1) What struck you most in the film?
In this film what strucked me the most is the posture of the students who seem a little bit caricatured and seem to be in other world when the killers began to shoot.
For example in the scene when the shooting begin there are people who think it´s a joke when people is screaming. Another example it´s just the killers are going to the library with their guns and the girl is not scared at all.
2) What also impressed you?
In my point of view what impressed me the most was in the way to record the movie. Actually Gus Van Sant finds the way to show us a normal day in a school. We follow all the characters in the corridors, we see their personalities, the director wants to involve us in the movie. Thanks to the cameras which follow the characters all around the school we take part in the story from the very beginning.
3) Did you find anything more particularly upsetting?
Logically the story is very upsetting. The fact to have two classmates who arrive one day equipped with a submachine gun with the purpose to kill me and the rest of the school is terrible. The most upsetting is that the school students ask them before dying the reason to do that.
4) What did you find very disturbing?
To be honnest, all along the film there is a part in the movie that I didn´t understand. This part is the scene where the black student called Benny who is walking towards the shooters as if nothing was happening around him. When he sees one of the killers about to fire a teacher and he doesn´t do anything, he just walks until the shooter looks at him and kills him. That was very disturbing because the viewer doesn´t understand why he did that instead of having run away or having stopped the shooter.
5) What was most shocking?
For me the most shocking in the film is the final scene. After the death of his friend, Alex, one of the killers seems to be normal and when it seems the story is arriving at its end he finds Jordan and his girlfriend. When Jordan asks him why he does that Alex starts to sing a song while he points the two teenagers.
Other thing that shocked me is the fact that the actors have the same name that their charaters. That is very shocking, as if the actors and the characters were the same person. In my opinion Gus Van Sant chooses this resource because he doesn´t want to recreate seamlessly what happened this day. He prefers to create this shooting with his imagination and we live a real shooting thanks to the realism of the characters and the way to record it.
6) What does the film suggest about the two school shooters?
The film suggests the two school shooters are bullied by their classmates. We can appreciate they are alone, for example Alex has just Eric as a friend and he visits him sometimes in his house when his parents are away.
Furthermore we can see the two characters are psycopaths who think this shooting is a funny game, they do that just to have a good time. More the film advances more we can see they are crazy, for example, just before the shooting they are watching videos on Nazi propaganda or they are kissing in the shower.
7) What's more, what does the film director make clear about the two killers?
The director wants to show this people is rejected by the society, there are bullied and alone. The director wants also to show that everybody have access to the guns. The two characters are two lonely teenagers with a growing hatred against the society.
8) What kind of approach to the school shooting itself did Gus Van Sant opt for?
Gus Van Sant opted to use flashbacks all along the film with the finality to understand why it happened before and after the shooting. As we have seen before we can see that Gus Van Sant chooses to follow the characters all around the school to make us to come into the story, Gus Van Sant doesn´t want to have viewers, he wants to have witnesses.
9) Moreover, what's the main
consequence of the realistic treatment he uses? What about the 'poetic'
touches he instills throughout the film?
The whole film is very realistic in all its elements, the time, the sound and the lights envolved the viewer. We can also appreciate that the director uses poetic touches like the character of John. Actually this character is blond and has long hair. He reminds us the image of an angel. Since the beginning of the story we can interpret other symbols that make us think about what can happen later in the film.
10) As a conclusion, what must we admit about the way in which the killing and the killers are perceived by the film viewers?
As a conclusion we can admit that this film goes far beyond a simple movie which tells us a story.
The viewer gets a place into the film, around the film. The director chooses to put a lot of types of characters who are very different among them. The viewer can think 'who is better' to die.
For example Gus shows us a group of girls who seem a little bit stupid and in another hand he puts a nice guy who takes photos to the people.
The viewer can be happier or more sad depending on who is touched. Gus achieves that because the viewer is on the side of shooters unconsciously.
Even if he shows us two monsters he tells us we can be monsters too.
The film ends with the message that we may be any of the characters, the shooters or the angel.
Tuesday, May 2, 2017
Wednesday, April 5, 2017
POST 13: THE US GUN CULTURE
Steve SACK, on www.startribune.com,
Gun Lobby and Congress (2010)
Dave GRANDLUN
Second Amendment and NRA (2013)
D, on www.davegranlund.com,
The Founding Fathers of the United States are the individuals of the Thirteen British Colonies in North America who led the American Revolution against the authority of the British Crown and established the United States of America.
The National Rifle Association of America (NRA) is an American nonprofit organization which advocates for gun rights.[3][5][6] Founded in 1871, the group has informed its members about firearm-related bills since 1934, and it has directly lobbied for and against legislation since 1975.[7] It is also the oldest continuously operating civil rights organization in the United States.
This first document is a caricature of the journal startribune drawn by Steve Sack. In this cartoon we can notice two men who represent the Gun lobby and the Congress. In the middle of them, the Gun lobby representative is bribing with a bag filled with dollars.
On the other side, in the background, a river of blood flows from the top stairs from the Capitol down to the scene where stand the two characters. We can read on the bullet what the Gun lobby representative says: "Now where were we, before we were so rudely interrupted..."
The overall scene may be be a critic of the power's gun in America. Another way to look at the question is the presence of money that shows the laws are based on corruption and they are not meant to improve Americans' better life. The bullet shows the power of big lobbys that bribe the government with the objective of making more money. The fact of having a river of blood represents the opposition of people to keep arms. That is, the presence of violence makes it necessary to have guns in society.
The second document is a picture by Dave Grandlun in 2013.
In this image two statues represent two soldiers of a different century. The soldier on the left side of the bullet represent the Second Amendment as defined by the founding fathers. The soldier stands on a column of stone and he is equipped with a rifle as its only protection.
Contrary to the character on the left, the character on the right side stands on an ammunition box.
The soldier is equipped with three machine guns all around his body, and two guns along the legs. Actually it is written he is the Second Amendment defined by the NRA.
This cartoon show a vision very different by the notion of the Second Amendment. It is well-known the fact that the Civil War soldier represents the heroic acts of Americans who had the courage to fight in the Civil War for the freedom of the United States of America. The soldier has just one rifle in front of a lot of soldiers. The other soldier is equipped with a lot of guns that make very easy to kill his enemies.
That is a critic of the power of guns in USA that create more violence and hatred towards other countries. In conclusion, it should be emphasized that this cartoon shows that the vision of war in USA is changing in the history. We must admit that a lot of problems in the war were caused by the military conflicts since the Cold War. Actually we can focuse on the representation of the two characters who are representated very differently. The first one fights for the freedom of a country and the other one likes the excessive uncontrolled weapons for wars that imply much more problems
.
Wednesday, January 18, 2017
POST 7; THE IDEA OF PROGRESS: QUANTITY vs. QUALITY
Today we will study the difference between quantity and quality. To illustrate it I've chosen the example of the vehicles. To explain it we will use two documents, one focused on quantity and the other one focused on quality.
Quantity
Quality
Since the XXth century the production of cars doesn´t stop growing.
Thanks to the current economy people buy one or more cars. As we can see in the first document the worldwide automobile production from 2000 to 2015 (in millions) was doubled in 15 years.
That gives to the majority of citizens the possibility of being transported faster and in a more comfortable way.
We can observe that the population is growing at the same time as car´s production, so we can say cars are becoming a very important instrument in our society.
If we talk about quality, we can see we have vehicles with better performances that enable to drive in a more comfortable and secure way.
Unfortunately this big quantity of vehicles provokes a lot of pollution. The CO2 emissions from cars increase the problems of climatic change. As we have seen our society produces a lot of cars which help the citizens but we have to point out that just one car contaminates too much so we can imagine how high has to be the contamination provoked by millions and millions of cars driven all around the World. In addition the sound in the cities also is growing. That is more problematic than people may think. Several scientists and experts dealing with the matter, and numerous official bodies have unanimously declared that noise has very harmful effects on health. Its affections are not only due to its direct effect: discomfort, communication and attention problems or sleep disorders, but also those related to prolonged exposures: chronic fatigue, insomnia, cardiovascular diseases, immune system disorders, anxiety, depression, Irritability, nausea, migraines and behavioral changes - hygiene, intolerance,aggression, social isolation.
On the other hand, it is to underline that cars take a lot of space in the street, if we observe how many people occupy just one car the average is 1,2 person for car.
Fortunately there exist electronic cars which permit to retain pollution levels and to avoid sound contamination but they don't offer a solution to the space problem. There are also other transport alternatives like the bycicle.
To conclude we can say the quantity of cars is increasing in parallel with the World population. Concerning the quality we have seen that technological progress is increasing constantly. But unfortunely that provokes a lot of problems which is necesssary to change. Thanks to these two documents we can observe the importance to find a balance between quantity and quality to solve all the problems exposed.
Thanks to the current economy people buy one or more cars. As we can see in the first document the worldwide automobile production from 2000 to 2015 (in millions) was doubled in 15 years.
That gives to the majority of citizens the possibility of being transported faster and in a more comfortable way.
We can observe that the population is growing at the same time as car´s production, so we can say cars are becoming a very important instrument in our society.
If we talk about quality, we can see we have vehicles with better performances that enable to drive in a more comfortable and secure way.
Unfortunately this big quantity of vehicles provokes a lot of pollution. The CO2 emissions from cars increase the problems of climatic change. As we have seen our society produces a lot of cars which help the citizens but we have to point out that just one car contaminates too much so we can imagine how high has to be the contamination provoked by millions and millions of cars driven all around the World. In addition the sound in the cities also is growing. That is more problematic than people may think. Several scientists and experts dealing with the matter, and numerous official bodies have unanimously declared that noise has very harmful effects on health. Its affections are not only due to its direct effect: discomfort, communication and attention problems or sleep disorders, but also those related to prolonged exposures: chronic fatigue, insomnia, cardiovascular diseases, immune system disorders, anxiety, depression, Irritability, nausea, migraines and behavioral changes - hygiene, intolerance,aggression, social isolation.
On the other hand, it is to underline that cars take a lot of space in the street, if we observe how many people occupy just one car the average is 1,2 person for car.
Fortunately there exist electronic cars which permit to retain pollution levels and to avoid sound contamination but they don't offer a solution to the space problem. There are also other transport alternatives like the bycicle.
To conclude we can say the quantity of cars is increasing in parallel with the World population. Concerning the quality we have seen that technological progress is increasing constantly. But unfortunely that provokes a lot of problems which is necesssary to change. Thanks to these two documents we can observe the importance to find a balance between quantity and quality to solve all the problems exposed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)