MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403424104 · doi:10.1080/01956051.2024.2391263

Failed dreams, fresh beginnings: A conversation with Jason Karman on <i>Golden Delicious</i>

2024· article· en· W4403424104 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tom Ue

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Popular Film and Television · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicJungian Analytical Psychology
Canadian institutionsCape Breton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConversationArtArt historyPhilosophyHistoryLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Growing up is never easy, as Asian-Canadian director Jason Karman makes clear in his first feature Golden Delicious (2022). In this interview, we discuss his widely acclaimed film, which was recognized by festivals including the Toronto Reelworld Film Festival, the Vancouver Asian Film Festival, FilmOut San Diego, and the Frameline San Francisco International LGBTQ Film Festival. The film’s title references a restaurant that links three generations of the Wong family. For over 20 years, George (Ryan Mah) and Andrea (Leeah Wong) have worked tirelessly to keep afloat the restaurant that he inherited from his parents. Now, they want bigger and better things for their children—seventeen-year-old Jake (Cardi Wong) and his sister Janet (Claudia Kai)—all the while overlooking their needs and wants. Such tensions are given renewed urgency by the entrance of the Wongs’ attractive new neighbour Aleks (Chris Carson) and by Andrea’s discovery of George’s affair. In this interview, Karman and I discuss some of the challenges of making this film; his reading of its central antagonist Ronald (Jesse Hyde); and the untidiness of its ending. This interview offers insights into intergenerational relationships and investigates how effective cinema can be for exploring their complexities.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.915

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.288 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Popular Film and TelevisionSame topicJungian Analytical PsychologyFrench-language works237,207