The Anti-Feminist Feminist Scene in THE PATRIOT

So I discovered this movie, The Patriot (2000), starring Mel Gibson and the late Heath Ledger, during the final week of my winter break. It literally played four times on the same channel, thisTV, in one week. And I watched it every time (some in their entirety and some just in clips as I switched channels). I normally don't go for war films, but this one continuously grasped my attention. There's a lot I could talk about in regards to this movie but of course for right now I am going to focus on one of the movie's few FEMALE characters. :)

Watch the scene first and then read on. ;)

Whoa! Slow down there, outspoken feminist of the 1700s! :P

This young lady is Anne Howard (Lisa Brenner), love interest of Heath Ledger's character, Gabriel Martin. And she has a lot to say.

Why it's a feminist scene:

This scene consists of a great monologue delivered by Anne standing up for what she believes. Not only does she do this, but the men in the room don't stop her from doing it and are ultimately moved by her words.

This movie takes place during the Revolutionary War and the last I checked women had little to no rights back then so it is actually pretty shocking and inaccurate to me how they let her go on and on and actually look guilty as she tells them off. This young woman speaks her mind, a full speech, and not one man in the scene tells her something along the lines of "Shut up and sit down, little girl! You have no idea what you're talking about!" Actually, they do the complete opposite. They listen to every word she has to say and are convinced to join the militia BECAUSE of her words. It is because of her, a character we know very little about, that the plot of the film shifts and moves forward. Gabriel doesn't influence them to join the militia. A woman does.

However...

Why it's not a feminist scene:

It's easy to talk tough when you're not the one doing the dirty work. I originally didn't like Anne at first because of this reason and felt that this monologue was an ongoing rant that ultimately doesn't really mean anything. She convinces them to show their patriotism with their values and claims that they are just as much patriots as she, but yet never does she say something like, "If I had the right to fight in the war I would, so why won't you?!" I do understand though too that her fighting in the war would have been unheard of then, so therefore a thought like this would never cross her mind anyway. Then again if she were to say this line, this is still talking tough without action. Sure she talks the talk, but does she walk the walk?

She makes a persuasive argument, and a well spoken one at that, but in the long run she's also going to be safe and sound (well, at least for a majority of the film she's safe) in her town while the guys she speaks to so passionately are the ones constantly in harm's way on the battlegrounds. She speaks to convince THEM to go while she stays put. It's like she's saying "You guys said all of this so you go do it even though I believe the exact same way you do and I am currently speaking about it like you do. But you guys can still go and be in danger and I'll just stay here." It's like a "speak for yourself" kind of scenario.

But, I'm probably looking at it the wrong way because the scene is clearly not intended to be perceived this way. It is portrayed as a very inspirational scene and audiences seem to really appreciate it. Perhaps this scene is trying to prove that women back then would have been willing to fight as well and to portray them in an encouraging, influential light, but yet I feel like she just does this to impress Gabriel, a man and love interest, as well. But then again this isn't a very effective enough explanation and I may not be giving her enough credit.

A bit about my reaction to the film itself as a whole:

I didn't have much internet access my final week of break, so for some entertainment I turned to TV. Perhaps if I had internet I wouldn't have watched this film. Four times.

If you haven't seen it I recommend you doing so. It was directed by Roland Emmerich. I knew that name looked familiar so I had to look it up. That is the same guy who directed Anonymous (2011).  I'm sure you remember my YouTube review of it. :P Anyway, perhaps that is a reason why I really like this movie. I had been wanting to watch another Roland Emmerich film and I did so without making this connection until now.

Okay, so I was still shocked at myself for actually enjoying a war film, considering I have had bad experiences with war films in the past, so I decided to look up details on IMDb, which says that it is rated R and I had a feeling it would be, and on here as well. Kids-in-Mind is a fantastic site for parents looking up films to monitor what their kids watch. It can also help people that are squeamish like me because it gives specific details as to what exactly happens that might be considered questionable in any film so people can be well prepared ahead of time.

I know I'm not a kid! Shut up! It's still a very useful site! :P

See the thing is I knew it had to be rated R considering the subject matter, but yet I was surprised to discover that R is its true rating, along with the high levels of gore on the Kids-in-Mind website. It didn't strike me as a rated R film as I watched it and I do not recall some of the details given on Kids-in-Mind. In fact, I was amazed at how tame the film seems for a war film.

The only conclusion I can draw, and I drew this even before I looked any of this up because it made no sense to me why a rated R gory war film did not showcase that much gore in my opinion or bother me in this way, is that the content of the film was edited for TV, so the version I watched and was okay with was the censored version, excluding most of the really gory details. In other words, I didn't get the full affect of the whole movie and was spared of some of the gruesomeness and people in pain, which is something else I really hate watching in any form of media. Keep that in mind if you are like me but are also interested in watching the film. I'd say perhaps before you rent it wait to watch it on TV if you want to avoid certain moments. Either that or read Kids-in-Mind or other sites like that, ask around for advice if you'd like, and determine for yourself what you can handle, which is better.

On a side note, does anybody else think that this actress looks a lot like Rachel McAdams? I thought it was her!

New Year Brings Good Cheer! January Brings Me Writing Job!!!

Happy Anniversary, "Taking it One 'Stef' at a Time"!

To celebrate "Taking it One 'Stef' at a Time's" second year anniversary, coincidentally Awesome NJ posted my articles I wrote for the site just now!

That's right, I got a writing job!!! I didn't want to say anything until the articles were posted on the site. How "awesome" is it that they were published on the same day? This is so exciting! I am very appreciative. :D

One article is a review of The Sound of Music that was playing at Paper Mill Playhouse. The other is a profile about Erica Cenci, the show's assistant director and choreographer.

I am so proud to finally include both of these articles in my portfolio. They are my first ones for the site and I enjoyed writing them.

Here's to plenty more! :D

To follow Awesome NJ, check them out on Facebook and Twitter.

An Unrealistic Outcome: The Sad Truth About Charles Dickens's "A Christmas Carol"

Welcome to my Christmas essay of 2012! I originally thought of this idea and began writing it in January of 2012, but since it was after Christmas I didn't want to post it, so I decided to work on it for this Christmas instead. It's funny because I have other ideas to write about when it comes to A Christmas Carol, such as the different film versions and how they each tell the story differently. I may still do that, but I also want to point out this observation I have recently made.

Alastair Sim as "Ebenezer Scrooge" in the 1951 film version

We all know the story of Charles Dickens's A Christmas Carol, right? An old miser named Ebenezer Scrooge is pretty much the world's biggest jerk. It isn't until he is visited by four ghosts, his old business partner Jacob Marley included, that he changes his ways and is a good man all around come Christmas morning.

It's such a heartwarming book, film, and Christmas classic, guaranteed to make your spirits bright and give you hope for the world. But what if I told you that A Christmas Carol isn't necessarily as heartwarming as we think it is?

This change in Scrooge's character isn't realistic and we shouldn't necessarily be proud of him. A Christmas Carol has such a happy ending just because it's a Christmas story ending on Christmas Day. Christmas is supposed to ignite happiness, so it would be blasphemous if a Christmas story, especially one that ends on Christmas Day, has a negative outcome.

This sudden 180 in Scrooge's personality is not natural even how it is done. How many of us want to make changes in our lives but find it difficult to do so? We can't expect flaws to leave altogether and never return. That would make us perfect, and we all know that perfection doesn't exist. It's a process and it takes time. We also all know that famous phrase: "Things don't change overnight." And yet, this is what Dickens leads us to believe, or at least tries to. Scrooge changes very quickly and we're supposed to assume that he never commits a bad act again and from here on in he is a good guy. All of a sudden he has a heart of gold and we're not supposed to question it.

Also, Scrooge is reluctant to change throughout the story until the point in his dream and ghostly visitations where he sees Tiny Tim and begins to sympathize with him. If a person is indeed going to change, the want to change also has to be there throughout the process as well. Here Scrooge changes without even having the desire to do so at first and throughout the story. It also seems like he gets off too easy. He doesn't want to at first, but yet it happens for him anyway. That's not fair to others that try to change but struggle with it.

So apparently at the end of the story Scrooge is an angelic man for the rest of his life, but who's to say that he didn't go back to his humbug ways the following days? The story ends on Christmas Day, which is when people are just automatically happy. Then again, this is the first time in his life after a long period that Scrooge is actually celebrating Christmas, so in that respect we can say that his reaction to it is genuine. However, a person doesn't make such a big shift that quickly and stay that way. First we are to assume that he does change, and now we are to assume that this change now lasts without any slip ups because the story concludes idealistically.

And finally, Dickens is trying to convince us that the life altering event that changes him so drastically is a bunch of dreams consisting of four wacky ghosts? Come on! If anything should change him, it should be an actual realistic event that he has to live through because that's how real life works. Even The Grinch from Dr. Seuss's "How The Grinch Stole Christmas" has a change of heart when he hears the Whos of Whoville singing, and he's not even human! Now that I think about it, Scrooge and The Grinch have a lot in common. They're both grumpy guys that isolate themselves from the rest of their worlds at Christmas time and then at the end learn to truly appreciate the season and everybody around them. We can argue that The Grinch's transformation is even quicker and less fair than Scrooge's, especially in the original 1957 book and 1966 cartoon version where all he has to do is hear the Whos sing and then realize that Christmas isn't about the presents but the people with whom you share it. It isn't until the year 2000 when a live action film version of the story came out starring Jim Carrey and provided us with a backstory and motivations for The Grinch, kind of like how the Ghost of Christmas Past shows Scrooge and the reader and audience his past. Past occurrences, and the fact that he isn't human, are the reasons why he hates Christmas. He meets little Cindy Lou Who and Martha May Whovier, his love interest, who help him along the way throughout the movie to make his changes and give him reason to do so. Sure it seems like throughout the movie he doesn't want to change, much like Scrooge, but there are moments where he does cave and seems willing. Also, keep in mind that in the movie the Whos ostracize him because they consider him a monster, making him feel unwelcome.

But the difference with Scrooge is people actually want him around to celebrate with them. Unlike The Grinch, who is pushed away by people because they make assumptions about him, Scrooge is the one that does the pushing away his entire life and it is ultimately his choice to be isolated whereas it may not be The Grinch's choice in his story necessarily. So The Grinch's story changes in the live action version to give him more to work with, but A Christmas Carol has never changed its traditional story too much (thankfully, because I made it clear in my Christmas essay last year that I don't really like that), so basically we have to work with the same thing we've always been seeing for years, which are his dreams. Also, we're supposed to relate to Scrooge more than The Grinch because Scrooge is a human being living among others in society whereas The Grinch looks like a distant relative of Oscar the Grouch and lives in the mountains by himself. (I've never noticed this before, but they look and act a lot alike, don't they? LOL.)

Sure the ghosts show Scrooge real past and present occurrences, as well as peeking into the future and how dire it is going to be if Scrooge doesn't change his ways, but these happen in dream sequences and you know how we humans are with dreams. When we first wake up we still feel like we are in the dream, so therefore Scrooge waking up fearing that he missed Christmas and dancing around in his pajamas in his first waking moment makes sense. He is still in dream mode, that limbo between being asleep and being awake. In this moment too he asks the kid walking by his house to buy his employee Bob Cratchit a huge turkey for his family using his money. All of a sudden he now trusts little children with his money.

This is all being done right after Scrooge wakes up because he didn't even have any time to register anything. He does all of this so hastily. When we wake up from such realistic dreams, aren't we shaken up too? Don't we have trouble thinking straight and critically? As we gradually wake up, the dream starts to make no sense at all. We even start to forget it until eventually it totally disappears from our minds and we come back to reality, thus returning back to our regular routines. After a couple of days, or maybe even later on in the day, since the story seems to conclude on Christmas MORNING, Scrooge could look back on his dream and ghost encounters that Christmas Eve and consider it a bunch of malarkey, returning him back to his old, nasty self.

Looking at it now, I'm actually pretty shocked that his belief in his dream seems to last the entire day, because there are versions of the story where he attends dinners and parties. I've always wondered what exact time he wakes up actually, because the little boy answers that it's Christmas Day, not Christmas morning. If he does wake up in the morning, time moves pretty fast in the final minutes of A Christmas Carol.

I know it's supposed to be fiction so therefore reality shouldn't really matter, but all of this makes me question just how joyful and moralistic this story really is. He supposedly learns his lesson after only ONE night of dreaming, but does he really? He dreams about his rough past and how currently people don't really like him, which actually brings up some unanswered questions on Dickens's part. Knowing Scrooge, why would he care about people liking him anyway? Also, why does he all of a sudden change his tune upon seeing Tiny Tim and how the Cratchit family struggles? He almost presents himself as a misanthrope not caring much about the well being of others, so how does all of this initiate change in him?

How sincere do you think Scrooge is at the end of A Christmas Carol? After reading what I have to say about it, do you still consider it an appropriate Christmas special? What about "How The Grinch Stole Christmas"?

Carousel Review!

(I sent this to The Montclarion to be published online, but they haven't done so
as of yet, so I decided to post this here in the meantime.)

Every semester has at least one Broadway classic delivered by the Department of Theatre and Dance. In Fall 2010 it was Sweeney Todd, in Spring 2011 it was Sweet Charity, Fall 2011 A Chorus Line, Spring 2012 Kiss of the Spiderwoman, and now, Fall 2012 we have Carousel, quite possibly the most original classic of them all. The department still continues to deliver these gems of shows to the best of its top-notch ability.

With a gigantic cast, beautiful music conducted by Gregory J. Dlugos and produced by the tireless orchestra, and memorable dance numbers, which is a majority of the show, choreographed by Mimi Quillin, Rodgers and Hammerstein’s Carousel, directed by Evan Pappas and brought to us by the Department of Theatre and Dance and John J. Cali School of Music, will be playing at the Alexander Kasser Theater until November 18.

The story is about a young innocent woman in late 1800s Maine named Julie Jordan, played by senior Haleigh Adams, who has caught the attractions of lead character Billy Bigelow, played by senior Christopher Cannon, an ex-Carousel barker who is down on his luck money wise. Charmed by how different and witty Julie is, Billy marries her, though proves that he is not the best of husbands by never finding decent work and hitting her once out of stress and anger. However, he shows that he has a heart of gold through his excitement for his future offspring when Julie reveals to him that she is pregnant. Because of this he discovers even more motivation to get some loot, but with the help of his friend Jigger Craigin (sophomore John Caliendo), his determination ultimately drives him to his downfall and he must try to make things right for his daughter Louise (senior Allison Steinberg), who engages in the ballet sequence of the musical. Carrie Pipperidge, Julie’s best friend (senior Brandy Kostick), and her betrothed Enoch Snow (senior Gabriel Rodrigues) provide a foil to the lead couple by being the comical duo whose troubles are not meant to be taken entirely serious. Throughout the musical you see that every single character has his or her flaws but also retains some redeeming qualities.

Audience members will really appreciate Carousel if they go for anything “cutesy,” for the songs and dances are cheerful and fun and the love stories are gushing with adorable moments. These can get somewhat overdone and a little too cute, but there are also very powerful depressing and heartbreaking moments to balance it out, mainly in the second act, for the way they approach the story of family love is very deep, leaving audience members in tears.

"The story has so many universal truths,” says Cannon, “It touches everybody's heart. I never felt so good to be in a show."

Cannon displays Billy’s suavity, anticipation, and desperation very well while Adams portrays Julie as a strong female character that takes a stand in her life and yet shows some restraint and composure to remain ladylike in society. The ensemble definitely puts a lot of hard work into their performances, for they do so much throughout the musical and steal the show with their constant stage time. In regards to special effects technique, one very great moment is how Carousel presents the afterlife with the use of smoke, bright lighting, and echoes.

From set to score, to gifted singing by the cast members, this version is a terrific one. Just like the characters share love for each other, you will fall in love with Carousel. For more information, please check out this website: http://www.peakperfs.org/performances/Carousel.

There are other things I want to discuss about Carousel that I have not in this review, so that might be another blog post.

Look at What I Just Received in the Mail! :D

I'm so happy and excited because I just received this in the mail today in very nice packaging after much anticipation:













If you remember from this blog post, Attempts on her Life by Martin Crimp has been one of my favorite plays on campus. To me it is difficult to find a copy of the script and I thought I wouldn't be able to read it because it is one of those rare gems, but then I found a great deal on BarnesandNoble.com! I am so proud of myself. I ordered it before Hurricane Sandy hit, so I think that's why it took longer for me to receive it, other than the fact that I set it for the longer shipping time, but it was well worth the wait! I consider this a birthday/Christmas gift to myself. :)




Here I thought the closest thing I would get is reading it at a library or borrowing a copy from someone. Now I have my very own copy!




For those of you who are curious about how the actual text is written (I know I was!), here's an example:













This is the first page of my favorite scene "Untitled (100 Words)". It is so amazing what people can produce with such a simply written script.




Here's something interesting. When I saw this scene, "Jungfrau (Word Association)", in the book, I didn't recognize it and figured that they just cut it out and thought maybe I was forgetting something but then I realized that it was replaced with the "Communicating with Aliens" scene that I saw and that the "Communication with Aliens" scene is missing from the book I have. I wonder why. Is there another version out there with the "Communicating with Aliens" scene in it or is this supposed to be the same thing? I wonder what the deal is with this. I wasn't aware that there were other different scenes. I was thinking maybe word differences but not necessarily scene differences. I'm interested in learning about the history of this play now. Why the scene change?













Well this kind of disappoints me though. I want the same version my school used. I think there might be other versions of this play and hoped that I was ordering the right one. I did see another book of it on the Barnes and Noble website, which could be the more updated one.




I just checked now as well. There are other copies of the seemingly newer version on Amazon.com and other sites (I saw a version with "Communicating with Aliens" in the Table of Contents on a Tumblr site actually). Looks like there are other versions I should maybe try to obtain. ;) I have to check who is in stock and which versions are which. It would be good to have the version I just received as well as the other one.




Then again, maybe the "Communicating with Aliens" scene is not that much of a loss to me and maybe it's a good thing to have a different version. It feels more intricate to have the original (if that is indeed what I have).




Everything else in the book looks pretty familiar and it brings back memories. I can't wait to read it some more and am glad to add it to my collection! :D




Well, I'm off to reading (and perhaps purchasing)!

First Theater Review for The Montclarion of the Semester and My Final Year at MSU! :D

You know, it is a tough world out there for us theater critics sometimes. It is sometimes difficult to plan on writing a review of a play and then sitting there watching it having no idea what is going on and what to put on paper. It's actually kind of nerve wracking when you have made a commitment and don't know how you are going to deliver when you have no feasible knowledge on which to base your critiques. It also does not help when your two companions joining you cannot provide any additional insight either lol. :P So what is a theater journalist to do?




This being said, the play Attempts on Her Life, which is playing until October 27, has been one of my favorites so far, and you will see why when you read my first theater review of the semester and my senior year here. I really love it. It is so unique and takes on so many ideas. I am so glad and grateful to have had the opportunity to see and write about it for The Montclarion. I love seeing my article published in there!




The more I thought about my confusion, the more I realized that I had much to say. This review is in my opinion one of my best work and I am very proud of it! Enjoy! :D

Peak Performances Update :)

The Department of Theatre and Dance 2012-2013 season lineup is now hanging in Life Hall!

Hey, look! There's Equus again!

The  pamphlet for the students productions are also available in the Alexander Kasser Theater. They are now stored in the newly added shelves instead of the table they used to be stored on near the Box Office. I believe you can also get them in other locations on campus or even in the mail.

For tickets to these shows and more, click here. This is another place where you can find the lineups of shows.

Throughout campus the shows are advertised with posters like these and more.

"The Red Balloon": A Retelling of the Crucifixion

I've made some pretty strong claims on this blog in the past. I mean, I once even had the nerve to say that the movie John Tucker Must Die is better and more feminist friendly than Mean Girls. *Gasp* However, I believe that the claim of this post surpasses even that one.

On the first day of my "Intro to Screenwriting" class, our professor screened the film "Le Ballon Rouge" ("The Red Balloon"), which is a French short film from 1956. I invented my own conspiracy theory about this film based on a comment my professor made when we discussed the film afterwards. You might want to watch the film now so you will be able to understand the rest of this piece and not be spoiled, so I will conveniently place it here for you:

When we discussed the ending in particular, my professor said that the balloons all carried the little boy because they knew he was good in his ways of nurturing The Red Balloon, so carrying him around is how they show their gratitude. As soon as he said "nurturing" I thought about Jesus Christ because Jesus is both a nurturing human being and deity in many ways and believed that the little boy represented Jesus and that the crowd of balloons were representations of angels carrying his soul to Heaven, like the Ascension. But that was where the similarities pretty much rested. This was definitely taking the film to a whole different level entirely and my theories were forming in my mind vaguely, but I still knew that I wanted to think about it further and write about it. However, as I began to think about it more and more throughout this whole week, especially one night when all of these ideas rushed into my mind at once, somewhat keeping me up, I realized that there is even more to the film in regards to Jesus Christ and His death. In fact, it appears to match up very well, and the film is not just about the idea of friendship that we agreed on in class.

The Fact That the Balloon is "Red"

This balloon could have been any color, but for some reason, red was chosen. Throughout the film there are other balloons with minds of their own showcasing all different colors, but the main balloon is red. Why is this? Was it just a random color chosen by the director, or something more?

Well, there could be a Catholic connection to this. Red represents a lot of things that Jesus also represents. Blood is red and Jesus shed a lot of blood when he was crucified. Jesus's sacrifice for us shows us how much he loves us, and love is also often symbolized by red and shades of it. Then there's the idea of royalty. The color red also symbolizes royalty and Jesus just so happens to be often referred to as the "King of Kings".

Acceptance and Rejection

Throughout the film we see various reactions towards The Red Balloon, some positive, some negative. These kind of varied reactions also prove true when people react to Jesus Christ. There are those that regard a balloon following around a little boy a normal occurrence, but yet there are those who react to the balloon with such distaste that they kick it out of the quarters or refuse it entry to begin with, symbolizing how there are people who reject the teaches of Jesus Christ and the good news of God that He tries to spread. There are times when the little boy gets in trouble because of The Red Balloon's presence, so this represents how people who believe in God, and Jesus, who claims to be God, are sometimes cast out and persecuted for their beliefs. Regardless, Jesus never gives up his preaching or who He is and continues to show up, much like what The Red Balloon does throughout the movie, though of course The Red Balloon never exactly "preaches." There is even a time when The Red Balloon rescues the little boy by following the principal of his school to release him from the locked room where he is being punished for The Red Balloon.

The little boy is a loner that travels a lot on foot. This could also resemble Jesus, but Jesus never really was alone much and the kid does use the trolley once. The beginning and middle of the movie consists of The Red Balloon's adventures, which represent Jesus's life and His many experiences and miracles. There also seems to be a high demand for this balloon, for every time someone sees it, he or she tries to grab its string for whatever reason, whether it's because the person wants the balloon or the person wants to get rid of it. This could illustrate how people react to Jesus in two different ways. Some could be reaching for Jesus to feel His warmth while others are reaching for Him to challenge Him and shun Him from the world, finding Him a threat in some way that might overthrow the working system of things, which He does. The people in the movie never seem to want The Red Balloon around as well, which is odd because it is just a balloon and a peaceful character for the most part, much like how Jesus is peaceful, but just like Jesus was and is considered a threat for some, maybe they find The Red Balloon a threat just as well.

Another thing is that the little boy runs into a little girl with her own lifelike balloon. The balloons take to each other, but the little boy wants nothing to do with the little girl and goes on his merry way to do what he has to do. This can somewhat be a connection to Jesus too. From the Catholic understanding (other scholars may tell you differently), Jesus never had a romantic relationship with a woman, but rather just focused on His teachings and healing others. This may or may not explain why the little boy does not place more of a focus on the little girl, for at first you believe that this is where the movie will end, the balloons and the kids coupled off in an adorable little double date set up. 

Then again, this scene could simply just show that the little boy is too young to be interested in girls and prefers his balloon and agendas, but it is an interesting theory.

The Setting

In addition to the somewhat morbid characters we have a very dreary setting and The Red Balloon stands out a lot with its rich color next to the bland grayish town, which is another thing that was brought up in class discussion. If The Red Balloon does indeed represent Jesus Christ, this symbolizes how life on Earth is rather dark, dull, and depressing without Him in it.

The Little Boys

After random moments portraying the relationship between the boy and his balloon, we reach our climatic moment. The little boy goes to an all-boys school and throughout the film these other kids are always fighting each other to get to The Red Balloon. Towards the end there is this extended high-speed chase sequence (believe it or not) where the boys are relentless and will not stop until they finally capture The Red Balloon and destroy it, which is their intention. At first I thought they just wanted it for themselves to play with it, but the story proves that these kids just want to be cruel with unnecessary violence.

There's something that must be said about these pursuers being all boys. There was no such thing as female Roman soldiers in Biblical times, the male ones being the guys that tortured and killed Jesus, so perhaps the choice was made to have the protagonist attend an all-boys school for this reason. The young lads follow suit to this, especially with the unnecessary violence. When they eventually capture the balloon, they don't just pull it down to pop it and be done with it. They make sure they torture it beforehand, throwing rocks and sticks at it as it floats in the air bound to them, for they had tied it down with an additional string. This very much resembles the scourging of the Lord before he is taken to Calvary, when the Roman soldiers tied Jesus up and flogged him, also placing a Crown of Thorns on His head. After much humiliation, much like what Jesus endured before His death, they take The Red Balloon up to a hill, much like Calvary/Golgotha, the hill where Jesus was crucified. As all of this happens, and throughout the movie, it is heartbreaking because the little boy who is trying to retrieve his Red Balloon and protect it from the dangers of his world finds himself alone and outnumbered by the rest of the kids and people in the town, much like how Jesus and His followers felt alone and outnumbered by the Jews, high priests, and Roman soldiers at the time of His death.

The Red Balloon is finally deflated by the kids, probably from a sharp object. Sharp objects, nails, are also used to nail Jesus to the Cross. This is the one scene in the film that has complete silence, with no background noise or music, except for a dog barking in a distance. As the balloon deflates, the camera's focus is only on The Red Balloon getting smaller. Sometimes the death of Jesus Christ on the Cross is portrayed in this same solemn way, giving us a chance to mourn and really reflect. Suddenly, the angelic balloons all react and all travel to the area when The Red Balloon gives its final exaggerated puff, just like the people at Jesus's death react mournfully to knowing then that He was truly the Son of God after He forces out His final words "It is finished." and breathes His last breath. It is when both The Red Balloon and Jesus Christ die that their followers and non-followers believe in them more and more and come to them.

The Ending

When I saw the final scene, I thought the little boy died and that the crowd of balloons were bringing him to Heaven before I even connected him to Jesus, but my professor's "nurture" comment is what then made me compare him to Jesus during the class discussion. But, it was technically the balloon that "died" so this doesn't really make any sense. But it does. I was thinking that perhaps the deflation of the balloon and the carrying off of the little boy served to connect both characters, saying that they are the same being and when one dies, so does the other. The balloon died and gave the little boy a paradise life in Heaven because of his good deeds. The Red Balloon's deflation is the little boy's actual passing OR the little boy was simply The Red Balloon's soul or human form the entire time.

Then after awhile I began to think about the connection this makes to Catholicism and trying to figure out which of the two characters actually represents Jesus Christ, and began to think that this portion of my theory, though at first seeming a little bit far-fetched even for me because I couldn't really find a way to prove it and I thought I was making it up out of nowhere, makes a lot of sense. This is what I finally came up with: Even the Catholic religion teaches that God isn't just one Being. There are three persons in one God, known as The Holy Trinity: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Perhaps this film is trying to prove this same thing. The balloon and the little boy are the same "person" in a religious sort of way. The little boy is the Father in one aspect because he's the one who trains the the balloon, which is Jesus, the Son, because it undergoes the most humanlike suffering and death and is trained by the "Father," often making mistakes and protecting itself from the dangers of the town because those are human qualities. The Red Balloon is also always by the little boy's side, much like Jesus is always by God's side, never denying his identity as the "Son of God" and preaching His word. Finally, it circles back to the little boy being the Holy Spirit because he is the soul of The Red Balloon that is whisked away to Heaven by the "angels." We could also look back to the first scene of the movie when the little boy "rescues" The Red Balloon, which is tied to the streetlight, depicting how God is always there for Jesus Christ and to rescue us when we are stuck. 

I realized that throughout this piece I kept calling the protagonist "the little boy," not really bothering to get his real name because it doesn't seem that important to the plot to have it matter to mention and I wasn't even sure if he even has one, but I decided to look it up anyway. I just discovered this now, but according to IMDb, the little boy's name is "Pascal," which is actually another word for "Easter" and often associated with it, such as referring to Jesus as the "Pascal Lamb" or "Lamb of God" and Easter as "Pascal Sunday". The lamb is a symbol of Passover, which is what Jesus celebrated with his twelve apostles on Holy Thursday before He gave Himself up for death. Easter is the celebration of when Jesus resurrected from the dead on the third day and is always celebrated on a Sunday, which is today. The little boy, whose name in real life is Pascal Lamorisse, appears to be the son of the director and writer, Albert Lamorisse. Perhaps Lamorisse is a Catholic director that wanted to tell the story of the Crucifixion in this way, maybe using his son as the main protagonist to teach him about it. Perhaps he is so much enthralled by the Crucifixion and Easter that he decided to name his son Pascal in the first place.

I could be wrong about all of this, but the stories are just too similar to ignore. I actually looked for some clues in regards to the resurrecting in three days concept, which is pretty much the most important detail of the Crucifixion, like maybe The Red Balloon's deflation scene and little boy's lift in the sky by the balloons scene is three minutes apart, but I couldn't really find it and don't think that is the case. Then again, Jesus lived on Earth for forty days after His Resurrection before He actually ascended into Heaven, so maybe it is forty seconds apart...

Okay, so maybe not every little detail matches up, but it is very close to it. Hopefully this entire post can help prove my theory. It could just be a cute movie about the values of friendship and hope in a dreary society, but perhaps this film is a commentary about religious intolerance and an allegory about the greatest moment in Christian history, which takes the original idea to a whole other deeper level.

I think I am one of two English majors in my class (I know, right?) and I am definitely in English major mode. 

(I wrote most of this last night and decided to post it today because it is Sunday, for religious reasons lol.)

Department of Theatre and Dance Student Productions at MSU 2012-2013 Season Lineup

The Department of Theatre and Dance this season at MSU is a bit behind in advertising the student productions of this season, so I took it upon myself to personally get permission to help out and advertise the shows on this here blog. :)

The following is the lineup I was given by request. :)

Hey, look! There's Equus!

There you have it! Now you're informed! Enjoy the shows if you are able to see them! Also, look forward to some reviews of these shows written by me! :)

Stef's "So Good You Can't Put It Down" Book Reviews: End of Summer 2012 Reading Challenge Book List and Comments

You'll be happy to know that my Summer 2012 Reading Challenge was not a failure. I did sample a nice handful of books this summer. Those are the following:

Equus-Peter Shaffer (Finished in two days)

Northanger Abbey-Jane Austen

The Abstinence Teacher-Tom Perrotta

Summer-Edith Wharton

The Grapes of Wrath (Play Version)-Frank Galati (Somewhat read)

Seminar-Theresa Rebeck (Finished in two days)

Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?-Edward Albee (Finished)

Steel Magnolias-Robert Harling (Finished)

Dirty Blonde-Lisa Scottoline

A lot of these I bought from the Annual Lacordaire Academy Book Sale and are listed above by order of which I began and/or continued reading them. This is the basic order I remember. I would alternate between books throughout my reading experience. I already wrote pieces about Equus and Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, so I will just give a few words about the rest of the books I read. What all of these books have in common is that the all have a strong female lead character, which is probably why I like them and what drew me to them in the first place. What's interesting too is that the female characters are each an evolved form of another or previous female character, each woman representing a different form of feminism, so that is how I am going to list them in my reviews below while also incorporating the order in which I read them.

AND you don't have to worry about spoilers from me, because I don't know the endings of most of these works either! :P

Northanger Abbey
This is the main novel I attempted when I said I wanted to tackle more classics. I had been familiar with this novel since I was a kid and saw the "Wishbone" episode in which it was featured, so I had been interested in the back of my mind in reading it ever since.

I always appreciate a story with a lead heroine, only in this book Austen makes it a point to say that her lead female Catherine Morland is not yet a heroine and is pretty much not heroine material. She is described as goofy and not very attractive. She is pretty much what you would expect from a quirky female character whom is still discovering her world and is not ready yet to be taken seriously because of her youth and innocence. It is because of her that the book is cutesy and light-hearted, understanding the romanticism of younger women, which is nice because not every book should be heavy and it's nice to relax and read a cute novel, but on the other hand...

The thing about this book is that it is extremely slow moving and the characters portray themselves as very snooty and Catherine is just trying to fit in this snooty, wealthy society. It is very repetitive and does not seem to go anywhere, the characters complaining and making comments about the same things more than once. It is just her vacationing at Bath with these people, but there does not seem to be a specific plot yet and so far I am at least a quarter or a third in the novel. I like that the story plays around with gender stereotypes, which is refreshing because it is set in a time period where gender roles were set in stone and Austen is writing in this time period and scoffing at it. I was told and read that this book is supposed to be a parody of gothic novels (but to me it is also a parody of this time period and society), so this makes sense.

Summer
I didn't read a lot of this one to really comment about it much, but it does have a quirky yet strong female lead and she stands up for herself more than Catherine would or maybe even needs to. This plot appears to be slow moving as well, but it seems to be one of those books that you take in stride as leisure reading. Like Northanger Abbey, it is a seemingly calm, not-so-heavy book. The book is described as depicting a young woman's sexual awakening, so that's why it grabbed my attention. Even so, the book hasn't really grabbed me in yet fully. It does look like it has the potential to build into something bigger though. I actually really like this one.

The Abstinence Teacher
As soon as I began reading this one awhile ago I liked it because it is very modern in the writing style and takes place in New Jersey, so I can relate. It is up there as one of my favorite books because of the style, familiarity, and subject matter. What the book does is argue Christianity and the controversy that surrounds it, such as abstinence-only education. The lead female character, Ruth Ramsey, is an abstinence teacher, but she also believes in forms of contraception and not keeping the kids in the dark about these alternatives. However, the institution at which she teaches and resides pulls the reigns on her and prevents her from doing so, for she gets into trouble because of it. Homosexuality, sexuality, priesthood, church, parish picnics, infidelity, conversion, misconstrued beliefs, beliefs, etc., are other themes that the novel discusses and believers versus non-believers is a huge part of the conflict in the story. This type of stuff interests me enough in everyday life, which is how the book initially got my attention in the first place and why I liked the book since the beginning, but yet because these are things I often see in my own life, I don't necessarily want to read about it in fiction and get further irritated about it because these topics also have a tendency to stress me out a bit. I am halfway through it, but there are times I do have to take long breaks from it because it can be a little bit too much.

Steel Magnolias
Because my reading of Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? was such a success, I decided to look in the library for another play to read this summer. This one jumped out at me on the library book shelf in the drama section, partially because I remember that it was performed at the Paper Mill Playhouse. This play isn't as gut-wrenching as the others with deep meaning as it is plain entertainment, with witty one-liners and some sad discussion points. The cast is all female and movies have been based on it, so it is always great to see a written work dominated by interesting women (even though it was written by a man, which is something I didn't quite understand or appreciate until later). It's just a bunch of women having conversations in a hair salon with one central character. After I completed the play I read in the book jacket that this was Harling's tribute to his mother and sister (for a mother/sister duo are the main characters of this play) and after I read this the play made more sense to me. It is considered a gift to these two family members of his and reads that way. It isn't meant for anything else to be explored.

Dirty Blonde
The title itself of this book spoke to me, because I myself have dirty blonde hair, and the description on the back of the book jacket further clenched my interest. A blonde woman, Cate Fante, becomes a judge and is not taken seriously by some because of the way she carries herself. After she makes a judgement on a case, the aftermath of her judgement spirals out of control and soon her own personal life gets involved in the works and hangs in the balance.

This actually might be my favorite one out of this list, because I literally got halfway through the book with flying colors, feeling myself apart of the action, but like with The Abstinence Teacher, I kind of had to take a break from reading this one too. The story takes a turn for the more annoying much like that one, basically making a big deal about a woman and her sexual exploits and her whole world toppling down because of it. An argument that is made in the book is whether or not any of this would be a big deal if she were a man. As I was reading it I saw that the book provides you with book club discussions in the back, so I think that is interesting and take them into account as I read.

However, I still have a lot of positive things to say about the book regardless. What I do like is that Scottoline always ends her chapters with a cliffhanger. I always loved this about fiction books as a child so I am glad to see this style of writing again. These kinds of chapters keep you reading, wanting to learn what happens next, so you know that this is a skillful author who knows how to captivate her readers. Even when I was really tired and did not want to continue reading because of my heavy eyes, it made me briefly read ahead anyway and skip ahead sometimes just to ease my wonder a bit. It is suspenseful, a favorite genre of mine, and somewhat mysterious, which can send chills down one's spine. 

And so my Summer 2012 Reading Challenge comes to a close. I'm not saying that any of these books are bad. These are just the impressions they give me and I am still willing and determined to complete them at some point. I am even considering to read them leisurely during my school and work life. This might also be my last blog post for a little while so I can focus on school and other things, so I think I can safely say that I accomplished the summer blog posts I had planned. Thank you so much for reading!

Oh, and Happy Labor Day! This day can be considered the final day of summer, so coincidentally I am posting this today. Haha.