys! Yes, it does seem more now than future in many ways.

Yes the eye gadget might be distracting… but you’d have preferences and levels of interrupts and could control it, right? Or, are we already totally distracted by our phone gadgets?

Is it “a future” where technology plays a strong role in our Lives / Art / Culture / Perception / Reality… or a present?


In the first video, technology was represented as something that we relied on more than we needed to. It was something that appeared harmful despite the potential uses that came with it. Between the two videos, the first video definitely was displaying the negative effects that come with the advancement of technology. The man’s empty apartment (and empty personality for that matter) display the emptiness of the advanced technology presented in the video. Sure, there was convenience in this technology, but at what cost? Is displaying all of your personal information worth being able to order wine and the flick of your eye? In the second video, the beauty of technology, both through the medical technology and the world builder through which the man created memories for his dying loved one.

Group 12
Kyle Shishido
Kordell Tan
Kimberly Gutierrez
Katherine Shinno
Katherine Pantoja
Julio Garcia

Glenn Zucman

Good insights guys. But are your insights about this dark “future” in the films? Can’t everything you said also apply to our phones and other technology that shapes us and defines our world today?


Leave a Reply