Junior Jacob Salzberg mutters lines under his breath. He repeats “This is ridiculous; please call this off!” quietly over and over.

“Am I still terrified?” Salzberg asks a few seconds later.

“You’re pissed off,” producer John Goodwin says.

In a slightly run-down student house on Patterson Street, eight students find themselves shoved haphazardly into one room with lights, cameras and sound equipment. Someone claps their hands loudly, marking the beginning of a scene — this is as much to quiet everyone down as it is to tell the editor, who will peer over hours of footage once the filming wraps up, where the take officially starts. Salzberg falls into character.

In front of a hastily hung green felt background, Salzberg (now the character “Matt”) frantically tells the camera how he fears for his life now that he knows one of his roommates, “Chris,” is a murderer — a fact revealed after the last episode of the mock reality TV show “Random Roommates.” The cameras stop after two takes, which are deemed successful, and the entire congregation heads upstairs to shoot the next scene.

This is how a group of Duck TV students spent their Friday night.

Duck TV is the University of Oregon’s student-run television network, home of news segments, sports broadcasting and many fictitious shows pitched from the minds of some of UO’s most creative students. Two shows which aired this term are “The Lab,” a suspense mystery-thriller revolving around the limits of human evolution and “Random Roommates,” wherein four radically different male students are shoved into one house under the guise of having their shenanigans filmed by a reality TV crew.

Junior Conor Armor pitched the faux-reality show after the success of his comedy show last term, “SuperDan and the Green Wombat,” which he co-wrote with Salzberg. After “SuperDan” won Duck TV’s award for audience favorite, Armor decided to try writing a solo project.

“I wanted to try and improve my comedy writing,” Armor said. “I thought, ‘What’s a ridiculous concept that people can relate to, aimed at a college audience? Everyone can relate to having awkward, weird roommates. What’s the most ridiculous combination of people you can have? A home-schooled kid who’s never seen a beer bottle in his life and a drug dealer.’”

“Random Roommates” embraces the absurd while confronting the uncomfortable. The characters partake in acid trips, puns, failed flirting and acts of revenge. Episode two, which heavily featured fake feces, was even deemed too inappropriate to air on Duck TV and instead found its home on YouTube.

“The Lab” is a different creature altogether. Writer and creator Blair Lindberg has been creating movies since he first borrowed his dad’s camcorder at 8 years old. He says he is rarely caught without his notebook, where he scribbles ideas for TV and film productions in a language only he can interpret fully. In his notebook resides his first inklings about the four-episode science fiction drama, which was adapted from its original feature-film version.

“I was thinking, ‘Why haven’t we been evolving lately?’” Lindberg said. “(The human race) has been static in terms of growing — what would happen if we did start all of a sudden evolving again? What would we become?” Lindberg had been working on the concept for “The Lab” for three years before it premiered on Duck TV.

“I’m so passionate about telling a story because, at the end of the day, that’s really all we have that we can call our own — stories,” Lindberg said. “Film is one of the great mediums that really exploits that.”

Not only is Lindberg the creative mind behind the show, he also portrays one of its main characters, Dr. Zahn — although Lindberg admits that he much prefers the creativity behind the camera as opposed to being in front of it.

While creative writing behind the camera is the first step of the process, screenwriters like Lindberg and Armor require actors to bring their work to life.

One such actor is freshman Lexi Sloan, who plays a main character on “The Lab” and was also in “SuperDan.” She has been a theater actress since she was 8 years old, working in three shows a year. Growing up in Southern California, she became familiar with the Hollywood culture.

After stumbling upon a poster for Duck TV auditions in early fall, Sloan found herself in front of a panel of upperclassmen. She was hastily given a scene from one of Christopher Nolan’s “Batman” films to act out.

“You walk in and there’s anywhere between five to seven people sitting behind a big table,” Sloan recalled. “They’re all juniors and seniors; no one looked like a kid from my class. It’s very fast-paced and intimidating.” Despite her nerves, Sloan landed a part. “Once you’re in, I found it to be fun,” she said.

“Auditions” in the Duck TV sense, are for anyone, from those seeking to be producers, actors, sound technicians or editors. The show may start in the notebook of someone like Lindberg or Armor and may continue through the talents of actors like Sloan and Salzberg, but the final product is far from complete.

That’s where people like Rebecca Felcyn come in.

What many consider the most arduous task of film and television production, Felcyn sees as a calling. Like Sloan, Felcyn, a freshman, also discovered Duck TV through a poster and was able to land a position exactly where she wanted to be: in front of a computer, editing.

“I enjoy sitting down and being frustrated; it’s weird how in love I am with it,” Felcyn said of editing. “So many things have to go into making ten people look like a house party.” She edits the episodes for “Random Roommates” and was also the editor for “SuperDan.”

Felcyn, who does not attend the shows’ shootings, is often given hours of footage without really knowing what she’s going to see when she plays them. The producers will often apologize to her through the camera for messed-up shots, yelling “We’re sorry, Rebecca!” from off-camera.

“It’s all about bringing the producers’ vision to life,” Felcyn said. The editing process, from when she gets the randomly labeled video files to when the episode is fit for screening, takes anywhere from six to eight hours, sometimes more. After that, one week’s episode is finally complete, screened and put up on the Duck TV website. Each Duck TV fiction show gets four episodes from start to finish, with each installment being approximately eight minutes long.

“It is nice to write something and then immediately see it produced and get a sense of how what you put down on a piece of paper can be envisioned by other people,” Armor said.

“Top Chef,” “Iron Chef America,” Hot dog eating contests. Local pie contests. What is it with Americans and competing with their food?

Regardless of where the interest lies, either in competitive eating, drinking or cooking, the fact remains that people love their food and love the challenges that can be shaped around it. According to Time Magazine, competitive eating has a foothold in 13th-century Norse myths, where an eating contest between the god Loki and his servant ended in the servant’s victory through consuming the plate. Major League Eating, the official international eating contest organization, records that the Nathan’s Famous Fourth of July International Hot Dog-Eating Contest has been held each year since 1916.

Food competitions outside of TV are by no means a recent phenomenon. “Iron Chef” premiered in Japan in 1993, was adopted in the United States in 2005 and by the UK and Australia in 2010. The appeal for viewers to witness food competitions, instead of lessons on preparing food, is an interesting and surprising phenomenon. Food competitions, both in eating and cooking, do not allow the TV viewer or audience member to sample the products. Sure, it’s entertaining to see reigning champ Takeru Kobayashi eat 20 pounds of rice balls in 30 minutes, but what is it that keeps this type of entertainment alive?

According to NBC’s “Today,” strong personalities and enthusiastic eating and food-description keep the audience engaged. Competition shows like “Project Runway” and “American Idol” allow the viewer a bit of personal judgment, something that food shows cannot provide. This, however, can be compensated for through the use of entertaining judges and hosts, and delicious food. Sure, not everyone can sew a gown or sing a ballad, but everyone enjoys food.

At the end of the day, this is what draws people to food-based competitions — the desire to witness food on a level they perhaps cannot reach, but can appreciate. Sure, most of us can’t eat 41 Lobster Rolls in 10 minutes like Kobayashi, or win “Iron Chef” battles like Bobby Flay, but there’s something about watching people eat and describe amazing food that keeps us coming back.

Movies help to define each individual generation. The ability to say, “I saw that when it came out in theaters!” is a bragging right claimed by many since the early 1900s.

But behind each great movie is a great director. The 1940s and ’50s have Alfred Hitchcock. The 1960s and ’70s claimed Stanley Kubrick. Woody Allen and John Hughes took over the movie scene from 1980s and 1990s, and directors like Steven Spielberg, Martin Scorsese and James Cameron have been powerhouses on the direction scene for decades.

But who will college students of today boast about? Here are a few directors I’d like to nominate as helping to define the cinema of the current generation.

— Wes Anderson: From 1996′s “Bottle Rocket” to last year’s “Moonrise Kingdom,” Anderson uses his unique style of bizarre characters and gliding camera work to tell strange and captivating stories.

— Hiyao Miyazaki: Sure, “Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind” and “My Neighbor Totoro” were ’80s films, but I like to think Miyazaki belongs more to us with his animated masterpieces “Spirited Away” (2001) and “Howl’s Moving Castle” (2004).

— David Fincher: Can this man create a bad film? When “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” (2011), “Fight Club” (1999) and “The Social Network” (2010) are on his list of achievements, I think not.

— Kathryn Bigelow: As unfortunate as it is, our generation will remember vividly being a country at war with the Middle East, and Bigelow has created (so far) two critically acclaimed films on the subject. “The Hurt Locker” (2008) and “Zero Dark Thirty” (2012) won’t be movies soon forgotten.

— Joel and Ethan Coen: The Coen brothers have mastered the art of combining disturbing themes with whimsical humor. “Fargo” (1996), “The Big Lebowski” (1998), “No Country for Old Men” (2007) and “True Grit” (2010) are just a few of their memorable projects, and the brothers never seem willing to take a break. Let’s hope it stays that way.

— Joss Whedon: His resume is not as Oscar-heavy as those mentioned previously, but Whedon is the quintessential nerd-culture director of current times. His creation of strong female roles makes him a unique specimen in the film world, and his work with everything from “The Avengers” (2012) to “Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog” (2008) gives him an unorthodox and impressive filmography.

The fashion designing reality show “Project Runway” decided to change up its 11th season. Instead of each designer working in a cutthroat personal bubble to claw their way to the top, host Heidi Klum and designing adviser Tim Gunn announced to the 16 contestants on the season’s premiere on Jan. 24 they were participating in the first ever “Project Runway: Teams Edition.” In previous seasons, contestants worked on their own, focusing on their individual designs. Now designers are forced to depend on their fellow contestants and work to make designs that are cohesive within a collection.

The designers were broken up into two teams of eight to work together to create a miniature clothing line judged by Klum, returning judge Nina Garcia and, taking the place of past judge Michael Kors for this season, fashion designer Zac Posen.

These two teams, Dream Team and Team Keeping It Real, learned quickly the strongest and weakest designers on their respective teams. Judges now determine a winning team and a losing team — the individual winning designer must come from the winning team, and the designer sent home must come from the losing team. This means that a designer can present the weakest garment and not get sent home if the rest of his or her team did well enough to give that team the win. In addition, the most skilled designer won’t see victory if he or she is constantly on the losing team.

Dream Team did not live up to its name the first three episodes — the group lost three designers after three consecutive losses. The fourth episode saw Gunn switch up a few team members in order to even out the skewed numbers, and this change-up gave Dream Team its first win.

Episode five aired last night — the first since the premiere where both teams started with equal numbers: six each. I won’t spoil the episode, but “Project Runway” fans will enjoy the continued drama brought about with team dynamics.

The 2013 Academy Awards airs this Sunday, Feb. 24, and the array of films, directors and actors up for consideration is no less impressive than previous years. I have made my own Oscar predictions for this year based on professional reviews, critical acclaim and, of course, the films themselves. While I don’t believe any film nominated for an award was falsely endorsed, I do have my own personal hopes for the outcomes.

Best Picture

My estimates give Best Picture to Ben Affleck’s “Argo.” This film follows a CIA agent’s attempted rescue of American diplomats after the U.S. embassy in Tehran is taken over by Iranian revolutionists in 1976. It had the second-highest audience rating on Rotten Tomatoes of all the Best Picture nominees at 93 percent. Quentin Tarantino’s “Django Unchained” received a 94 percent, but will be passed up on the Best Picture front due to its lack — in comparison to “Argo,” at least — of emotion. “Django,” a fantastic film about a freed slave and a German dentist’s journey as bounty hunters through the mid-1800s United States does not play so much at the heartstrings as “Argo” does, and the Academy does so love its films with less humor and more pain, especially in the endings (past winners include “Schindler’s List,” “The English Patient,” “Gladiator,” “A Beautiful Mind” and “The Departed”). Additionally, 2009’s Best Picture victory for Kathryn Bigelow’s “The Hurt Locker” shows that the Academy has a soft spot for films about struggles with the Middle East. Why, then, won’t Bigelow’s “Zero Dark Thirty” capture the statue? The LA Times said it best in claiming that the controversy surrounding the film’s portrayal of torture gives it little chance of winning gold for Best Picture.

Best Actor

I expect Daniel Day-Lewis to take home the Oscar for Best Actor for his performance as Abraham Lincoln in Steven Spielberg’s “Lincoln.” It’s hard to believe this Irish-English actor is capable of portraying the soft-spoken, thoughtful American president, but if his Oscar win in 2007 for “There Will Be Blood” and 1989 for “My Left Foot” prove anything, it’s that Day-Lewis is probably one of the most dedicated and immersive actors on the market today. Not to say that Hugh Jackman in “Les Miserables,” Joaquin Phoenix in “The Master,” Bradley Cooper in “Silver Linings Playbook” and Denzel Washington in “Flight” weren’t masters of their own performances.

Best Actress

Best actress is a more difficult award to predict. Time Magazine has its money on “Zero Dark Thirty’s” Jessica Chastain, but Huffington Post claims Jennifer Lawrence’s performance in “Silver Linings Playbook” will win her the trophy. Indiewire predicts “Amour” actress Emmanuelle Riva, the oldest Best Actress nominee in Academy history at 86, will beat out these other women, but in this instance, I’m going to have to agree with Time Magazine. Chastain’s performance as a CIA officer obsessed with capturing Osama Bin Laden was forceful and convincing.

Regardless of the outcome of the 2013 Oscars, I look forward to a night of film appreciation and hope that host Seth MacFarlaneis funny enough to keep up.

16 seasons and 237 episodes makes “South Park” the fourth-longest running animated show in U.S. television history. Creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone don’t seem to be slowing down either — in 2011, Comedy Central renewed the show through 2016, giving it at least until its 20th season. But Parker and Stone have plans to change the show’s process a bit for its upcoming 17th season, which is set to air on Sept. 25.

Fans of the show will be familiar with its unorthodox airing schedule — each season consists of two separate batches of seven episodes, 14 total, with the first batch concluding in April and the second batch beginning in October. Future seasons will be stepping away from this production schedule and instead will air a single batch of 10 episodes. This will give Parker and Stone more time to focus on their recently created production studio Important Studios.

Not only that, but the “South Park” creators are also thinking of translating their mega-hit Broadway musical “The Book of Mormon” into a feature-length film, a project that seems even more likely with the development of their new studio company.

Fans of the crudely hilarious animated show will have to decide come September whether or not the creators’ other priorities take away from the quality of the social commentary of “South Park,” and also whether the episode switch-up is a good or bad thing.

Back in 2003,  the world fell in love with a clownfish. This fish’s name was Nemo. We fell in love with his paranoid but caring father, Marlin, and Marlin’s curious, forgetful travel companion, Dory. We fell in love with a radical sea turtle named Crush and mysterious moorish idol named Gill. We met a group of sharks trying to swear off eating fish and an aquarium stuffed with strange but highly likeable characters from the sea. But more than any of them, we remember: P. Sherman, 42 Wallaby Way, Sydney.

Pixar’s fifth animated film, “Finding Nemo,” followed a father’s journey through the ocean in search of his son, who was scooped up by human scuba divers and relocated to a dentist office’s aquarium. The film was touching on an emotional level, and, as Pixar’s films often are, it was enjoyable across all ages, and won the Oscar that year for Best Animated Feature. Fans of the film will be happy to hear that this classic is, indeed, getting a sequel.

The sequel will feature the same director and writer as the original, Andrew Stanton, who also wrote and directed “WALL-E” and “A Bug’s Life.” Deadline announced on Tuesday that comedian Albert Brooks would be reprising his voice role as Marlin, and comedian Ellen DeGeneres is said to be returning as Dory.

This leaves viewers wondering — what’s the plot? Is Nemo going to get lost again? Just how slippery is this fish? “Finding Nemo” left the characters happy, having for the most part overcome their individual flaws. Will new flaws be introduced?

It looks like Pixar fans are going to have to wait a while for any new information about the film, which isn’t going to be released until 2016.

Kissing in the rain. Unfounded jealousy. Clumsy accidental first meetings. Perfectly witty, off-the-cuff banter. These are some romance movie clichés I’m sick of.

Give me awkward pauses. Give me insignificant misunderstandings. Give me women who don’t jump to irrational conclusions and men who understand common decency toward the opposite gender. The average mass-produced romantic film is chock-full of tropes that have been beaten to death and that I, along with many film buffs before me, see as lazy screenwriting and directing.

Even movie posters are losing originality, blurring together into a one-size-fits-all red-and-pink-colored picture of two beautiful white people looking longingly (or disparagingly) at one another. Can’t we have a less-than-perfectly attractive male and female lead? Maybe take a break from hetero-normality?

I’m just waiting for someone in the movie making industry to take a chance.

It has been eight years since “Brokeback Mountain” challenged popular views of what romantic movies need to be. In 2012, “Savages” turned monogamy on its head, introducing the audience to the lesser-known concept of a polyamorous relationship. Certainly, there is no dearth of ideas when it comes to revamping an old genre, but major studios, it seems, are reluctant to embrace unique approaches that are outside the norm, even though those risks have proven time and again to be successful — the dysfunctional romance in 2008′s “The Reader” won Kate Winslet the Best Actress Oscar, and that same year, Woody Allen’s “Vicky Cristina Barcelona,” featuring a polyamorous relationship among people of different ethnicities, won the Golden Globe for Best Motion Picture (Musical or Comedy).

I implore those in the movie business to put down the habit-made manual on how to create the dime-a-dozen romance flicks and try to push the emotional and physical boundaries of human behavior when it comes to love. A quick look at reality shows that the fictitious world of film is playing it safe on the romance front.

Valentine’s Day movie lists remain as predictable as the movies they suggest. Sick of magazines promoting “Love Actually”as a means to bond with your significant other? Want to save “Casablanca” for another day? Here are some excellent movies where romance is not necessarily the main plot:

— “Wonder Boys” (2000) tells the tale of a dysfunctional university professor (Michael Douglas), who is stuck picking up the pieces of his off-kilter editor (Robert Downey Jr.) and mysterious student (Tobey Maguire). During it all, he struggles to deal with his adoration for his boss’s wife (Frances McDormand) with whom he’s having an affair.

— “Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy” (2004) is about friendship and rivalry more than anything, but TV personality Ron Burgundy (Will Ferrell) has an on-again, off-again passion with fellow anchor-person Veronica (Christina Applegate) that gives an entertaining, dramatic love angle to a classic comedy.

— “Forrest Gump” (1994) Who hasn’t heard of the life-long love story between Forrest (Tom Hanks) and Jenny (Robin Wright)? From childhood friendship (“Run, Forrest, run!”) to destined romantic rekindling, “Forrest Gump” focuses on the life of well-meaning man and his adventures through historical moments, such as the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal.

— “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind” (2004) offers an unorthodox, science fiction look at the emotional struggles behind impassioned relationships and their breakups. Joel (Jim Carrey) and Clementine (Kate Winslet) take the flirty, fun-loving beginning of romance and turn them on their heads.

— “WALL-E” (2008) Some kid movies, if well-made, transcend age boundaries, and Pixar’s “WALL-E” is one of them. Robotic romance may seem hard to relate to, but trash-collecting machine WALL-E and advanced Earth probe EVE show more emotion than many human characters in romance films. These two machines find in each other adventurous spirits and kindred curiosity about the world around them.

Couples don’t have to resort to “chick-flicks” or sappy sweet plots to watch a film this Valentine’s Day. Movies of every genre include sparks of chemistry between characters, and sometimes a hint of romance is more touching than an obvious portrayal.