Patrick Ballard - Watchmen

Well since I went to see it I suppose I should blog about Watchmen. It was a very entertaining film, but at times it felt as though it lacked focus. Oddly enough that sense of indecision matches many of the characters perfectly. Throughout the film there is a pervading sense of moral ambiguity, or perhaps something subtler. No, on second thought it isn't any sort of moral evolution, it is indeed static and indecisive. We are presented with the second generation of heroes, as the first generation have all died or retired. We are not given much information about the first generation but they are presented mostly in a good light. In the comic their backstory is slightly more revealing of their moral and ethical demeanors, but the film doesn't give it much time. The most get get from the film is when the Comedian makes disparaging remarks about Hooded Justice's sexuality. So we get to believe the first generation are more or less the good old days moral standard. The current generation of heroes by contrast is significantly more flexible. The one exception is Rorschach whose moral code is absolute. He is perhaps the only character in the entire film with any decisiveness to him. The Comedian takes pleasure in causing torment but is still grouped in with the rest of the heroes despite his twisted worldview. Jon, or Dr. Manhattan, has become so far removed from the human reality that his morality becomes difficult to classify. I suppose apathetic might work, but that's oversimplifying things a bit. At the very least his moral compass is crooked enough for him to get mixed up with Laurie while he's still in a relationship with Janey Slater. In a bit of poetic justice Laurie leaves Jon later in the film and almost immediately shacks up with Dan(the second generation Nite Owl). Laurie's relationship with her mother is an interesting point of conflict. It brings into question how much of Laurie's life is just following in her Mother's shadow instead of living her own life. Again, indecision. Dan by contrast has done just fine with his version 2.0 status, and even maintains weekly get-togethers with his predecessor. No, what eats away at Dan are his own doubts about retirement. He's never quite sure if he should have hung up his mask or not and eventually returns to action. Ozymandias, or Adrian Veidt, is a slightly more complex character. His moral code is probably the most flexible of all the characters. Even after being forced into retirement he doesn't stop trying to be the hero, he just alters his methods. Unfortunately these mehtods end with thousands if not millions of innocents dead. To his credit it does avert a nuclear Armageddon. I find it a bit paradoxical how a man trying to do good and save people ends up doing it with an elaborate scheme that destroys entire cities. Amidst all these chaotic personalities there is only one man who is steadfast: Rorschach. The irony of Rorschach being the one character with strong moral convictions is the brutality with which he acts upon them. For Rorschach things are simple: punish the wicked. He does it and does it with ruthless efficiency and enthusiasm. When the government tried to retire him he refused and continued to act as a vigilante. It would be easy to peg Rorschach as an “ends justify the means” kind of guy given his brutal information gathering tactics, but his behavior at the end of the film suggests otherwise. I think it makes more sense if approached with the understanding that Rorschach is so brutal because the majority of people are wicked. By the end of the film you really have to wonder what's wrong with the world. Heroes and saviors have crooked morals and destroy entire cities of innocent citizens. At the same time those with good morals who stand up for their beliefs end up being psychopaths who get killed by their closest friends. What does that say about the importance of being a moral person?

The Decalogue : Wilbert J. Hill Jr.

This film was very interesting to me. I had never watched a polished produced film before. The character that really stood out to me in the film was the sales clerk at the dress boutique shop. He did not want to talk about the war or anything negative that had happen in the world. He overshadow or overcompensated his faults by not focusing on them. He focused very hard on his work in order to not think about what was or what did happen in this world. Everyone has faults, but all have a uniqueness about them that make them special to this world and society. When every person faces the truth in their individual lives they will be freed from living a lie of overcompensatio; then they will accept their own faults, rather self inflicted or imposed upon by another force, a person will have the faith to look at there unrighteous state of being and be able to move forward, because of the strength and power they will recieve from having faith to move forward and not dwell in the pig-pin of there past. This is a film about overcoming your fears by facing the truth and moving forward. I enjoyed this film.

The Thin Red Line : Wilbert Hill Jr.

This movie was very interesting and encompassed a lot of real life metaphors within the war. This was a battle that tested the fortitude of a soldier. This was the fight of these soldiers lives. With one wrong step a soldier could have died in an instance. All the metaphors in the movie were used to introduce or display a certain character or event that happen in the film. Private Witt was a character who struggled with the inevitability of death; But as the movie progress Private Witt was freed from the fear of death and imbraced the reality of death. Witt became a man who was free in his own spirit. The film showed images of Private Witt playing with children in an angelic and harmonious manner. Witt was smiling and enjoying life within his own mind. He was internally and eternally free from the fear of death that once terrorize his soul. I really liked this film, and I really gleaned from this film, that if you face your fear with faith and courage you will be free from your own chamber of prison. a person that is free will not try to run away from there duty or calling in life. They will have the power, assurance and confidence to do the task that is appointed unto them, without the fear of death.

Eric Morgan-- Apocalypse Now

Through this movie the depiction of war is turned into a metaphor insinuating the immorality of the human race. People when put into a place where killing is alright the animal nature of those people is provoked and brought out to the forefront. This is first demonstrated by the first sergeant the main character encounters who basically destroys whole towns in order to fulfill one of his desires, surfing. You know that something has to be wrong when the value of somebody's life is less then shredding the next wave. Then the movie progresses as the main character and the boatmen travel up river, they encounter a night USO show with playboy models. There the soldiers are basically depicted as uncontrollable animals just wanting and desiring for the women without self control what so ever. The as the movie comes to an end the main character reaches his destination with is filled of people who seemingly are brain washed and are completely non-human or more fully natural humans without morals or God. The only thing that they were motivated by was fear of their superior who had obviously gone completely crazy. The journey up the river was symbolic to the de-evolution of the human race and ended with mindless drones. This was a great semi-creepy movie that I found quite interesting.

Like water for Chocolate-- Eric Morgan

Love is a confusing thing especially when it is expressed in the english language. In Like Water for Chocolate love was expressed but that is not exactly it. There are different kinds of love and here the kind of love that was expressed is best described by the Greek word eros. Eros is one of the many words describing love, and it is given the specific meaning of sexual desire. God is love and what is sometimes forgot is that even the sexual side of love was created by God so here in this movie what is expressed simply is another part of God's creation. But what is expressed by this movie is basically that even though everything that God created is good us people manipulate them and have a lack of self control with many things. This lack of self control is expressed by the reaction that the people have after they eat their food. These people lose basically all control of themselves expressed very vividly in the naked showering scene where the girls shower house goes into flames then runs away to ride away naked on a horse. And again the commander in the army completely leaves his duty in order to follow this scent of passion that was in the air to find it. Humans have little to no self-control when it comes to love and what is shown very prominently is that we are very powerless beings in the realm of this world.

Koyaanisqatsi-- Eric Morgan

Crazy and scattered were my first two reactions to this movie, but as it progressed I felt as if I grasped what the filmmakers were trying to portray. The calm music and slow panning of different natural elements portrayed how God meant the world to be; beautiful, calm, and tranquil. As the humans got more involved in the world and started to change it into what they thought was best for it the world began to lose its beauty and tranquil nature. People using their rational minds excavate the natural world and turn it into an ugly organized assembly line. Here it is compared by images that people in cities are moved through the subways like hotdogs on conveyer belts, showing that even though they think they are smart and are proud of what they have created really they are as smart as a hot dog when compared to the almighty creator. This movie was a great depiction of the human life of our society has conformed from our original natural nature to be subjected to the system and are never really able to express and do what they want. This very odd movie turned out to be great and I was happy that we watched it.

Eric Morgan-- Decalogue 8

In this movie we could easily see that there was a struggle of great emotional significance over the theme of the movie, do not bare false witness. What we could see is that there were two sides; first was the old woman who in order to not be false basically confronted her past head on, and didn't leave anything out, and second was the old man at the very end, who did the complete opposite by not talking, thinking, or acknowledging the past. The second approach would seem to be the best way in order for yourself to feel better about what happened but what is portrayed by ignoring past actions is incompleteness, represented by the job that the man had just making dresses. But the first what was seemingly monotonous, represented by the straightening of the picture frame, seemed to be the best way for one to heal. Ignoring the past is not how you grow or heal but facing it head on and battling it is the way in which one become a strong better person.

Eric Morgan--The Jacket

First off the Jacket was a great movie, whenever time travel is put into a story it immediately hooks me in because of its impossible and completely compelling nature. Whenever I watch a movie with that in it I begin to think of many ways in which I would change my own life and what I would do to make it better. I feel like this is a completely common thing among most viewers. Inside the aspect of time travel what I liked most about the movie was the eventual motive behind his travel, which ended up basically playing god. I'm not saying that it is a good thing to play god and try to control the world, but what I meant is that he tried to make the world a better place for the one that he loved. He went into the future to basically gain knowledge in order to figure out to change everything bad in the lives of the people who he was closest to. Although in the end he seemingly didn't have to die but when comparing it to the gospel of Jesus what is apparent is that he had to sacrifice for the one that he loved; in Jesus' case, everybody and in his cases simply the woman. It was a great movie and I will definitely watch it again.

Matthew Winant - Decalogue 8 (March 29, 2009)

The most intriguing aspect within Decalogue 8 was that it was very obviously a Catholic made film. The commandment “Thou shall not bear false witness against your neighbor” is the eighth commandment in Catholicism, not the ninth commandment like it is for Judaism, Anglicanism, and other Protestant denominations. Also, the actions and view points from the characters is very Catholic, the woman who says that taking the Jewish girl in and making her their “child” is breaking the commandment of bearing false witness is, in my experience as a Catholic, a very “Catholic” thing to do. The student who says that the family should have abandoned the commandment for saving the child's life is correct, although the action may or may not be correct in the eyes of God. The themes in the film are a fantastic representation for survivors of the Holocaust as well, the child searches out the family that would have adopted her in a mindset that we cannot fully explain. When we first meet the woman she is only interested the ethics professor's work, and while listening to the story being told we cannot tell her motive; such as if she is searching for the woman out of anger, or distaste. The reaction to the would-be-adoptive father is very interesting as it seems that he has lost all faith in his life ever since that moment in 1943. He wishes to keep busy and to live in the mundane, and one can always wonder as to if his hole in life can be filled by taking back up faith and following Christ.

Sacred & Profane: Revisited

As we have gone through the semester and viewed several films, the theme from Groundhog Day keeps coming to my mind. This is the idea of the separation of the Sacred and the Profane. Of course this is a very broad idea and topic so it can be applicable to most films or real life occurrences. However, I have wondered, it seems that in most causes the sacred and profane and solidly divided, they are black and white the separation of good and evil. But is this always the case? People can do good things (sacred) for all the wrong reasons (profane). In addition, someone could have a good heart and be forced to do something terrible to save another, or a small evil to help the greater good? These areas seem more gray than black and white when it comes to the sacred and the profane. Can the sacred and profane become mixed or gray? Or is this not possible?

- Robbie Heath

The Decalogue

I found this short film to be very interesting and powerful. When I heard that it was a Polish film that was made in the 1970's under the old Soviet regime I assumed that it would not be that good. More specifically I thought that the religious themes of the movie would have been very watered down. But to my surprise this was not the case. There was the deep look at what had happened during WWII as the older woman was a religious Catholic and the young woman the Jewish girl that she had to turn away. Since this time they had both been plagued by what had happened. I find it interesting however that the older woman said that she no longer went to church. Also many people such as the tailor refused to talk about what had happened. I wonder, was this turn from religion and the past because of the current anti-religious Soviet regime? Or had people simply fallen away from their faith or were too horrified from the past to think about it?

- Robbie Heath

Nick Lynch - Decalogue 8

Nick Lynch


The facet that intrigued me the most about this short film was the similiarities between the woman described by one of Zofia's students during a class discussion in which a woman becomes pregnant with another man's child while her husband is slowly dying of disease. The woman is described as living within the same apartment building as her husband's doctor and is conflicted as to keep or abort the baby. We later find out that Zofia's husband died of cancer, his doctor lives in the same building as Zofia, and that Zofia's son is estranged from her, which could be the result of his discovery of his birth being a product of infedelity. Too many similairities exist between the two to be dismissed.

Decalogue 8 refers to the ninth commandment which demands that "thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor" which when simplified boils down to "don't lie". While the film deals primarily with the interactions between Zofia and Elzbieta, I believe that the parallels between Zofia and the woman in the story represent the falibility of people in general and points to what seems to be a dishonesty inhierent in everyone. Zofia being abandoned by her son and her lonliness in general represent the punishment for breaking this commandment.

Becca Hornick--Outside Movie

Henry Poole is Here
This movie was stocked full of religion. But before I go into all of those I want to talk about a theme that I found in the coloring of the film. Henry was always wearing blue or blue gray. The movie was filmed in blue tones and all but a few of the main characters wore blue tones for most of the movie, even his house was blue. So blue was a very important color in that movie, even when someone wasn’t wearing blue, blue was still important because by them wearing different colors you knew they were important because they weren’t in blue.
The premise of the movie is that Luke Wilson’s character Henry is told by doctors that he only has so long left to live, that he is dying. So he moves back to the neighborhood that he grew up in and then things start to change for him. When he moves in he is greeted by his neighbor Esperanza (which is Spanish for hope), and she is one of the characters who never wears blue. She finds the face of Jesus of the side of his house in a water stain, and believes that it is a sign. Henry who has moved to the house to slink away from the world, to be alone and quietly die, gets really frustrated by her. She starts bringing people to his yard to pray to the Jesus figure and that really sets him off because he can’t see the image, he won’t see the image. Henry also goes to the grocery store a lot to buy vodka and junk food and the girl who always checks him out at the register her name is Patience and she is always so sweet to Henry trying to brighten his day. Later on Patience ends up going to his wall and touching it and her eye sight is restored (because she has really bad eyes, not completely blind but legally blind). His other neighbor Dawn, has a young daughter named Millie that doesn’t talk, not because she is mute but because she chooses not to. All these characters have complicated backgrounds just like Henry does, and they all come together to change Henry’s life because of one thing in common, Jesus’ face on Henry’s wall.
The movie is about hope, and patience, and a belief that a higher power in the world can change things around. All the characters have struggles and sorrows in their lives, but they all deal with them differently and that’s why some of them wear blue and why some of them don’t. The movie shows that you can approach life and all of its ups and downs with open arms and faith, or you can retreat into a dark cave and wallow your way through in misery. In the end Henry’s life completely changes for the better and you see him stop wearing blue, which purposes a question to the audience…when will you stop wearing blue?

Becca Hornick--Decalogue 8

The short film had a great concept and was very moving. The theme that I found to be the most prevalent was life is not perfect,and people are not perfect. People make mistakes and sometimes live the rest of their lives paying for them, or trying to find ways to make up for their mistakes. The elderly woman in the movie is an example of someone who made a huge mistake and spent years worrying and trying to make up for it and forget about it. Finally though the young girl she let slip through fingers returns to see her and she can finally have the comfort of knowing the girl is alive, tell her the truth and apologize for her wrong doing and seek the forgiveness she needs to move on. The girl also needed answers to why she was hurt and abandoned so she too gets her answers, her apology and she can begin to move on as well.

Becca Hornick-The Jacket

The Jacket was a good film. It had me at the edge of my seat wondering what was going to happen next. It wasn’t a movie that I could just predict everything that was going to happen I was actually right along with the characters wondering how Jack died, and why he was put in the “box”, and why he could see the future while he was in there, and if the future was actually happening or not. The movie was intriguing in many ways, even the scene where Jack is walking down the road alone; I wanted to know why he was alone, where he was going, and I knew that something was going to happen and I wanted to know what that something was going to be. The cover of the movie made a me a little hesitant to watch it because it looked like one of those creepy, awful to people kind of movies, but I am really glad I watched it. My favorite scene was when the doctor took Jack to see the little girl and the mom. The part that really touched me was when he was leaving and he said goodbye to Jackie. The way he looked at her with the unconditional love of a man fully devoted was amazing. Even though she was still only a child it pained him to know the love they would have shared together, and the final look and touch he gave her was innocent and beautiful. It really moved me, because it was a look of pain, love, self sacrifice, and fear of what he would be losing all wrapped up in one final glance. I also found it interesting that the name of the movie was The Jacket, and the two main characters names were Jack and Jackie. Obviously on purpose, but why, I am not sure. I imagine it has something to do with the fact that the jacket they put him in while he was in the box was as big a part as the main characters. The jacket changed lives just like Jack and Jackie did, because without the jacket Jack wouldn’t have been so able to stay calm, because he was restricted by the jacket keeping him still. I feel like had he been able to flail about in the box he would have never been able to calm himself down and see the visions he started seeing.
The movie had some philosophical and ethical undertones that posed some really good questions. One being the way Jack was treated by the doctor. Was that torture or actually helpful? I feel like it was both. It was unethical what the doctor was doing which is why it was done in secret at night, but in a way it helped change the life of the girl Jack loved. So I would call that a catch 22 situation. Also the notion of time travel is one of the oldest asked questions and unsolved mystery. Were Jack’s visions real, or were they just a made up universe to help him escape from his memories of the war? Either way in the end we are lead to believe that Jack changes the relationship between Jackie and her mother for the better, which seems to be the thing he wanted to accomplish in the end anyhow. In the end to me it seemed like the movie had a kind of “everything happens for a reason” feel to it; because even though he was searching for the answer to why he dies, he still dies in the end but saves a life of a mother and a daughter, so it seems he was meant to save the life of one while losing his own.

Susan Watkins -- Outside Reading 3

I was thinking today about Martin Buber's I and Thou, and about how we relate to nature and to eachother. Buber argues that since humans are inherently relational creatures, we live our lives in a process of relationship to everything around us regardless of whether we're aware of it or not. He says these relationships can be classified as either "I and Thou" relationships or "I and It" relationships, depending on whether we view the other participant as a personality or an object/tool.

It seems to me that a lot of people favor the "I and It" relationship unless they are thoroughly convinced they should enter into an "I and Thou" state, kind of like "guilty until proven innocent." Because, really, the "I and It" relationship allows a staggering amount of room for self-interest on the part of the "I." In this mentality, if the other participant is a mere object it cannot have any worth beyond its usefulness to the "I." So if we approach situations assuming an "It," we have the right to do absolutely whatever we want without heed for the other participant's feelings or needs [because theoretically it doesn't have any]. The problem is that when we assume this, we run the risk of treating a "Thou" as an "It," a tragic blasphemy.

If we assumed an "I and Thou" relationship with our surroundings, how would our situation look different? The worst risk we would run would be to treat an "It" with too much respect, too much goodness. No harm done. But what it comes down to is that it's so much more work to assume things are "Thou's." We have a tendency to fall into laziness and selfishness, to prefer the path of least resistance and interest in our own comfort to the path of pursuing goodness even above and beyond what is strictly required.

What if there really is a judgment day, and what if we get there and find out we've been treating everything and everyone around us as "It's" when the whole time they've been "Thou's"? What if we find out we've destroyed countless examples of beauty in our laziness? I'd far prefer to run the risk of creating too much goodness and kindness in the world, even if there's no eternal reward, than risk destroying precious things and finding out far too late their value and my travesty.

Apocalypse Now & Thin Red Line - Robbie Heath

It has been interesting to watch these two war movies consecutively. They both tackle some similar themes and ideas, but they move in varying directions. In both we see the horrors and the idea of the futility of war. In Apocalypse Now we see Colonel Kurtz who went off the deep end from war. He went in a direction it seemed of becoming numb and retracted from humanity. Killing meant nothing to him. To truly be a good soldier a man must become dehumanized in some way to not hesitate killing anther man. This is also partially true with Capt. Williard. In this movie we see the horrors of war as they take men with them. Kurtz went crazy and Williard became unable to go home and live with himself.

On the other hand there is the Thin Red Line. Here we see soldiers like Private Witt thinking about the war and its ethics. He begins scared, upike Apocalypse Now he does not dehumanize himself. He simply does his job and overcomes his fear of death and embraces death knowing there is something there. This is much different from the darkness of Apocalypse Now in which it is easy to question whether there is any good or high power. We see two movies about the same questions with one moving to the darkness and the other to the light. So, which is more likely, for men to overcome fear and be brave in battle or be overcome by its darkness?

Apocalypse Now

Apocalypse Now presents a question of morality to its viewers. The rules of human decency and integrity are retired and forgotten in times of war. In this film, war was used as a symbol for survival and serving of the self. In order to fight war, one has to rid themselves of moral principles and focus on the competition of battle. This is because the primary goal of war is to focus on becoming more strategic and evil than one’s enemy.
This need for suspended ethical beliefs is the most important difference between Colonel Kurtz and Kilgore. Viewers are more inclined to identify and sympathize with Colonel Kilgore because he loved his men and did not want them to be harmed. While these feelings and actions may seem ordinary in everyday life, they are in fact suffocating and detrimental in times of war. His ‘brotherly’ mentality is hurtful for his troops because he teaches them how to be weak, rather than strong and evil.
Colonel Kilgore, on the other hand, seems crazy to the average viewer because his fearlessness is misconstrued as carelessness. His mentality, however, is in face more helpful and constructive in times of battle.
This concept of suspending morality for a larger cause or reason is stemmed in Christianity. In my Vision of Christianity class, my professor discussed a certain instance in the bible where God’s orders and agendas seem to be lacking ethical standards. For example, God tells Abraham to kill his own son without giving a reason. This act seems extremely heartless and cruel, yet Abraham is willing to abide by God’s wishes. This same theme of setting morals aside for a bigger cause goes back to religious texts.

Leandra Jacobson- Babette's Feast & the Jacket

I find a fusion in the ideas of love in The Jacket and Babette’s Feast. There is an element of predestination, ideas that there is a determined path of love for us all. In The Jacket, Jack knows his destiny it to die. He found love on his journey and now he had a destiny in his relationship with his love interest. In Babette’s Feast, the sisters knew their love lied supreme in God above a love with a man. The General’s journey was to choose glory over staying in the town with the sister, impossible to love her while fulfilling his vanity and success. I find both these paths to be interesting. Is there a predetermined soul mate for us like they find in the movies so serendipitously? Or should our life choices lie supreme to finding this love? Which path do you choose in order to live well?

To live well, you must determine whether you believe importance lies in success or in finding love. The General saw this love to be inferior to his grandiose plans, where Jack found his love in the end to be all he wanted to save above himself. “One person at a time,” as reiterated in the superhero television show “Heroes.” I have always had conflicting opinions about this, whether I would need to put off romantic relationships to interfere with my success. I have been in a relationship off and on for quite some time, and have plans of making the promise of a permanent relationship in 4 months. I get extremely freaked out even typing the word so I will not. While being a college student, I can’t let this commitment get in the way of graduating or getting my Master’s degree. By taking the path of the General, I would be able to get all of my academic dreams fulfilled much less distracted or with other weighing options in my way. In a simplification like this, I would be disregarding the possible predestined mate for my own glory and the career that would follow it. Jack offers and interesting guidance in the worth of life, virtually nothing, without the fulfillment of that person you could save with your care for them. Hopefully there is a medium of the two where glory and love is balanced.

Leandra Jacobson 3/16/09

Apocalypse Now begins and ends with the Door’s song “The End.” This directive choice highlights this song as having significance, or a message within the music.

"Of our elaborate plans, the end
Of everything that stands, the end
No safety or surprise, the end
I'll never look into your eyes again."

The second verse draws in components of a possible transcendence from a profane existence to the sacred order, coming to an end of everything that stands and all the plans made throughout life. Whether Jim Morrison was referring to a fall from grace or a transcending into it, the passing from the profanity of “everything that stands” in existence into what you believe to be “the end” is a transformation to the next line; “Can you picture what will be, so limitless and free.” This captures the escape from the cycle we have imagined for ourselves, a break from the chaotic order for a glimpse of paradise. This is seen in Apocalypse Now with the natural order ruling the river versus the attempt at a civilized order on the boat or at various crumbling docking ports.

In the next line, “desperately in need of some stranger's hand in a desperate land,” the men in the film all display a need for help reaching out for guidance among the chaos. They have found themselves “lost in a Roman wilderness of pain and all the children are insane” in the madness of the jungle, the loss of culture, and the darkness of war. The constructed order of civilization is lost, as seen through the development of this song and in the movie, and gives way to the power of nature.

His references to a snake, seven miles long draws direct connections to the wild and the holy significance of the number seven. God’s presence in nature is difficult to discern when thrown into a place of violent wilderness, creating a tension of who will win. The temptation of humans to primitively play God adds to this tension, trying to control aspects of life and death as seen in this film.

Ben France- The Jacket

I really enjoyed this movie and found it to be very powerful. An Idea that I found to be very interesting in the film was the idea of self-sacrifice. Throughout the entire film the movie focuses on the main character journey in finding out what happened to his life. And in the beginning he is going into the jacket to help himself and find out more about why he is going to die. Not until he realizes that he can change another persons life does he give up his persuit of saving his life, he sacrifices his own life to help another and that is a powerful concept. He chooses to not go back and change is outcome but to make the girls life end up better. A key concept to understand is that death is enveitable and we can not change that fact but what we can change is how we impact others while we are still alive.

Ben France- Apocalypse Now

The movie Apocalypse Now is about the struggles between good and evil. The idea that good has trouble over coming evil and that good does not always win. The movie is about the individual struggles Lieutenant Willard has during his time spent in Vietnam during the war.
The story focuses on Lieutenant Willard’s journey into the jungle of Vietnam. Willard travels up a river on a navy patrol boat in his pursuit of a rogue General Kurdtz that the U.S army as told Willard to kill. His journey on the river is quite symbolic. The river symbolizes a change taken place in Willard a transformation. Willard and the crew traveling further and further up the river symbolize them moving out of civilization and into the dark and unknown. The theme while traveling on the boat is to never leave the boat because out in the jungle is where civilization no longer exists and where pure evil lives. The scene where Willard comes out of the water to kill Kurdtz shows his Willard being a messenger for civilization and killing the corrupt.
On of the major themes throughout the film is the idea of darkness and the distinction between what is civilization and what is not. In the film darkness symbolizes lack of civilization. As they go deeper into the jungle the darker it gets and the less civilized it becomes around them. Even when Willard gets to where Kurdtz is located the entire scene when they speak to each other is dark, suggesting complete madness.
Madness is also a central theme in the film. As the company moves further up the river each one of them break down mental. This is very clear in the case of Lance. He becomes completely mad and assumes the role of a non-civilized man.

Matthew Winant - Watchmen (03/15/09)

Before spring break I took the time to read the graphic novel Watchmen and in turn then proceeded to watch the film on opening night. The religious aspects of the film and novel are many in number, but most need greater evaluation. More often than not the religious aspects of the film are paired with some philosophical vision, such as free will and savior figures. The individual characters themselves exhibit some kind of religious, or at most, a spiritual vision towards the world. The most obvious connection to the mysterium is the character Dr. Manhattan. He is a product of experimental disaster when the doors close behind him in the particle chamber, giving him the ability to break down matter and change it, or even create it. However, while understanding how to master this ability he has lost touch with humanity. It is ironic that during the movie Dr. Manhattan mentions that he doesn't believe in God, but if there was one, he (Manhattan) wouldn't even compare, yet at the end of the film/novel Manhattan mentions about leaving this galaxy to move to another, and possibly creating life. Dr. Manhattan is also considered the savior of America for most of the film and is looked upon by the American government to destroy the Soviet missiles aimed at the United States. In terms of human nature, the film agrees that human nature is inherently evil, much like the Christian view of humanity. One of the characters, The Comedian, even abandons the Watchmen because it is pointless to continue vigilante justice when people don't change. Also, the character Ozymandias, the smartest man alive, finds that human nature will become good if there is no threat in the world, to succeed he blackmails Dr. Manhattan to create peace between the United States and the Soviet Union. However, Rorscach's journal is published which shows Ozymandias betrayal of Dr. Manhattan which post-film recreates an evil human nature proving that human nature cannot be changed from evil to good.

David Godwin- Bunny

A while ago, we watched the short animated film “Bunny” in class. I remember being really surprised by the class discussion afterwards, because I saw the film from a completely different perspective than most people in the class. Although the film seemed to have clear and identifiable symbols of eastern religions, the class constantly used terminology typical of western religion. Some people discussed the moths as symbols of “angels,” and referred to the light in the oven as the “light at the end of the tunnel.” These symbols could definitely be applicable, but I think some other, more eastern, symbols in the film were overlooked.
For one, I saw the moth not as a nameless angel/ messenger, but the very husband over which Bunny was mourning. Thus, the moth was not just an anonymous supernatural being, but an actual (and personal) reincarnation. Obviously, the idea of reincarnation is not a western idea, but one attached to eastern religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism. So, when the class discussed the film, it was understandable that reincarnation was not the most obvious or pronounced symbol we saw. The symbol, however, was definitely there. One way the moth indicated it was, in fact, a reincarnation was its desperate attempt to point out Bunny’s wedding picture. In the picture was Bunny’s husband, exactly the image that the moth kept ramming himself into. And, whereas moths are normally attracted to light (and most commonly the flickering flame of a candle; where we get the saying “like moths to a flame”), this moth finds himself attracted to an object that cannot even give off light. Interestingly, a popular Buddhist document entitled, Milindapañha (“The Questions of King Milinda”) compares the passing of the soul to its next vessel to the passing on of a dying flame to another candle. Perhaps the husband in the photograph was once a dying flame that passed on into the form of this moth. Perhaps the moth is simply the vessel preparing itself to “catch flame” before Bunny dies. Either way, the moth’s attention to the picture does not make any natural sense outside of this possible candle analogy. The last shot of the film seems also to suggests the filmmaker’s allusion to reincarnation. In this scene, the transparent outlines of moths rest on the shoulders of Bunny and her husband.
Another major eastern idea overlooked was that of Brahman. In Hinduism, Brahman is the center and source of everything. When one meditates, one is attempting to be “one” with Brahman. Because we are individual souls (atman), too aware of ourselves, we get in the way of this undivided union. However, after one has cycled through the various levels of reincarnation, one’s individual atman unites with the all-encompassing Brahman. After Bunny enters the oven, she begins to float in another realm. Bunny has wings in this realm, and as she floats closer and closer to the bright light in front of her, she seems to look more and more like the moths surrounding her. Eventually all the moths fly so far away that you can’t distinguish them from the light into which they are floating. I see this light as Brahman, and all these indistinguishable little moths as separate souls coming together to be “one” with Brahman.
Finally, the fact that Bunny crawls through an oven struck me as well. The scene was somewhat jarring to me, especially to think that little children would be watching it. I mean, crawling through an oven just seems so graphic, violent, and at least unpoetic. The whole time I was thinking, “Is Bunny really in there? She’s going to burn to death!” That was me and my western perspective. Perhaps an easterner would see this action as poetic imagery. In Indian culture, the tradition used to be that once a man dies his wife follows behind him out of her devotion to him. She kills herself, and thereby joins her husband in death, by jumping into a fire. The oven has obvious connections with fire, so Bunny’s crawl through the oven seems to serve as a modernized example of this fire-jumping tradition.
I think the feeling of shock that I felt (and perhaps that others felt) as Bunny crawled through the oven was only a natural response resulting from my innate western perspective. It was good to feel shocked, though. Whenever films incite such emotions within us, we should not ignore them. Chances are, the filmmaker knows that we’ll have them and has instigated these reactions purposely—so that we will take and consider a cultural perspective foreign to us, a perspective so foreign that it takes animated bunnies before a cute family film for us to see them.

Susan Watkins -- Outside Reading 2

I was very struck when I read this passage the other day:

"The word of God hurts as no sin can ever hurt, because sin blunts feeling. The question of the Lord intensifies feeling, until to be hurt by Jesus is the most exquisite hurt conceivable.... The word of the Lord pierces even to the dividng asunder of soul and spirit; there is no deception left.... There can never be any mistake about the hurt of the Lord's word when it comes to His child; but the point of the hurt is the great point of revelation." -Oswald Chambers, My Utmost for His Highest, entry March 1

I think that modern American Christianity has sucked a lot of the life out of God because many believers don't want to scare non-believers away with a God that is "wrathful." The church has such a bloody history that nowadays Christians just don't want to offend anybody, lest they get grouped together with the Crusaders or Spanish Inquisition, or some other sore memory. However, in turning God into a sugar-coated wish-granter, only there to comfort and support us in any endeavor of our choosing, we lose Him altogether.

Chambers hearkens back to Otto's mysterium tremendum, proclaiming unashamedly that to speak with God is a terrifying and often painful experience. He lays before us two options: the dulling, numbing practice of sin and indifference or the overwhelming life in the sacred. The first option may be more comfortable, but numbness is one of the first signs to death and will eventually lead there. The second is totally uncomfortable, but brings us closer to the fullness of life we were originally intended for. I'm tired of a "safe" God, like a tired old grandfather who can't life a finger to guide us and is indifferent to our behavior. I long for a steadfast Father, who will love and admonish and grow and rebuke me in order that I might reach my full potential.

Wilbert Hill Jr. : Apocalypse Now

Apocalypse Now, was a movie about freedom and redemption. It starts with a soldier who wanted to be at war but was in his hotel room drinking liqour, until he recieved orders from a superior soldier to go over to Vietnam and kill a commanding officer who had lost all moral stability in his mind, and also had lost his immoral discretion among men. This commanding officer had turned into a killer and maniac amongst men. He would kill ma and women and leave there bodies hanging from trees or either have there heads cut off and put them on a stack. As this desdened soldier embarks on his journey. He first meets his crew that he will be with while in Vietnam. These men are all from different walks of life, but they are brough together for one purpose. The youngest man on the boat is 17 years of age. This young man is shot and killed while listening to a recorded message from his mother on the boat. The leading officer on the boat and main character says an extremely important statement when he says; Don't get off the God Damn boat unless you are ready to go all the way. This is the most important statement for me in the whole entire movie because he gives the audience a vivid statement of an assigment, and obedience by faith to the assignment that is given. For example Peter in the Holy Bible got out of the boat when Jesus bid him to come, and by faith he was ready to take tohe first steps, but soon as he seen the danger of the waves crashing he started to doubt and lost hope in the hope of glory, which is Jesus. Peter could have walked on the water the whole way, but lost his main focus, which was Jesus. The leading officer told and warned his crew not to get off the boat unless you are ready to die yourself. One of the crew stayed on the boat hidding under a blanket, because he was scared, but in the end he was found by the enemy and was beheaded. The leading officer was not scared and was ready to go the whole entire way no matter if it killed him. He did his mission with vigilence and obedience, and was faithful until the end.In the end the tribe had to bow down to him beacause he was victorious in killing there leader. He was set free and also the tribe was set free from the rule of the perditional maniac.

Becca Hornick--Apocalypse Now

I found the movie to be raw and intense. It was rough to watch at times because to me it was kind of scary. But the things that were scary to me were not exactly the things one would think. I think the part that scared me the most..well freaked me out the most...was when they left the boat to go looking for mangos. It wasn't because of the tiger because i knew that was coming, but because I don't ever recall seeing a vivid picture of the vietnam jungle and that is what freaked me out. I just started thinking about all the men who got lost in those jungles or who spent a lot of time in them and I feel for them. I truly began to understand the horrors of that place and see where minds could easily have been lost in those jungles (especially if the guys were doing acid). Speaking of acid, the sufer character during his acid trip made me feel weird also. In any movie where they portray an acid trip I always get this weird feeling because as the viewer I am supposed to, but this guy was seeing things that could mess you up sober. I feel like that could have been the way it was for the real soilders there too, seeing those kinds of things ( i know that movie wasn't supposed to be an actual representation, but I'm sure some of the things weren't so far off) could really alter your psyche with out drugs, and adding drugs, whoa I'd be gone. I feel like the only thing you could do is check out mentally. My cousin is in the war right now and sent the family a video he made and there were bombs and guns going off in the back ground pretty much the whole time, and there were pictures of the wounded, and the dead, and seeing those things on a daily basis could really cause someone a lot of change in their life. I mean myself seeing two people in a casket in the past month has been hard on my mental wellbeing I couldn't imagine adding a jungle and people being killed infront of me. The movie made me really ponder what life is really about. And how thankful I am that we have people serving our country and people like me who couldn't handle it don't have to.

Susan Watkins -- Outside Reading 1

I've been coming across a particular theme in several different areas of my life recently, and haven't really had a chance to sit down and process it. I guess this is a good place to do so.

In a book I'm reading, Brian Mclarren's A New Kind of Christian, one of the characters suggests that perhaps Heaven and Hell aren't really two different places, but rather the same place seen through two categorically different lenses. He says that people who have spent their whole lives preparing for Heaven and know the King of Heaven would probably be ready for its light, warmth, and joyous noise, so it would seem to them a paradise. However, those who had been avoiding the King their whole lives and steeping themselves in isolation and anger would find the light blinding, the heat scorching, and the noise a cacophony.

Otto discusses something similar when he describes mysterium tremendum, pointing out that what we perceive as the Lord's wrath in text sources like the Old Testament could possibly be merely His unveiled joy. Both would be equally devestating to us as feeble mortals. We assume that just because something destroys us it is evil or angry, which C.S. Lewis says would be like saying a mighty waterfall is angry with every gnat it sweeps up in its current ('Til We Have Faces)

I'm not sure how I feel about Mclarren's idea, but it seems to be tying itself in with more and more things I study. I was excited to see how it relates to Otto's work, and will have to consider it more because it could potentially redefine some of my beliefs about the spiritual world.

Apocalypse Now Reflection

Apocalypse Now is a very interesting film and at first glance it can seem very chaotic. Kurtz is a very dynamic character that can be characterized as out of touch with civilization. I do not think he is totally insane, however, because he seems to have reasoning behind all of his decisions. Kurtz consciously decided to turn away from the world and go back to man’s primitive and harsh side. Kurtz goes all in during the war and leaves everything he knows for a new lifestyle. Kilgore is almost Kurtz’s opposite, Kilgore has a very unusual method in handling operations but he still clings on to the things that remind him of home. Kilgore yearns for surfing and barbecues with t-bones and beer. Another aspect of the film that I enjoyed was the imagery. In one of the last scenes a cow was being sacrificed in a very gruesome way while Kurtz was being assassinated. This was the one scene that stood out in my mind and I believe it had the most power. This scene showed how ruthless war can be and it also showed that Kurtz believed that he was dying for a cause just as the sacrificial cow.

Susan Watkins -- In Class Film 2

I thoroughly enjoyed the movie The Jacket, although I had reservations about it when I first heard it described. I think I expected to be more disturbed by how inhumanely Jack was treated, but the film handled it in a really tasteful way and turned his sufferings into something more beautiful and redemptive.

One thing I thought was really interesting was the relationship between Jack and Jackie. The fact they have such similar names is our first clue that their relationship is something deep and almost uncanny, a suspicion which was confirmed as the movie went on. When she was a little girl, Jackie was helpless in the situation with her mom and Jack stepped in to save her. Then when he travels back in time, Jack is helpless and Jackie is able to save him in return. Throughout the movie, their lives complement each other's, like a soul split into two bodies. Young girl and grown man, healthy mind and damaged mind, pessimism towards life and optimism, future and the past. Then, at the end of the movie when they are finally together, the sun shines through and they are complete. It was beautiful.

Susan Watkins -- In Class Film 1

I have to admit that I thoroughly enjoyed watching the segments of film from Koyaanisqatsi, although I've heard a lot of different reactions to it. Personally, I really enjoy movies that focus on audiovisual elements over basic plot and narrative structures. I find that I connect with them on a deeper level, even though sometimes the connection is more vague and harder to understand.

Koyaanisqatsi was great for me because I really experienced a sense of mysterium tremendum as described by Otto, especially at the beginning of the movie. The images of rolling mountains, sky, clouds, and especially water made me feel more and more like I was part of them, like it was myself that was so vast and eternal, or rushing along like the rivers and oceans. I really experienced that kind of "blank awe" that Otto describes as part of mysterium and fascination. The tremendum, though, I think really struck me more through the music than anything. The low, rumbling repitition of "Koyaanisqatsi" legitimately disturbed me, and it was like even without speaking Hopi I could have guessed that it was a word of power and desruction. I think the height of my disturbance came when the images of metal powerline poles and wind-power structures were paired with this music. For whatever reason, they seemed so wrong and terrible. When that music faded, though, so did my sense of tremendum.

So, I think I liked the movie primarily because I felt such deep and strong reactions to it, and I think movies that can inspire that kind of response are products of great artistry.

Apocalypse Now- Paul Crowley

One interesting dynamic of the movie is comparing Kurtz to Kilgore. And while on the surface they may seem similiar, they are completely different. Kurtz has shunned away all aspects of his former life. He is completely emersed into the primevil culture that he is running. And he is in my view completely insane. Kilgore on the other hand is doing his best to hang on to a semblance of his former life. He does this by surfing. And while it may seem odd to some people, it is Kilgores way of keeping a sense of normalcy. So in my view they are completely different.

It is also intersting to compare both leaders treatment of their men. Kilgore tries to give his men treats such as beer and food. He does this to bring them closer to home. Both Willard and Kurtz are critical of this. They think they have make their men just like the Vietcong. They have to have everything invested in the War. They have to have no hope of returning home. Only then can they win the War.

In my opinion, the optimal way of doing things is Kurtz and Willard way. You must make the men completely and totally invested in the War. The man who is defending his home (like the Vietcong) are much more likely to win the war. The Americans needed to fight with this savagery and will. However in my opinion, the problem is making the men like that. How do you go about doing it? The better thing to do is to fight like Kilgore, give the men something to do look foward to and be happy about (surfing and beer).