Live from Tribute to Film

The Big Empy

This was quite possibly the most confusing short film I have ever laid my eyes on. Personally, I never in my wildest dreams thought that a film could be made entirely out of the topic of a woman's vagina...unfathomable. Yet it was...and I was astounded to realize the movie was symbolic although the subject matter seems so literal.

In this movie, a woman has an ache and in the begginning we see a montage of all different doctors failing to diagnose what the problem is. This poor girl was in pain and no one could help her. Finally she goes to a specialist who jumps inside of her (yes this movie is fantastical) and discovers her insides to be completley empty, cold, and a tundra. He then makes her his puppet, selling her abnormality to the public as some sort of amazing feat of life, defying all logic. As if she were a circus freak, she was dragged around on display for the world to see that she was different.

You might wonder what happened to the ache? It went unnoticed, and untreated. Finally a man asked her if being so empty hurt. The only person to recognize that this difference might actually cause her some pain. This was the climax of the film; this moment is where all symbolism unites to illustrate the idea of loneliness. Alice, played by Selma Blair is finally looked at as something more than just an object on display. She was viewed as a person. The thoughtful man then jumped inside of her and never came out. This was the other symbolic moment of the film.

All these weird fantastical events add up to one moral; although everyone is alone, there is someone out there who cares about you. Until you find the one you love and who loves you back, no one will be able to take away the ache of an incomplete heart. The person who ur pain and sees you for who you really are is the one who can remove the ache forever.

Portraying the idea of love and loneliness through the mode of vaginas is quite remarkable. In order for this movie to not be obscene or awkward in any way, the director had to find the line between inappropriate and entertainment. Lisa Chang and Newton Thomas Sigel did a superb job directing and cast to create a movie that had something to say on life in general. To some, the message might be hard to find because they are caught up in the subject and how ridiculous the story is. However the message is obvious and I absolutely loved it.

The Elephant in the Room

As the movie finished I glanced around my classroom. The students sat stunned, staring blankly at the ominous cloud background and fur elise music playing behind the credits. This film, a realistic depiction of a school shooting, was exquisitely made.

The entire movie made you think about movites, causes, and the pain high school kids endure. Obviously the killers must have gone through terrible ordeals in order to birng themselves to murder innocent people. But then one must think, what could have possibly happened to them that rendered them so unsympathetic and cold-hearted that even those who had never bullied a kid in their life should be brought to their death just for attending the same school? As director Gus Van Sant wanted us to relate to, I began to think about the Columbine inncident. Did it happen as the movie depicted? Was the day unlike any other? And where are all the adults while this is happening? It is the adults responsibility to make sure that teenagers in high school are treated fairly and allowed to act or feel however they want within legal bounds and not suffer from humiliation.

Aside from the excellent depiction of a school shooting, the cinematography was unbelievable. It was unlike anything I have yet seen in any movie. The movie gave the apperance of being unedited, having extremley long shots while the camera followed one character as they followed the days events, unaware of what was about to happen. As we could only see the back of one character's head at a time, it left the watcher uneasy because we had no idea of what was happening around them. Unlike other movies where this method might not have gone over very well, I can think of no other filming technique to better demonstrate the days events. We were introduced to one character at a time, not necessarily in chronological order, and we watched as each one of them was murdered. All except one, the innocent along with the 'guilty' were shot.

Not a single sane or admirable adult was shown on film. As the class watched in horror while the events of the day unfolded on the screen, I began to notice the elephant in our room. Had anyone acted in a way that could possibly drive someone to commit such an atrocity? Had any of us perhaps mocked innocently or stood by as an innocent kid was bullied, scarring them for the rest of their life? Awkwardly we all stood around. I know that I am no angel. I admit to have observed bullying a few times in my life and been too cowardly to stop it. All the while we consol ourselves - this won't be the straw, they can always endure more.

The elephant in my classroom stomped around mocking everyone in their seat. Who do we side with? Of course we can't agree with Alex and Eric. How they handled their pain was beyond the boundaries of normal psychological coping mechanisms. There is no excuse for how they acted ever, and it can never be offended. But we can never ignore the cause. Clearly something went wrong in their life and since this was based on true events there are mistakes happening every day that can no longer go ignored.

I hope this movie is an eye-opener for everyone who sees it. We must be aware of the events that unfold around us and we must do the right thing, always. Let there never again be an elephant of that magnitude in any room pertaining to this topic again.

Rushmore, please No More.

I sincerley apologize to anyone who may disgree with the following statement:

Rushmore is one of the worst movies ever made.

It was ridiculously unrealistic, pointless, utterly preposterous, dumb, poorly directed, incoherent, and overall horrible movie. I am not a harsh movie critic so please take what I say into account literally: Do NOT go see this movie.

As a movie pertaining to the life of a high school teenager I would at least expect the plot line to be somewhat entertaining. I foud myself struggling to stay awake as monotonous scene was followed by yet another montonous scene. Much of the film was misleading. While at one point you might believe the film was heading on one direction, you were only supremley disappointed to find out it was heading in a different direction, only to be surprised again moments later when it turned down yet another unforseen road. Some might say unpredictability is directing at its finest. I agree, however, unpredictability only exceeds mediocrity when the actual events formulate a real story. In this case it did not.

I was very excited actually at the start of the film when I found out that the movie was about high school. It happens that my favorite movie is Charlie Bartlett. In fact, these two movies draw extreme similarities. At the beginning, both films open with a fantasy of the main character. Both male main characters are viewed as outsiders, awkward, and weird. They were both kicked out of the private school they love and embrace their place in social society as a misfit. However, Max in Rushmore decides to chase a teacher (not attractive surprisingly) because he supposedly fell in love with her after talking to her for all of three minutes. Max attempts to sabotage anyone in his way. Charlie, in Charlie Bartlett goes the other route. He becomes a selfless peer listener trying to help everyone around him with their problems. These two characters are the antithesis of each other. While Charlie is a character that one grows to love, Max is one that the audience begins to hate.

This film explores no greater meaning to life quite unlike Charlie Bartlett. In Rushmore, I might say that the greatest lesson learned throughout the entire film is honestly. While this is a noble lesson, it is hard to make a best selling movie when the entire story is driven by uncoordinated events strung together on the quest for honesty. Charlie Bartlett however, teaches the lesson of using power for good. It teaches te value for family and for love, and helping peers along the way because everyone needs a shoulder to cry on.

I highly do not recommend you see the movie Rushmore; you will most certainly regret it. I apologize for my strict scrutiny and hope that the next movie I view finds itself in better lighting than this one.

Do The Right Thing...sometimes.

Upon the completion of Do the Right Thing, motion picture directed by Spike Lee, I began to reflect on what I had just watched. True, the opening credits were misleading and at times I found myself playing clips of other more...interesting films in my head, once delving into the point of the story I began to realize how much thought and awareness was put into this movie.

As a title, Do The Right Thing tells you nothing about the film it is named for. What it does say, however, is that there will be a morality lesson posed in the movie and that in fact is true. Near the end the entire movie takes a turn of events when playful aggressive behavior becomes destructive and violent. When Radio Rahemm refused to turn down his music Sal began the downward spiral of unnecessary acts of violence and hatred. This succession evolved into nothing less than a riot, where Radio Raheem is killed by a police officer after refusing to stop choking Sal, and Sal's pizzaria is burnt down.

This dilema poses the question of fault. Who takes the blame? Is it Raheem for abusing his right and not adhering to Sal's rules in his own store which is allowed? Is it Sal for letting his anger get the best of him and smashing the radio? Is it the all the people of the town who were swept up in the emotionof the evening? Or is it the white family who represents the larger problem of racism?

The answer is this: There is no answer. Each individual who watches this movie can come to their own conclusion regarding who was wrong who was right. There is a catch, however. You must be able to justify why you believe this is so. The reason you have to justify is because otherwise you could be labeled racist or ethnocentric. This is an extremley touchy subject and most do not like getting into it at the risk of living up to a stereotype. The movie raises this "elephant" in the room and begs you in the title to DO THE RIGHT THING. You have the right to believe what you want, but it must be based on hard facts.

Sometimes there is no right thing. In some situations, everyone is wrong. This movie skillfully raises the question of blame, and who rightfully deserves it on their shoulders. Both sides are depicted evenly; there is no one 'better' group demonstrated in a more possitive light than the rest. Therefore, this is not just a movie, but a question asking you to search your own morality and look beyond your own personal beliefs to see the much larger issue between not just those of different races and genders, but more importantly between those of the same.

High Noon

Upon the completion of classic film High Noon, I sat back in my desk and began to think. Why is this movie a classic? I see no classical features or timeless plotline. This well-known western was nothing else but anti-climactic. Now I know what you are going to say; I just cannot appreciate a good western film. There my friend, you are wrong. I happened to watch the entire Blazing Saddles and absolutely loved it. Therefore, my conclusion is either 1) It is a movie better watched by contemporaries of the era it was produced, or 2) The film in general is just plain bad.

I am inclined to go with the former, if purely for Zinnerman's sake. My main complaint aside from the black and white is that the film in general was extremley boring. There was no action, and it was primarily a movie about one man walking around an old town trying to gain followers. The acting wasn't necesarily outstanding either in my opinion; there seemed to be no emotion whatsoever in many of the characters' voices. This holds true for all except Gary Cooper (Will Kane).

I will attempt to draw a parallel that in my head appears to completley overlap one another. As I watched this movie I was strongly reminded of the entire Harry Potter series, more specifically the 7th edition. For the obvious, Will Kane (Harry Potter) is the one good guy who resolves to face his enemy rather than run away and go into hiding. The enemy Frank Miller (Lord Voldemort) was first missing, and later arrived on the train to join his cronies (Book 4 when Lord Voldemort was brought back to life and summoned his death eaters.) There are still some of Millers' friends on the streets awaiting his arrival (Voldemort's followers who escaped the ministry of magic.) More specifically to book 7, as Kane walked alone to face Miller I was reminded of when Harry walked alone to the forbidden forest to face Voldemort. The overriding good vrs. evil, morality vrs. selfishness and loyalty questions are present in both.

This is the only good thing I can say about High Noon; it reminded me of my favorite book. Other then that, High Noon fans are on their own. I saw nothing good to comment on; even the camera while filming was shakey. I profusely apologize to all those who loved the movie, however, I have a distinct feeling that I am not in the minority here.

One Missed Call

Look closely! Do you see what I see? Look at the eyes. Now I bet you do and your stomach just dropped a mile downwards. Those faces for empty eyes look terrifying, don't they? Well don't get too excited. Don't let this picture fool you as it fooled me. I apologize for the minute or so anticipation you might have had to watch this movie if you are a thriller fanatic, but I assure you that is not what you will find here.

I recently viewed yet another thriller. Unfortunately for me, though, is the fact that it was absolutely horrible. Knock-off, corny, anti-climactic, bad acting, and confusing are but a glimpse from the long list of words I am sure I could come up with to describe this movie.

Now I know that one may tell me not to judge; I do not like scary movies. This is false. I happen to love scary movies...the night following the viewing however is a different story. One Missed Call was almost a precise replication of the well know The Ring, which when released was a very new and creative idea. The fact that some mysterious creepy dead girl could locate you regardless of your location, call you, tell you how many days you have left to live, and then kill you was intriguing; as you may remember America went through a horror film craze during the year this movie was released (along with The Grudge and some other classics).

The Ring, though terrifying, was amazing. While the story was definitely intricately planned it wasn't so hard to follow; there was clearly much thought put in behind it and the events unfolded well. In One Missed Call, I can not say the same. Not only was the story confusing, but it made no logical sense. Obviously scary movies are all fictional, however what sets a great scary movie apart from the rest is the very realistic qualities that they contain. One Missed Call had no such quality so to speak. Aside from the confusing and supposedly scary main plot, there was not even a sub plot. There was no greater message attempting to awaken its viewers, there was no romantic aspect to the film, there was no meaning except for a phone call with albeit a chilling ring tone.

This 'Missed Call' is a call dialed from the phone of the person previously killed. The message that is left is that of how the owner of that phone is going to die. You actually hear your own death. The phone call comes in on the date and time of your murder. This all may sound terrifying to you, but have no fear! All this mysterious killings are traced back to some little girl who tried to kill her little sister, and then died having an asthma attack which was caught on a nanny-cam. The sister, however, was in the hospital when it burnt down killing her mother. If you think this already sounds confusing, wait until you hear the rest. When the main character Beth Raymond (played by Shaynnyn Sossamon) who acts as the morally righteous protagonist goes to thehospital to try and uncover the mistery, she is attacked by a little baby. Who is this baby? Your guess is as good as mine. The movie ends with a close-up shot on a cell-phone, recieving a call playing the same ring tone indicating the killer.

Not only was I utterly confused throughout the entire film with the anticipation of maybe a concluding end, but I was left in conusion feeling as if I had just wasted two hours of my life. I do not suggest this movie. Your time is much better spent on worthier movies with meaningful and intresting plots.

V for Vendetta? Or Violence.

(SPOILER ALERT)

This renowned movie abruptly ended today with a bang, and I mean that literally. With parliament blown apart to pieces depicted as a beautiful event, I sat stunned in my seat as the credits rolled down the screen.

There is no doubt that this movie is fantastic. With such a cunning and innovative (though based on a theme perfected by George Orwell) plot-line, superb casting, and wonderful directing, how could it not be? Perhaps the special effects were done a little distastefully, and unrealistically, but over all I cannot deny that I was sitting on the edge of my seat throughout the entire film. I found some of the story convoluted and confusing at times but all in all I don’t think one need understand the intricate details to comprehend the entire purpose of the movie.

Interestingly enough, this movie introduces a few very large and controversial topics. The first of which: Can violence be used for good? To this I say: How should I know? This question has a multitude of answers, each of which differing depending on the eye examining it. Good is one of the most subjective words in the English language, apart from maybe beautiful, or bad. For instance, the Nazis firmly believed their violent acts were for the greater good of the world, although this meant murdering millions of innocent people. And Lord Voldemort believes that killing all the mud bloods is violence necessary to achieve ‘good’. Obviously, this is not so from our perspective. So can V’s actions really be justified on the basis of the greater good of the entire country? Personally, I don’t believe violence should be the means to any end, regardless. However, one might disagree. The fascist government implemented in Britain during this movie was flagrantly corrupt and infiltrated with greed and power-hungry individuals who had no ethics or morals regarding the citizens. I am not defending that the events which took place at Larkhill should not have been vindicated. However, I am certainly suggesting that the term ‘violence for good’ can never be accurately answered.

The next question that arises from this film is that of terrorism. Does this film truly promote terrorist actions during a time where we face real unmasked terrorists? I believe it does. Needless to say the people of a country should absolutely have the right to revolt against a government that does not work for them. Yet terrorism is not a subjective word like good. Terrorism specifically means the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes, courtesy of dictionary.com. Whether we agree with the ideals behind V’s mask or not, there is no way to disguise that he is in fact a terrorist. I acknowledge that some may feel threatened by this movie; that perhaps it promotes acts of revolution. Maybe people will begin to think clearly again, and realize what a government should really be about. I agree that V for Vendetta illustrates bombing a national building as glorious; this is a little unsettling. However, the fact alone that this movie is being released to the public shows how unlike the socialist regime demonstrated by the movie our society is. Many conflicting issues are ever-present in this almost-radical movie, however, I believe that all these separate ideas combine to form a film which provokes the watcher to think; that in itself is an excellent motion-picture.

V for Vendetta.

V for Vendetta. Excellent reputation. Stellar actors. Amazing director. Above all of that, an incredible reputation. The first day watching this movie in school I would agree with these descriptions of the movie. I found the plot extremley interesting - a fascist England with people who know the government is constantly feeding them lies - and the acting to be superb. I must admit, though, I am extremley biased becuase Natalie Portman is my favorite actress.

Second day. Still intriguing movie. The plot mirrored that of Orwell's 1984 and the events were unfolding quite intricately. V, mysterious man character behind the mask that reminds me of that in the Saw series, symbolized revolution and revolt, divergent thinking and Violence. Though obviously creepy, my opinion of him still was that his intentions were in the right place.

However, the days continued to unfold. We are now more than halfway through the movie and I am SERIOUSLY disturbed. Firstly, we were introduced to a first hand account of the detention facility where V was detained. The images shown here were scarring. Numerous people with shaved heads and the same exact red almost hospital gown look-alike forced into lengthy lines awaiting an injection that later kills them. The pit of naked dead people thrown on top of each other without a care in the world. As I watched in horror I was reminded of the Natzi concentration camps and the Holocaust museums I have visited. I am sure there was a parallel drawn there. The wrought iron and gray steel doors enclosing prisoners were soul-shaking. Later, our beloved Natalie Portman who represents the center of goodness and morality is captured and brought to a government facility where she is tortured and interrogated. We see her stripped of her identity, shaved, thrown and dragged around, bound and hanging to shower, shaking and bleeding, only to find out that it was all a test of V. These images were horrifying. However, the fact that V would submit her to this cruelty knowingly and willingly is even more disgusting. Is that how a radical really thinks? He believes in Violence for good, but that is certainly no good.

I must admit, because the depiction affected me so adversely the movie must indeed be effective in conveying a message. Obviously the directing is excellent. I however am apalled at what the movie is actually showing. Hopefully the ending is satisfactory and eases me a little more, however, unfortunately I'll say that the more uneasy I feel the better the movie is.

ATTENTION, IF YOU ARE INTENDING TO WATCH THIS MOVIE DO NOT READ THIS ENTRY, IT MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS.

Prom Night, directed by Nelson McCormick, is a horror/thriller film, and let me say that the actual movie lives up to is description. Starring Brittany Snow as Donna, this movie takes you on a terrifying ride that leaves you gripping onto your seat for support.

I love scary movies. I watch them all the time. In fact, I think I love them too much because I usually end up staying awake the entire night after watching one. Of all the many scary movies I have ever seen, this has to be among the top three. Meant to thrill the viewer, any high school student watching this is even more effeted than the average watcher because the subject hits so close to home. The plot is undoubtedly plausable. Obviously it is not entirely believable, but the director's purpose in filming a horror film is to make you believe while watching the movie that THIS COULD HAPPEN TO YOU. And McCormick most certainly achieved his goal.

Brittany Snow displayed an excelent portrayal of a senior in high school dealing with trauma in her past. The premiseof this movie is a high school teacher who falls madly in love with one of his students. He becomes obsessed with her, and ultimately kills her family looking for her. Donna actually had to watch him kill her mother while she was hiding under the bed (the scariest most powerful point of the movie in my opinion.) He gets arrested, and Donna is finally able to live her life without fear, although the memories of her past haunt her. The night of their senior prom approaches, and happens to coincide directly with her stalkers' escape from prison. He shaves his face so no one recognizes him, and arrives at the hotel where the prom is taking place.

The fact that most of the terror scenes occur inside a hotel is a tribute to the psychological fear associated with hotels. The most famous terrifying films have taken place in hotels, such as The Shining, and 1408. I applaud the director with his filming strategies, because a long dimly lit hallway with a killer on the loose while Donna walks slowly towards her hotel room is the epitome of how McCormick tried to evoke fear. Inside a hotel room there are numerous places where one could be hiding, and or jump out at you.

The most amazing night of Donna's life soon turns into a fight for her life, as friend after friend, boyfriend after teacher is murdered in the pursuit of Donna herself. Actually, I believe one of the most suspenseful aspects of the film is we do not know who is going to be killed next; in fact we don't even know where the dead bodies are hidden until an actor stumbles upon one by accident.

The most psychologically disturbing aspect of this movie is that all of these people are dying because of Donna. The audience sits in horror as people give their life away to save anothers, starting with her mother, and ending with her boyfriend who is her support throughout the entire movie. It evokes the feeling of helplessness and claustrophia; this killer is so cunning and devious that no one can escape him. If you love scary movies, I highly recommend this one. If you do not like scary movies, stay as far away from this film as possible.

Today in school the people representing Invisible Children came to speak to us. This organization raises awareness for the millions of people fighting for their lives in the Uganda genocide that is happening this very instant. They explained how the war in North Uganda started, and how children are being captured, killed, or forced to fight in an army killing not only strangers, but family members whom they love. This is a tragedy of which no one is paying much attention to, however, I believe that we all must recognize the catastrophy that is taking place before our very eyes.
They showed us a video today of a brother and sister who visited Uganda, met with the 'invisible' children who live there, and experienced first-hand how horrible the lives of those who suffer in Africa are. This video, to me, is the epitome of an effective video. It started out by introducing the sister who is a hair stylist in L.A. They had montages of photos contianing her and her husband, and what her job entails. This allows the viewer to make a personal connection with the documenter, and we as High School students can reflect on how she is an average person just like us.
When they arrived in Uganda, the film quickly flashed through the state of the country, and how dilapitated everything appeared. We then met a child who's life has been ruined by the Uganda genocide, but still fights onward in the hopes of pursuing her dreams. This young girl, Roseline,
captured my heart, as well as those who sat around me. Her mother was killed during the war, and she is unfortunately HIV possitive which was genetically passed onto her through her mother. She lives in terror that she will be kidnapped, and in constantly worries that she will be unable to obtain the next batch of medicine for her treatment. One in five HIV possitive patients are being treated in Africa; Roseline's life is dependent upon a pill that is uncertain to be within her grasp the following month.
However, Roseline was singing in the video. She was laughing, playing, and sharing her ambition to become a doctor should she live that long. It amazes me how her outlook on life can still be so incredibly possitive and how much strength she demonstrates.
The close-ups on Roseline's face, the music that played in the background, the sometimes shaky picture due to te fact that it was a documentary, and the montages of different images put together created an unbelievable short film. It was captivating, and really portrayed the message that there are people who are desperately in need of our help. They are experience an inordinately large amount of pain, more than any of us will ever experience in a life time. The film was effective in showing the pain that these kids go through, and the fear that haunts every day.
As the video ended, I looked around the room. There were seldom dry eyes in the entire auditorium. I knew that the video had done what it intended to do; make us care about people who we have never met.

North By Northwest 1

Today in class we watched the first section of North by Northwest, a film directed by the famous Alfred Hitchcock. Hitchcock is known for his ability to 'thrill' the audience, creating scenario's that are not only suspenseful, but chill you down to your bone. With a reputation like his, I would have imagined the films to far surpass my expectaion of a 'good ' film.
As of right now, I cannot comment on my feelings towards the film because it is still too early to fully understand the genius that could have been part of the directing. I can, however, describe why I think the intro, so far, is definitely effective.
As my English teacher likes to say, "Films can be read as books." Until this point I honestly did not fully understand why he thought so. Yes, film is a form of literature, but are they not purely for our entertainment purposes? No. I can already see how North by Northwest can be read like a book. The beggining of the movie before we even see any actors, the crossing lines in the background portray a sense of structure, fitting, and importance. The next images that flit through the screen are the bustling streets of city life, showing people moving with purpose and conviction. It creates a sense of order within chaos. Everyone had somewhere to go or someone to see, and there was no room for disruption.
I though that these scenes were a great way to open the entire movie. Even though I have only seen the first 20 minutes, I can already understand that the initial montage depicted the way Roger Thornhill, main character, used to live his life. Hitchcock has so far lived up to my expectations of him.