The NAZ

The award winning Berkshire dining commons, located on the Umass Amherst campus is one of the four dining halls available to students and in my opinion, one of the best. Your hunger can be satisfied anytime between 11 a.m. and 9 p.m.  at this delicious college dining hall. There are a wide variety of foods for the thousands of students that come to eat here. Sushi, sandwiches, stir-fry, pizza and Chinese food are only some of the tasty foods that are offered at Berkshire. There are 11 different cooking areas at Berkshire all of which have delicious selections to choose from. The deserts vary from day to day as opposed to the soft serve ice cream flavors that are available at any time for your convenience. On weekends, personal omelets are offered and made right in front of you as you crave the perfect breakfast. Berkshire is extremely convenient for everyone especially due to their late night hours from 10 p.m. to 12 a.m. Sunday through Thursday. The menu changes each night in order to give a variety to the students. Late night allows you to schedule meals around your schedule in case you are too busy to eat dinner earlier in the day. The Berkshire staff is always a pleasure to deal with and the food is always at a well-supplied level. The only downfall to Berkshire dining hall are the busy hours. During the typical time for dinner around 6 p.m. or 7 p.m. the dining hall gets extremely crowded and there are never any seats, although I guess this is expected due to the 20,000 students attending the school. Another great feature of Berkshire is Grab n’ Go. This allows students to swipe for premade sandwiches and meals on their way to or from class. My favorite addition to the Grab n’ Go part of Berkshire DC is the New England Coffee that everyone loves, especially the iced coffee. Grab n’ Go has satisfied my hunger a countless number of times that I have been rushing from place to place during the week. Berkshire DC is located in the Southwest residential area across from John Quincy Adams Hall. Many students come from all over campus up in Orchard Hill or Central residential area to enjoy this yummy selection of food so if you haven’t been there yet, make sure you set aside some time before the semester ends to eat at the award winning Berskhire Dining Commons!

It might be a little strange, but I am going to do a review on the Hampden Convenience Store. Yes, to many people it may just seems like a typical convenience store, which it is, but it also provides me with the things I need to get through my day. Like most college students I am a zombie in the morning. I have an 8am class somedays and a 9am class on other days, so dragging my butt out of bed that early can often be impossible. Once i’m up and out the door, and presumably late, I stop at the Hampden Convenience Store. There in the center of the room is the glorious and magnificent coffee station. Yes, the coffee is not Starbucks quality, but it sure as hell does the trick. Hampden Convenience offers a nice selection of New England Blend coffee, hot and iced. There are around six different flavors for hot coffee and one flavor for iced; so pretty much that convenience store has become my own personal savior.

The winters in Amherst are cruel and often unbearable at times, especially when I’m hauling myself to an 8am. That hot coffee from the convenience store has made it possible for me to do the twenty minute walk to Marcus, and without it I would probably be defrosting in a snow bank right now. However, my main reason behind writing this review is to talk about the Hampden Convenience’s iced coffee. I am a diehard Starbucks coffee drinker, but I have grown to love and worship the decently good New England Blend coffee that the convenience store so generously provides me with. The past two weeks the weather has improved significantly, which means to me iced coffee time. As if I have taken some magical medicine, the ice coffee transforms me into this ready-to-go student who otherwise would fall asleep in class. The iced coffee is so refreshing at 730 in the morning, I often feel as if I could skip to class; well not really, I am a college student after all. If you like coffee or depend on it to survive, go to Hampden Convenience Store for your coffee fix, and tell them I sent you.

Going to the University Museum of Contemporary Art on Wednesday was not my first time seeing Goldblatt’s work. In fact, it was my third round observing his photographs. At first, I had a “been there, done that” kind of mentality when walking into his gallery, because we had gone there for my art class and had already discussed and analyzed his work so much. However, I actually was able to notice even more about some of his photographs and pick up even more things than I did during my two previous visits.
There was a set of two photos that I never really stopped to look at before Wednesday. It was the two on the back wall of the main floor of the different playgrounds. Unfortunately I couldn’t find a picture of it online, but I already enjoyed how Goldblatt intentionally paired different ones of different sizes to play off of each other and let the viewer draw parallels as to how they go together, so I immediately stopped to look at these two. They were both of children’s play scenes, but extremely different from one another. The first, done in black and white, had two young girls smiling, using a tree branch as a seesaw. They were out in the nature, and the entire photograph just exuded happiness and a carefree spirit. The one next to it, however, was dark, barren, and cold. It was that of an empty nursery school playground, and had barbed wire closing everything in.
The thing that struck me the most about the juxtaposition of these two scenes was that the more vivid, lively one was in black and white, and the dead, cold scene was printed in color. Did Goldblatt do this on purpose to show that color doesn’t always equal liveliness? Or was it to show how dark the one of the nursery school playground really was? Even in color, it still almost appeared to be in black and white because the colors were so bland. The picture in the nature, however, still came off as being alive and happy with all the depth and shadows of the trees and joyous expressions on the girls faces. Either way, I loved how Goldblatt paired two or three paintings together at once on some of the walls because it made me think about and analyze why he put them together even more.

After going to David Goldblatt’s “Intersections Intersected” I can see why people are so impressed by his work. Most photographers would depict the troubles of a country in a very blunt horrid manner. But the way Goldblatt took his pictures were very simple yet they were very powerful. Especially when you read the captions to what the picture was about. He had a way to make you look at their situation through the pictures differently then seeing them in complete turmoil, although it still seemed bad it was their life and you could respect it in a way.

When looking at his work I feel like I could see the everyday life of the people of South Africa with less of a troubling experience. There were some pictures of people that were happy, maybe we didn’t think it was something to be happy about but its something they would only understand and it was a nice contrast to see. Also the way he laid out his work was interesting to me. In some cases he took a picture from years ago and put it next to a picture from the present. To be able to look at these scenes from two different years was very captivating. To see how much has changed in South Africa, for him I bet it is a great sort of scrapbook to see the history of his presence there.

One of my favorite pieces was the one with three pictures of a fashion store. To see how different a store is there to a store is here is to be expected and yet shocking. It is just a white room with metal shoe racks and some clothes on hangers. It was just interesting to see what everyday life is in South Africa in this simple term. There is no way we can get a real experience from these photos or any photos for that matter but to be able to look at it in a different angle and put your own perspective on it made it a more enjoyable experience.

This exhibit was not what I was expecting. I thought there would be much more controversial (or critically acclaimed) photographs throughout the exhibit. I was surprised on two fronts: the first being that, from my extremely limited knowledge of photography that many photographs were missing kind of basic aspects of symmetry and continuity in the picture, and that I had trouble identifying the “apartheid” theme which was harped on in the research that I did.

Even so, many of the pictures were provocative. While they weren’t perfect, who says that every angle needs to line up in a picture to make it “right”? His range of pictures varied greatly: from people to landscapes to architecture. There were really only two/three pictures that I enjoyed looking at and thinking about that were not people: the two police memorial pictures from 20 years apart and the picture of (essentially) an entire neighborhood in ruins. These pictures were powerful and conveyed a powerful message, even though I’m not entirely sure what that message is – something along the lines of the desolation that is omnipresent in South Africa.

I enjoyed his pictures of people. They all looked somber and not posed, which added a sense of reality to every photograph. I especially enjoyed that he had a series of pictures that included the “AIDS ribbon” in each of them (as AIDS is most prevalent in sub-Saharan Africa.) I also think that he had a surprisingly number of pictures of white people. Something that didn’t occur to me before I went to the exhibit is that in order to show the differences between two races of people, you need to show both groups of people equally in order to compare them. I guess when someone says “apartheid”, I simply instantaneously try to think about it from the black South African perspective, as they were the ones being oppressed.  While there were many pictures of black individuals, I was simply surprised at the stark comparisons of body language between all of the people in the photographs.

The last thing that I noticed about the exhibit was the sheer volume of pictures. There were a lot of them, far more than I was expecting, which gave me insight on his creative process.

I, personally, am not a big museum or exhibit guy.  I occasionally go to events like this when my parents drag me to “educational” exhibits. However, recently I have become more intrigued by art and photography. Maybe this is because my twin sister goes to art school or I have just grown up a little. Regardless, I was pretty excited to see David Goldblatt’s photography. One reason is because his art has a purpose. I am a fan of art with a story or history behind it. And this is exactly what Goldblatt’s photos represent. Being born and raised in South Africa, Goldblatt focused his entire life on taking photos during the long and devastating apartheid in South Africa. I have heard stories about the apartheid, but it is a whole different experience to see what it looked like back then.  Right from the first photo that I saw, which was a remarkable run down steel mill (in the picture above), I was interested in viewing all of them. What I liked about his work was that he kept it pretty simple; there was either a landscape picture or pictures of human beings. However, I could sense a story behind each one. My favorite photo was a very simple, but also a very strong work of art. It was taken in the 1970’s and  it was a black and white photo of a bed with a pillow on it that had words sewn onto it.  It said, “Abake babonana bophinde babonane”. This means, those who once met, will meet again. A young black South African woman made this pillow after her husband was killed during the apartheid. All of his work was very good and I was very impressed. I am glad I got a chance to go to this exhibit and I would recommend that you go see it while you can.

Throughout our visit to the museum, I learned a couple of things about David Goldblatt. His work is a bit different from other photographers because he uses his photography to create stories. Something I noticed about his work, which I also found out during my research was Goldblatt’s ability to tell stories throughout his collection of photographs in the museum. He used different types of photography for the different stories he wanted to implement. As described in the exhibition description as well as in the research I learned about him prior to the exhibit, two of the several types of photography he likes to use are landscapes and photographs from his home city, Johannesburg.  After reviewing his whole gallery, instead of comparing some of the pairs of ‘Intersections Intersected’, I decided to take the two photographs I got the most out of and describe the comparison in their stories. The first photograph displays the public lavatories on Landowne Road in the time of AIDS. This picture describes the extent of the poor and unsanitary community. All of the lavatories in the picture seem as if they are man-made but not with too much effort. Stability of the lavatories don’t look too promising, not to mention the cleanliness of them seems even worse. The obvious reason for relating this photograph to AIDS is the concept that the people in the community don’t have much of a choice about their living conditions. Most of the reason for the contraction of AIDS in communities like this is due to the level of unsanitary locations.

Later on in my museum visit, I was reviewing a photograph taken in Johannesburg of the people braiding hair on the street. It could just be the way this picture was taken or how it is displayed, but this photograph showed South Africa in a different way than the picture on Landowne Road did. In this photograph, taken on Bree Street, it looks a lot similar to a picture that could be taken in New York City. This observation brought me back to the other photograph of the public lavatories. The two different photographs tell their own story of life in South Africa. I thought it was an amazing thing for two of the photographs in his gallery to somewhat contradict each other. Although the hair braiding on the street and the people in the community look as though they are sensibly poor, the buildings shown in the background and surroundings of this second photograph hint that it is a well-built, well-preserved community. Discovering this was one of the things that caught my interest throughout the visit. Photographs have a lot of power and depending on how they are taken along with how they are viewed can a wide variety of stories. The pairs of photographs called ‘Intersections Intersected’ also supports this idea.

For this review, instead of relating photographs that he purposely paired together, I compared a landscape photo with a Johannesburg photo to relate the two stories to each other. Something I found in photography that I never realized before was how effective it is and that a picture truly can describe a thousand words.

A photo from the David Goldblatt Exhibit that really hit me was the photograph titled, “The Docrat’s lavatory.” The caption underneath this photograph reads.
“In 1977 Ozzie Docrat and his family were forced to move from their home    in     Pageview, which had been declared a Group Area for Whites. When the front-     end loaders came to destroy their house they were unable to topple this     concrete structure which housed the watertank and lavatory. It stands to this     day, an unintended monument to apartheid and those who suffered it.     Johannesburg, 17 March 2003.”

The incredible story behind this photograph shows the strength and resilience of the South American people. The fact that what is essentially a bathroom was unable to be toppled by those trying to enforce apartheid is like a kick to the balls to the haters trying to bring down these people.
David Goldblatt captured the strength of South America in many of his photos because in the film he talked about the irony of how while all this suffering and death was going on everyone still went about their daily lives. This photograph captures this idea for me because using the lavatory is a necessary daily aspect that everyone does and even though apartheid and racism are present we all still have to use the bathroom. I liked many of Goldblatt’s photographs but this one stuck out to me because it had a slightly humorous quality to me. I can imagine the frustration the white people must have felt when they went to clear this land for nice new homes only for whites and not being able to rid of a bathroom, and the fact that it still remains shows us all that in the face of racism we are all still human. David Goldblatt’s simple way of presenting such a dark subject matter are also very powerful to me. This photograph and almost all of David’s show the simple way in which South Africa survives through all of it’s struggles.
There is also something to be said about the simplicity of the photographs and how they say what needs to be said in a non confrontational manner. David’s photo’s certainly tell a very powerful story but they are not overtly political or in your face. They present their subject matter in a polite way sometimes with the help of an informative eye or caption and even in some places a bit of ironic humor.

David Goldblatt’s use of doubles and triples in photographic series is one of the ways that his work makes a statement. The series where he takes a photo and pairs it with one from 20 years before is one way in which he achieves a greater response for his work. The Triptych’s however are harder to create because they are all the same image from a different angle or perspective. The triptych “Missing!!! C&B Hiring and Decor” for example shows a decorating store that’s doors are closed from three different angles. The store is empty but shows a scene of everyday life in South Africa, but from three different angles and gives the viewer a full perspective on the scene at hand as well as the signs on the door of the store.
The affect of a triptych as opposed to a normal photograph allows you to feel immersed in the work, and like you are a part of the scene. Standing in front of these three photos you can pretend that you are in front of the store and not in a gallery looking at a photograph of a store. The large format printing also helps enhance this affect.
As well as the visual affect of the triptych it also has an emotional affect as well. The barred doors and the “Knock for Assistance” sign shows how the beautiful interior of the store is locked away from the public. This symbolic visual reminds me personally of the separation of classes in South Africa and how disparate the wealth is in that society. The fact that the doors are barred and one needs to knock for assistance shows me that this well kept store is kept away from the masses or everyday people. Whether this store actually does keep poorer people out doesn’t really dampen the affect of this work for me. The separation of wealth in South Africa is so huge with incredibly poor and incredibly wealthy people mixing in close proximity; I can imagine many businesses not being available to the poor or the everyday people. I can see discrimination as well taking place among the South Africans in many businesses like this.
The black and white missing child sign on the door also contrasts with the bright pink of the store interior creating a symbolic affect. The missing child almost becomes second in importance to the bright pink and luxurious store interior.

The triptych to me creates a visual experience for the viewer that is unlike any normal photograph, being able to feel immersed in the series allows the background story and the feelings conveyed to affect the viewer much more. The triptych is a much more personal feeling for anyone who cares to stand in front of the series as well as when they are printed at such a large size that you could literally be standing in front of the subject that was photographed.

Today during our class time, we viewed David Goldblatt’s art exhibit at the UMass Fine Arts Center.  I was immediately struck by how desolate the majority of his pictures looked. It was almost as if I could literally hear the eerie silence that engulfed those photos. A lot of them were of small shops or businesses on completely empty streets or dry, deserted hills. Most of the photographs that Goldblatt takes are during the time of AIDs in South Africa. In many of the pictures are red ribbons, which stand for the fight against AIDs. Before going to this exhibit, I thought that I was going to be seeing photos of violent or really sad scenes. That was not the case though, instead the pictures exposed the struggles of those times in more creative ways than normal… sort of like a peaceful kind of violence if that makes sense.

The picture that I found most entertaining was of a business, that was of course empty, that had a sign in front of it that offered services from a “traditional healer” such as bringing back a dead loved one, helping in court cases, curing insanity, blindness, deafness, be-witchedness, etc. I think that it was taken in 2006 so it’s kind of strange to see that people thought that you can actually heal or solve those kinds of problems without intensive surgery in some cases.

Another picture that I found interesting was one of a large statue of an elephant looking like it was trying to take a stride forward. It seemed as if with its beady red eyes, it was angry and wanted to unleash its fury on the wrong-doers of South Africa. Even though the subjects of Goldblatt’s pictures varied, they all worked together to achieve an ultimate goal of exposing how horrid life could get due to the negative actions of the government and due to the affects of deadly disease.

Going into this museum, I assumed I would either love everything about it or not like it much at all. I ended up somewhere in the middle of the spectrum with some pieces really striking me and some…well, some not so much. After reading some of my classmates’ posts, I can agree strongly on liking the pictures with people in them the best. However, because I took a South African Democracy class my senior year of high school, I found one picture of a ‘Hacienda’ housing development to catch my interest the most. Here is the picture This picture moved me mostly because of a movie I watched in the aforementioned class. It was a movie called Biko, after an anti-apartheid activist Steve Biko who collaborated with a man, Donald Woods to work together and expose the truth about the government and spread the Black Consciousness Movement together. The main difference between the two men was the Woods was white in a world where being white was, quite literally, a lifesaver, and Biko was black. This picture made me think so clearly of this movie because Woods lives in one of these haciendas and Biko lives in a terrible area designated for other bantus like him and his family. This picture reminded me so strongly of Woods’ home, which he so graciously, and not to mention dangerously, allowed Biko into. Biko ended up a martyr for his cause as he died in captivity. Police brutality had him internally bleeding and as the white police tried to “save” him by bringing him to a hospital, they traveled to one over 700 miles away–causing him to die in the transport. The rest of the pictures were good as well, but this one stuck with me.

David Goldblatt’s exhibition in the University Museum of Contemporary Art contains photographs taken in his home country of South Africa.  His pictures display everything from landscapes and poor architecture to portraits.

Personally, I found his portraits of different types of people to be the most interesting.  There is one of a white schoolboy, who is dressed in a put together and clean uniform, next to a photograph of a young black newsboy, who is wearing ragged clothing and already having to work.  Though the boys are approximately the same age, you can tell just from the pictures that their lives are so separated because of the color of their skin.

Other photograph’s also tell more about racism in South Africa.  One picture depicts a black family all laying in a bed with newspapers and comics sprawled across them.  At first glance the viewer might think that it is showing a happy family moment, yet the title of the photo reads “A Non-White Family in Bed on a Sunday Morning.”  The way that they are labelled “Non-White” makes it seem as if they were doing something wrong and the whole title sounds like a conviction.

Other photos show damaged or just poorly made buildings.  Some of the houses and neighborhoods reminded me so much of homes in New Orleans that had been destroyed by wind and water damage in Hurricane Katrina, yet the homes in South Africa are more of a statement of race and poverty.

Overall, David Goldblatt’s exhibition was very descriptive of the culture of South Africa and very interesting to view.

Wings over Amherst has become nothing short of clutch for all UMass student. The restaurant known as The Hangar offers a delivery service that stays open till 2:30 in the morning on weekends and around 1:00 on weeknights. The menu offers anything from wings to sandwiches and salads.

     There are thousands of students that will order wings on a Friday or Saturday night and the delivery service is pretty good for how many people order. The average delivery time so far this year has been around a half an hour, and once you get the food you realize that it was well worth it. There are countless flavors of wings to choose from including traditional barbeque, teriyaki, and chipotle. Boneless wings are also offered, and the ribs complete the menu. The Pepsi drink selection is also very good because they include Mountain Dew which is in my eyes the best soda.

     The average combo order is a Hangar 1, which comes with a pound of wings, a small French fry, and a can of soda for about thirteen dollars. The wings are unbelievable and fill you up. The French fries to be completely honest are a little soggy when you get them for take out because they sit in the Styrofoam tray with the wings for a little too long. Extra sides will cost you a few extra dollars which, and extra dressing will also require you to dip further into your wallet. Another great item on the menu to choose from is the buffalo chicken wrap which is better than the ones at the Pita Pit.

     Overall Wings over Amherst can be a great asset on the weekend and weeknights where you don’t feel like going to the dinning commons, but you’re stilling looking for something to eat. I would recommend wings to all UMass students.

     The David Goldblatt exhibit currently located in the lower level of the Fine Arts Center at the University of Massachusetts Amherst is a great place for someone to go if they are looking for a historical record taken through pictures. The exhibit offers a wide selection of photos that were taken by Goldblatt and have a variety of messages that they deliver to their viewers. The Fine Arts Center puts the photos on display by filling the entire lower level with only Goldblatt’s photos that he has been taking since the early 1940’s.

     When you first arrive in the exhibit there is a poster board directly in front of you that gives you a little background of Goldblatt’s life and career. You get an idea of the racist South African environment that he grew up in, and that influenced him to go into a career in photography. Also included in this mini biography hanging up, is a description of a few of Goldblatt’s awards and accomplishments.

     There are six different rooms that you can walk through that have a range of photos to look at and interpret. The exhibit photos are of all different themes and cultures. Goldblatt does a good job of portraying the message that he is trying to get across through each picture. They range from ones that take up half of the wall to ones that can fit in a small picture frame in your house.

     There were a few photos that really caught my attention while I was walking around. One in particular was a picture of a bunch of construction materials, mostly lumber, that was still all wrapped up, and there were a bunch of unfinished homes in the background. The picture had these houses positioned extremely close together and on a sort of desert terrain. What I took from this was that the area where this was taken was very poor and that there no skilled laborers that could help repair the beak up broken houses. There were so many other pictures that caught my eye; most of them were of different terrain areas and the cities and towns that he was able to capture on film. There was part of the exhibit that showed Goldblatt capturing the time when AIDS was starting to become a well know issue, he was able to capture the hardships of people dealing with this through photos and it was sad to see.

     Overall I think that the Goldblatt exhibit is a great thing to go and check out if you have the time. I am not a big art fan but even I liked some of the photos that were on display. I think that there is a lot to take from these photos and it is like viewing history through these pictures. It was a good experience and there is a great selection of photos to view.

At first glance, David Goldblatt’s photographs may seem utterly simplistic, but in fact they are quite the opposite. When I walked into the gallery that was displaying Goldblatt’s pieces, I was overwhelmed with the power each photograph held, and how such a simple picture can be so complex and mysterious. Many of the photographs seemed disconnected from one another, but in little ways they were all connected, and although it was often hard to see the connection, you know it is there. There is a mystery behind each photograph; you wonder what Goldblatt is really trying to tell us. There were pictures that I was able to say I understood his message, but then there were others that left me confused. But that is the point of art. You are not supposed to understand the exact meaning behind everything because then it loses its beauty.
Although many of Goldblatt’s photographs caught my eye, there was one that I thought was stunning and unique at the same time.
This photograph is titled “Squatter camp of foreign nationals between the N1 and railway property at Woodstock, Cape Town, 2006”. A long and vague title, like most of his photographs had. What drew me in was the wave like motions of the tall grass; so serene and graceful. Then in the background lie the disheveled squatter camps, a major contrast to the beauty of the grass. This may resemble the severity of quality of life in South Africa, how many people live their entire lives in poverty while others live a life of beauty. Through his work, Goldblatt wants to show the world the often painful life that the people in South Africa live. I hope that the people who buy this photograph look past the initial beauty and see the picture for what it really represents; the struggles of the people.

Antonio’s Pizza, located on 31 North Pleasant St in the center of Amherst is one of the most unique pizza shops anyone will ever run into. Not only are their slices huge, but their variety is huge. I alone have tried at least 10 different flavors, but every time I walk in there are around 25 on display.  After recently going there I have tried another flavor, spicy chicken quesadilla, and I have to say that it ranks in my top 3.  Nothing will ever beat their chicken bacon ranch in my opinion, but honey mustard chicken comes pretty close. The variety which they have creates a vibe that will always want you going back to try another slice.

Another great aspect about Antonio’s Pizza is the dollar slice of cheese pizza on Friday nights. Amherst is a college town, and there is nothing college kids want more than a slice of cheap pizza after a great party. Though I do not recommend ever getting a slice of cheese pizza from Antonio’s because it is just average, and there are so many ridiculous flavors, a big slice for a buck is quite the deal.

Antonio’s restaurant itself is very small, practically a hole in the wall.  So when it gets really busy it can become quite claustrophobic. However, it can seem pretty cozy at the same time with the old fashion family style of you yelling what you want over the crowd, having your slice put in the over, then handed to you in a nice small box hot and ready.  With the slogan “Pizza by the Slice” Antonio’s pizza is a great place to visit. It has another location in Providence that was rated very highly by the Phantom Gourmet so, that’s just more reason to check this place out!

David Goldblatt is a photographer from South Africa from the times during the apartheid, before going to the museum I was expecting a lot of dark pictures that may be hard to look at. I was expecting the pictures to be haunting to look at and even hard to realize the reality of the people in the pictures. However the harshness is a lot more subtle than expecting, the people in the pictures have sorrow written all over their faces but the pictures themselves are not as blunt. The pictures are beautiful to look at and all mess well together as a collection. Not all of the pictures depict any sorrow; there were pictures of middle or upper class white people living a good life. There are a variety of different circumstances depicted in his collection and it is very interesting to look at. https://umail.oit.umass.edu/webmail/view.php?popup_view=1&mailbox=INBOX&index=1223&actionID=view_attach&id=2&mimecache=e691d9b7282ea1a0626f1f3bdad86f00&img_data=1
One picture that stood out to me the most was a picture of a father and his two young sons standing in the doorway of what I assume is their house. The background has a wall that is break apart with lots of over grown plants covering it. From the picture you can tell they do not live a very good or lavish life, they most likely get by on the bare minimum. This is the kind of picture is was expecting to see before looking at the exhibit, you can tell this family lives a hard life and it leaves you asking questions like where is the mother and how did they end up in such a disheveled living area. In a lot of the picture you have to look deeper into the meaning behind the scene, this is one of the few pictures that lays the hard times out in front of you. While I prefer things to be laid out in front of me, its nice to stand back and think about

Last friday my friend asked me if I wanted to go with her to eat at Bueno Y Sano. I have heard a lot about this place because they sponsor events all over UMass and it is one of the only Mexican Restaurants in town. Coming from Los Angeles, there is delicious Mexican food over there and I am a big fan. So I decided to go try Bueno y Sano. Bueno is kind of hidden because it is behind the main road, so you will not see it walking around town. We walked into the small, empty restaurant and I looked over the menu. They have a typical menu with tacos, burritos and quesadillas. But they are known for having huge and delicious burritos, so I decided to order one of those. They have many unique “filling” choices that you can add to your burrito for an extra $1.50. Some of these choices include BBQ and Buffalo Chicken, Sauteed Spinach and Garlic, and Steak. I decided to go with the BBQ chicken because I am a big BBQ fan. The comments on the size were definetly correct. The burrito was very big and very filling. For taste, the burrito was good.  Nothing mind-blowing, but it was definitely satisfying. It was nothing compared to my favorite spots back home, but I am sure that you will find me back at Bueno Y Sano soon. It is a nice spot to escape the D.C. food, it is not expensive and it is a tasty place.

DOPE: Dancers of a Provoking Experience. One of my best friends is on the UMass Dance Team, so whenever she has different dance performances outside of the basketball games, my friends and I like to go support.That’s Tay, in the center.

For this particular performance, I found myself traveling to Hampshire College on both Opening Night, last Thursday, as well as again on Saturday night. These performances were have been in the works since around October, when dance majors here at UMass auditioned other dance majors, dance team members, and people simply passionate about dance for their performances. The nine performances were all student choreographed and were absolutely wonderful. My favorite piece was the fourth of the night, “Manipulation”. This involved five dancers, four girls and one boy. They wore spandex suits one-pieces and I think the simplicity of their costumes allowed for a focus on the dance. It started off with dim lighting so you could only see their silhouettes, and then the lights came on and you were taken aback. It was very tik-tok-tik, and by that I mean boom boom boom–very move to the beat-each-beat-one-at-a-time. It was captivating and they did a wonderful job.

My second favorite piece was the last one of the show.

^This piece had this hardcore, horror movie music in the background that fit in perfectly with the intricate, spider-like moves they were doing. It was the perfect climax for the show and capped off the night on a great note. The whole show was unbelievable and I highly recommend checking out dance performances in the future. Well worth it.

David Goldblatt’s exhibit Intersection Intersected is put together very well and certain pieces have different themes. One of the themes was AIDS awareness; in every picture there was an AIDS ribbon because it is such a large problem in South Africa today. Although different pieces of his photography have different themes they all are very significant to South Africa and South African culture. Some photos were of their president that was against educating the people of the AIDS epidemic that was and still is a very large problem. Others were of everyday life in South Africa and people working. One of the photographs was of two women that looked like they were on a beech, but there was no water around. After looking closer you see that they are selling clothes trying to make some money.

Left taken in 1983. Right taken in 2004.

The photograph that stuck out to me the most was a set of two that were of a memorial from the battle of Anglo-Boer War. The memorial holds the bones of sixty men that were South African police that died in this battle. The other Photograph is the same exact memorial, with the same angle, and same lighting, only about thirty years later. The difference in the appearance of the memorial was eye opening. The more recent picture showed that the table had been broken, maybe by vandalism, there is weeds growing in the cracks of the stones, and most of the stones are cracked and decaying. The first picture was taken in 1983 and looks gorgeous. The second picture was taken in 2004 and it looks like 50 years have gone by. I have never really had an eye for art but in these two photographs I really could not believe the difference.

Today, I went to David Goldblatt’s art exhibit in the museum at the UMass Fine Arts Center.  For those of you who do not know David Goldblatt, he is a photographer who worked during the apartheid in South Africa.  This being the case, we might assume that his work would be hard to look at, but it isn’t really.  A lot of photos don’t capture a lot of the violence and destruction of the time, but really small aspects of life.

            One of the pictures that kind of disturbed me more than anything was the picture to the right.  The desperation shown in the picture is haunting.  The mother’s skinny legs and the rawness of the mother and child’s kiss stuck with me. 

            This photo to the left was my favorite David Goldblatt photo.  The girls are teeter-tottering!  It kind of reminds me of the way my sisters and I were as kids.  I am the oldest of three girls.  One is 17 and the other 15.  Provided our closeness in age, we have always been close as friends too.  The girls in this picture are taking what they have available and truly having a good time.  My sisters and I grew up kind of out in the boonies, and sometimes we were the only people we had to play with.  But when I think back on my childhood, I wouldn’t have it any other way!  I like to think that these girls will look back on this picture and remember some of the good times they still had through the apartheid. 

            I am struck more by photo with people in them, pictures of landscapes or houses I tend to just glance over and move on.  A lot of Goldblatt’s photos were not of people or children, but they ones that struck me were.  I like to look at a person’s face or see an emotion in photo, and I don’t get that connection from a picture of a landscape.

Last night, I went to the Pita Pit.  Despite unappetizing name of this on-campus restaurant, this “pit” serves some pretty delicious pitas! Well…at least one pita!  I cannot go on and on about all the different kinds of pitas and salads that they have there because, the truth is, I have only ever gotten the Chicken Caesar Pita.  I usually like to switch things up, and I am always willing to try something new, but the Chicken Caesar Pita is just so good! It would almost be a waste of a swipe if I did not get this pita because I think it might be my favorite food!

 For one YMCP swipe, if you are a part of the UMass meal plan, you get a pita and a drink and your choice of chips, a cookie or a brownie.  I have to recommend the chocolate chip cookie!  They are the perfect combination with the softness in the dough, but still baked enough to be sturdy.  When my Dad’s grandmother made chocolate chip cookies, she was very conservative with the chocolate chips.  You were lucky to even get one in your cookie!  But the chocolate chip cookies at Pita Pit are the complete opposite!  You cannot take a bite of the cookie without getting a mouthful of chocolate chips! J Its wonderful!

But their pitas is what I am here to talk about…one pita specifically.  If you like Caesar salad then you are bound to fall in love with this pita!  The dressing they use is exceptionally good, and they really pack the pita-wrap with a ton of chicken!  Each bite is dripping with the perfect amount of chicken, dressing and lettuce!  The only draw-back is that sometimes they can be messy to eat.  Well, for me anyways….I once went with my boyfriend and everywhere within a 1 foot radius of where I was eating had something that dropped out of my pita.  When he was finished, his space was perfectly clean.  So the messiness may just be me.

The University Museum of Contemporary Art at Umass is currently showing the work of South African photographer David Goldblatt.  In our posts, we’ll be describing the show, titled “Intersections Intersected.”  What will you write?  A review of the art?  A description of the University Museum at Umass–what kind of work they show, and what has been up this year?

Most of us will probably write about our experience:  how the images made us feel, what image/or images struck us the most (describing in detail), and then also trying to understand the context of what he’s depicting.  For instance, here’s an image we’ll see:

Photo: David Goldblatt, Stalled municipal housing development. Kwezinaledi, Lady Grey, Eastern Cape. 5 August 2006

It’s an evocative image on its own, but it is also referring to a specific thing in South African history.  You can try to uncover this.  Or if you are a photographer, you can describe the technical process he used to take his photographs.  Or if you have ever visited South Africa, this might be a nice moment to write about it.

To prepare for the trip, research David Goldblatt, and try to get a rough idea of the context of his work, and also a working knowledge of what apartheid was.  Do a one-page write up to hand in at the museum, saying what you learned from your research.  Here are some links I found to get you started:

Information from when the show was at Malmö Konsthall, the New Museum, and here is review of the show from the New York Times.  Some info on Goldblatt from NPR.

And if you want to look at how some people in the field write about art, here is ArtForum, and here is Cabinet Magazine.

Dale and Brennan fighting over Dale's drumset

Step Brothers is a hilarious tale about to forty year old men that still live with their parents. One lives with his mother and one lives with his father. When the two parents get married the two sons are forced to live together and even share a room. Their childish antics are what truly grab your attention in this film. At first they hate each other, they bicker and fight constantly. As the story progresses the two sons learn that they have a lot more in common than the thought. They slowly become closer and closer until eventually becoming best friends.
When their parents get sick of their games and childish behavior is cause them to start fighting more and put a strain on their marriage. Eventually they decide that a divorce is necessary to keep their sanity. When the mother and father went their separate ways the boys were forced to finally grow up. They got grown up jobs and made their own lives. Through out this life journey they experienced they did a number of ridiculously funny things. From the dialogue to the actors facial expressions, everything was hilarious.
Will Ferrell and John C. Reilly star as the two middle aged sons. Both are well known as comedic actors but I never thought that they would be this good together. The way they play off of each others facial expressions and tone of voice is impeccable. In this movie they form a very nice comedy team. These two actors do such a good job in this film that I really couldn’t picture any other actor filling their shoes. Their parents, played by Mary Steenburgen and Richard Jenkins, did a phenomenal job. It was almost like they were their actual parents. The way they reacted to the things the two sons did was priceless. I could really see my dad reacting in the same way if I did some of those things.
The story line was very easy to follow and you didn’t have to guess what was going on any point. The simplicity of this movie is also what adds to the humor in it. Most movies that Will Ferrell stars in he improvises his some of his lines when he forgets. If it is funny and it makes sense with the story the director keeps it in. In Step Brothers you couldn’t tell that he improvised anything because the whole dialogue in the movie was so funny and childlike. It would be very easy for a comedic genius like Will Ferrell to add lines here and there that add to the story.
This move would be great for a rainy day, or a relaxing late night movie. So far I have not heard any negative feedback from anyone else that has watched it. All of my friends, family, and neighbors think this movie is a riot. I would strong stick to the rating though and not allow young children to watch it. There are some scenes that you would not want young children seeing.
If you like comedy movies this is one that you can’t miss. If will have you non stop laughing through the entire movie, and even for days after. It is defiantly not for the whole family but it would be perfect for going to see a movie with your friends or even

Everyone has that one friend that is so attached to their girlfriend that they basically have no close friends. Whenever the group goes out, he always stays in to watch a movie with his girl. Well what if this guy was getting married and had no close friends to be his Best Man? I Love You, Man portrays the story of Peter Klaven, a successful real estate agent, who is going to marry a beautiful girl, but first needs to find a Best Man to be at his wedding. This leads to a series of hilarious “man-dates” in which Peter is on the quest to find his new best friend. Peter finds his unlikely match in an opinionated but charming man named Sydney Fife. Paul Rudd stars as Peter and Jason Segel complements him as Sydney in this film that really defines “bromance”.

I Love You, Man was a fantastic comedy, but what made me enjoy it so much was that it was unlike most of the other humorous movies out their. I Love You, Man has an awkward and quirky theme to it, which will keep you laughing the entire movie. Each scene seems to go bad for Peter who cannot seem to say the right thing to any one that he interacts with. one can only imagine how disastrous it would be if you were apart of the movie in real life. Now that I have been discussing these scenes, I will list my 5 favorite scenes from the film (in no particular order):

1. The dinner at the Chinese Restaurant in which Jason Segel gives the perfect speech that nobody wants to hear at a family dinner. He starts it off normal, but then goes into a calm rant about Zooey (Rashida Jones), Peter’s soon-to-be wife, and her unwillingness to perform in bed. This scene makes everyone in the move theatre feel just as awkward as the characters in the film how are sitting at the dinner table.

2.  The “best friend” talk that Peter has with his family back home. J.K. Simmons, who plays Peter’s father does in an excellent job of being the father that favors one of his children. The kid that he favors is Robbie, Peter’s younger brother who is played by Andy Samberg. In this scene, it starts off as a nice family dinner until they bring up the fact that Peter does not have a best friend. He then defends himself and questions his father on who his best friends are. His father utters back at him that they are Robbie and Hank Mardukas, who is referred to many times in the movie.

3. The golfing scene. What is worse than watching sports with girls? How about going to play sports with them. Once Peter becomes friends with Sydney, they go on a double date with his fiancé and her friend to go golfing. Sydney already displayed his hatred of playing golf  with girls but he goes anyways. The day on the field could not turn out worse as everything seems to ruin this double date. This is a fantastic and very funny scene that seems to be everyone’s favorite.

4. The Rush scene. Peter and Sydney bond over the band Rush. They both grew up listening to them and they have an obsession with Rush. When Peter realizes that his fiancé has never heard of Rush, he is somewhat shocked and makes her listen to them. Then, Peter starts playing his “air bass” and the scene takes a detour as now his funky style of playing the air bass become the main topic. I promise you will be laughing throughout this scene in the movie.

5. Any scene with Lou Ferrigno in it. Peter Klaven is a real estate agent in Los Angeles and throughout the entire movie he is trying to sell Ferrigno’s house. His flamboyant and annoying co-worker Tevin wants to help with the foreclosure so he can make money off the house. However, Peter remains strong and wants to prove that he knows how to sell houses. Lou Ferrigno pops up in a couple scenes in the movie and his presence alone brings a unique humor to the film. I mean who would not want to see the Hulk himself in any film? Especially in a comedy.

In every movie made there is some flaw or something that could have been a little bit better. If I had to say one flaw in I Love You, Man, it would be that it moved slowly during some parts. But overall I would not change anything. This is one of my favorite movies that I have seen in a few years. It kept me laughing the entire movie and it had a great plot line that kept its flow with many clever jokes throughout the film. Another aspect that I loved was that all of the scenes are realistic and not far-fetched. Even though everything turns bad or awkward for Peter, I can relate to them myself. This kept me engaged during the entire movie and it made me feel as if I was actually in the scene.

If you have never seen I Love You, Man, I recommend that you get the movie, grab some popcorn, find a comfy spot on the couch, and be prepared to laugh.

The Devil Wears Prada is power driven movie with witty characteristics. It is completely a chick flick so for those with a high love for fashion this movie would be good. It shows a story about a normal girl in a high fashion industry where its dog eat dog. I find it to be very interesting to see her work ethic because in jobs like hers this movie can be very relatable. By no means is working in these industry’s a glamorous job, its just goes to show how much you want something and what you would do for it to make it all worth it.

Andy played by Ann Hathaway, is a sweet girl with an “I’m too focused on work to care about my clothes” attitude as Niguel (Stanley Tucci), the senior editor had said, who is trying to better her career of being a journalist.  As she goes into her job interview with no prior knowledge of “Runway” magazine she meets her soon to be boss, Miranda Priestly (Merly Streep). Miranda or the “Dragon Lady” as she is referred to, is the editor and chief of “Runway” magazine and is known for her blunt words and outrageous tasks for her assistants. As Andy tries to obey Miranda’s tasks by doing everything she asks, she finds herself getting lost in her job and not paying attention to her personal life which is hanging by a thread.

The things that drew me to this movie are the fashion, the work ethic and of course Meryl Streep. The director David Frankel did an amazing job with the to die for clothing along with the costume designer Patricia Fields. Frankel was the director for some of the Sex and the City episodes so you know it was going to have some good outfits. From the Chanel boots, the Valentino dresses, Dolce & Gabbana stilettos and of course Prada bags, the film was pulling out all sorts of high-class designers.

The worth ethic in this movie, I believe is quite relatable to many people out there trying to get jobs in that type of industry. To see Andy struggling to get everything done and done perfectly is something that not many people can do but when you can master it, it can get you so far. One thing Andy showed in this movie whether unintentional or not is how dressing sharp can change your attitude. She looked good so she felt empowered which gave her that edge needed to get things done. It also showed how serious she was with working for Miranda in which Miranda started to give her more credit.

Most importantly Merly Streep had completely made this movie, without her this movie wouldn’t have been anything. The elegance and yet vicious persona she had played absolutely made the character and the movie. To get a Miranda Priestly as a boss was definitely a horrid endeavor. Although it was a little exaggerated, the way Miranda voiced her opinions or how she got things done was so arrogant and yet at the end of the end you cant tell she knows her stuff. She knew exactly what she wanted and what worked which made her an infamous fashion icon and fun to watch.

I find this movie to be about being empowered and finding what truly matters in one’s life. Andy was transformed as she worked for this infamous “Dragon Lady” into ambitious woman with a strong mindset. Throughout the movie you see Andy breaking down because of her tasks at work and her personal life but that only made her strive to prove herself. In the end she was one of Miranda’s greatest disappointments and yet the best person she had ever worked with. It’s fun movie to watch, I personally enjoyed its insight into the fashion industry.

When I think back to my sentiments walking out of the theater after seeing “Black Swan”, one word rings true in my mind…confusion. “Wait, what just happened?” is a more than popular after thought. One thing I noticed after talking to people about this movie was that they either loved it or hated it. I personally really enjoyed it, but like any other motion picture, found some flaws or things that could have been done differently, like the following…

1. The lack of development of Natalie Portman’s character, Nina Sayer. She starts off as a very naive, immature but dedicated ballerina who is very dependent on her mother, who also danced professionally in her day. She is somewhat neurotic and insecure, and only gets more so throughout the movie. Basically, she just goes from crazy to crazier…Oscar worthy? Not so sure.
2. The predictability of the whole story-it basically mirrored the actual synopsis and plot of the real “Swan Lake”, where the white swan (Nina) goes crazy because the prince (the ballet company director) chooses the black swan (Mila Kunis’ character, Lily) instead of her. Her depression and downfall ultimately lead to her demise, when she falls to the ground, presumably dead, in the last scene.
3. Some of the scenes were a bit too inappropriate for a movie of that genre. When going to see it, I was under the impression that it was a movie mainly about dance and that I was going to watch it for the impressive ballet scenes. With that in mind, I went to see I with my mom and it ended up being the most awkward experience of my life…in one scene, Lily’s character performs oral sex on Nina. In another, the company director repeatedly grabs Nina’s crotch. This is all fine and added to the dark nature of the movie, I just wish I had a prior warning.

And now for the actual plot…

            Aside from the fact that it was overall predictable, at least from my point of view, I thought that it still had some brilliant individual scenes. One in particular being when Nina and Lily first start to become friends and they decide to go to a bar together even though they have their opening show and rehearsal tomorrow. They end up inside the club, and Lily convinces her to pop a few ecstasy pills in an attempt to “loosen her up”. The bright flashing lights seemed to jump off the two ballerina’s limbs and onto the walls of the bar. Nina, heavily under the influence of alcohol and drugs comes back and screams at her mother, showing that she is no longer her little girl anymore. I thought this scene branched out from the central topic of the movie, being ballet, and exposed some other important issues like mother daughter relationships and experimenting with drugs.

            The actual plot, however, is really very simple and easy to follow. Nina, a dedicated ballerina, is finally given her dream role-to dance the lead in the Swan Lake. The only problem is that the director feels as if she can only handle the soft, delicate role of the white swan, like how Nina’s personality truly is. He suggests that she watches Lily, a new dancer who is much more experienced and carefree, to help her embody the black swan. Her many attempts to not only have the dance skills for the role, but also the personality, eat away at her psyche and eventually drive her to become nearly insane because she is obsessed with being the perfect ballerina for the role. What gets to her even more is the fact that the dancer who plays the Swan King is secretly having an affair with Lily. She begins to literally turn into a swan because she immerses herself so deeply into the role, culminating in her growing wings and talons.

            Overall, the way I saw the story was the Nina was clearly the white swan, and Lily represented the black swan, or her evil twin. I think that Lily could have easily just been a figment of Nina’s imagination, seeing as how the oral sex scene was just a dream, and when Lily comes to the door and Nina asks who’s there, her mother says, “no one.” Lily was just a representation of who Nina needed to be in order to capture the role of the dark and sensual black swan in order to please the director- and in the end, she did…Even if that meant death.



The Departed – one of Scorcese’s best works to date. This gritty gangster movie tells the tale of an aging mob lord, an under-cover officer trying to redeem his family’s reputation and a corrupt detective who, by the end of the movie, cannot decide which side he should be working for. The film is set in South Boston and shows some land marks around the city that should be familiar to nearly any Massachusetts resident.

The movie opens by laying the foundation for all the characters: Frank Costello (Jack Nicholson) who is the film’s primary antagonist, is shown befriending a young Collin Sullivan (Matt Damon) whom later in life becomes one of Costello’s several moles within the Boston state police department. All the while, Billy Costigan (Leonardo DiCaprio) is working to rebuild his family name which is riddled with crime and defiance. Upon entering the state police, Staff Sgt. Dignam (Mark Wahlberg) tells Costigan outright that he is not a cop. And so starts the intricate dance of rats (double agent informants) in and out of the Boston state police.

What makes this movie so great is the authenticity of it. And I’m not just talking about the Boston accents, shots of the capital building or the rugged portrayal of south Boston. While all of these are great, there is a certain grit to all of the actors that make you think that some of them really are from Boston. That’s because some of them actually are: 2 of the 4 main characters were born and grew up in the greater Boston area. Also, the director, Martin Scorcese, didn’t dumb down the content of life in the mob. There are some extremely violent scenes including a stabbing, a man falling 10 stories, a strangulation and several shootings. This touch of authenticity is what brings the movie above most others. (Also, they spare no expense imitating the cavalier language exercised by many of the more crass individuals in the greater Boston area. Just try to count the number of “f-bombs” in the first twenty minutes.)

Each of the characters has very distinct personalities which are thoroughly developed over the course of the movie: something that is difficult to do with four separate characters over the course of two and a half hours. Let’s start with Frank Costello.

Frank is a drug laundering super power in the area of Boston, with his center of operation being on L Street. He claims that, even now, he “hasn’t needed money since [he] stole Archey’s milk money in the third grade”. Now, he is simply doing what he does because he knows nothing else, and you can see it wearing on him. Frank is ruthless as they come, and the epitome of a hardened gangster. One scene depicts this quite clearly when he handles a severed hand in a plastic bag while simultaneously poking fun at its previous owner.

Next is Collin Sullivan, the police detective who entered the state police in service to Costello, who began his brainwashing at a young age. Sullivan is not all bad, as he is seen having second thoughts about his entire ordeal with Costello and even thinking about completing law school in another city in order to escape the mob. He falls for a police psychologist, which infinitely complicates things for him and Billy Costigan.

The third main character is Staff Sgt. Dignam. While for most of the movie he is arguably a minor character, he flourishes in the final scene of the movie into a fully fledged main character. He is the crass and abrasive second in command of the Boston police department, and will take any means necessary to bring about what he considers to be justice.

Lastly but certainly not least is Billy Costigan. He the son of a one-time mob lord and the nephew of an infamous murderer. Upon joining the state police, he is initially turned away, and then offered an undercover position which is designed to infiltrate Costello’s operation. After the time spent undercover, Costigan starts to lose himself and his mind due to the horrific deeds he has had to do in order to maintain his cover. He is one of the three rats in the movie that then entire film is based around.

Now here’s the kicker: only one of these four characters remain alive at the end of the movie. When it is revealed that Costello is a protected FBI informant, the s*** really hits the proverbial fan; the movie takes twist after twist to bring it to its stunning conclusion. If you haven’t seen The Departed, at the very least pick it up to see some areas in Boston on film, at the most be ready to be taken on a gripping ride that won’t let you go until the credits start to roll.

 Goodfellas has become known as a movie that is nothing short of a classic, from the old school Italian dialogue, to the almost perfect cast. The movie portrays the life of a true Italian-American gangster that had it all, and than had it all come crashing down on him. The main role is played by Ray Liotta and has co stars Robert De Niro and Joe Pesci to bring life to the film. Liotta plays a man named Henry Hill who has been a member of organized crime since he was a teenager. We get to see Hill grow up and exactly how he came to become involved with crime. Henry works his way up until he has it all, the cars, the perfect family, and the drugs. Co-Star Robert De Niro plays a hard nose gangster that kills and steals for fun, whose is practically untouchable to the cops and other gangsters. De Niro outdoes himself in this film, and his acting is better than it was in both Casino and Deer Hunter, which were both Oscar worthy films. Joe Pesci follows De Niro with a great performance by perfecting the Brooklyn style Italian accent, along with acting as the small tough guy that is always looking for a fight.

     The screenplay and dialogue make this movie into the masterpiece that it is. There are countless one-liners and hysterical scenes that make the movie not only flow better but also make sure that your attention is kept. Director Martin Scorsese delivers as he has on movies like The Departed and Casino. He uses a few of his favorite actors and gives the public possibly what I believe to be the greatest Mafia film next to The Godfather trilogy. The movie takes you through the 1950’s 60’s and into the early 70’s and explains how the Italian Mafia had it all, and lived like kings, but members who were facing prison time started to rat out their friends and brought the whole empire crashing down. While watching this movie you will wish you could just hang out with these guys for one day and live a carefree life.

     There are two scenes that show the movie’s true mastery, including Joe Pesci’s restaurant rant and De Niro smoking a cigarette to the Eric Clapton song Sunshine of Your Love, in the bar.  The early scenes also enrich the movie when all the gangsters are sitting around barbeques in the summer time laughing and smoking cigars. The movie captures you from the opening scene until the very end and then makes you want the story to continue.

     One of the more interesting facts about this movie is that it is based on a true story. All of the characters in this film are real people that are now serving their sentences in prison due to Henry Hill snitching on them, or are now dead. The character played by De Niro (Jimmy Conway) went before the parole board in 2004 and the role played by Liotta (Henry Hill) is currently a in the witness protection program. The movie is based off of the book Wiseguy by Nicholas Pileggi. I have yet to read the book but I have heard nothing but good things about it.

     Overall the movie is an American classic and another piece of art from director Martin Scorsese. The casting was truly too good to be true and the screenplay keeps you laughing and at the edge of your seat the entire time. Overall I would give the movie a ten out of ten rating and recommend it to anyone looking for an unbelievable movie to watch. There is honestly not a bad thing to say about this film and I think it is Ray Liotta’s best performance and one of De Niro and Pesci’s better films.

Yes, it’s extremely stereotypical for a young woman, but i’m a sucker for romantic, heart wrenching movies. Throw a little military in there and i’m hooked. So of course, when I saw the trailer for Dear John I was ecstatic and I could not stop myself from replaying the trailer multiple times. The trailer was captivating and the music was tear jerking, every aspect which seemed appealing to me. The real hook however, was the stunningly gorgeous character John, who was once troubled then found himself while serving in the Army. Seems like the most perfect combination for a beautiful love story right? But I wouldn’t make any assumptions yet; the movie throws you a twist that will leave you screaming, crying, and begging for your money back.

The movie takes place in North Carolina where a dashing Channing Tatum who plays the character, John, meets the beautiful Savanna, played by Amanda Seyfried. The two fall quickly in love and it for about six minutes the movie is joyful and happy. The director speeds right through the falling in love part and skipped right to the deal-breaker. John was only on a leave from the Army for two weeks, and after the few minutes of blissful romance, comes the sad and depressing departure of John. However, John and Savanna keep in touch with the classic and slightly unrealistic communication of hand written letters, hence the name of the movie, Dear John.

John was deployed for a year and right before he was about to discharge from the Army for good, terrorists strike the Twin Towers. Of course John and Savanna’s romance begins previous to 9/11, because that gives the movie more drama. John decides to reenlist, but before he does he travels to North Carolina to see Savanna for the first time in a year. They only have 18 hours together and when Savanna discovers John is going to reenlist she feels betrayed and heart-broken. However, they spend a very passionate night together and in the morning she brings him to the airport. Before departing they both deliver their classic line “I’ll see you soon” which is repeated multiple times throughout the movie; because I’ll see you soon is much more romantic then goodbye.

Everything seems fine between John and Savanna; they write to each other how much they miss and long for one another. Then Savanna’s letters begin to come less and less and by the painful looks on Channing Tatum’s face you can tell something bad is going to happen. After two months of not receiving letters from Savanna, John gets a single letter. The letter consists of Savanna telling John how she cannot live her life without him and because of this she needs to move on. She then continues to drive the knife deeper into his heart by telling him she will love him forever but that she is engaged to someone else. My first reaction was to cry, then my second reaction was to strangle Savanna. What a bi*ch right! This poor guy is off in some no-man’s land in the middle of who knows where and she drops this atomic bomb on him. I mean its the twenty first century, there are phones; she didn’t even have the decency to call him! She just leaves him high and dry, with no chance of getting her back, because the kicker is that she’s already engaged. After a painful minute of the director forcing me to stare into Channing Tatum’s watery eyes, he proceeds to dramatically burn every letter Savanna has ever written him .

To top it all off, Channing Tatum gets himself shot twice, spends a few months in a military hospital then decides to reenlist because he has nothing else in his life to live for besides a father with aspergers. After a few years, John ultimately returns home to say his last goodbyes to his father, and to plan his father’s funeral. Just another thing to add to John’s horribly crappy life. When he is home John goes to visit Savanna, only to find out that she married a man who is now dying of lymphoma cancer. Its horrible because you just want to hate Savanna but then the movie forces you to feel bad for her because her husband is dying. John and Savanna find themselves alone, in Savanna’s house ,while she cries to him about how she was trapped while he was gone, and how she never expected it to turn out like this. Boo hoo; Savanna is sad because after 5 years of being apart she finally wants John back. John then takes Savanna in his arms and then you think, here it goes, they’re gonna get back together! Nope, the movie just lets you down again, because absolutely nothing happens between them. As John is leaving Savanna says “ I’ll see you soon” and when John replies, “Goodbye Savanna”, you know it is all over; no more summer love with a girl and a solider, that ship has sailed. The movie ends with John giving an anonymous payment to Savanna’s husband so that he can finish his cancer treatment and so Savanna can live happily ever after; while John walks off into the distance sad, alone and crying.

When the movie ended I had wished that I had never laid eyes on this film. I was so ready for this beautiful love story to play out and instead the movie spends a few minutes highlighting the good stuff, then continues to drag you down throughout the rest of the movie, while you beg for it to put you out of your misery.

Three things I love about the movie The Other Guys

1. The Cast
There is just something about Marky Mark Wahlberg that I adore. I loved him in Invincible, I loved him in The Fighter and I love him here. Perhaps I love him here the best if only because of the one liners he delivers—which I will get to in a later point. I think Marky Mark is someone that many people adore. He is just someone from a humble upbringing that you cannot help but respect. He is wonderful to watch and, after personally seeing him in only serious movies, I appreciated his ability to deliver these lines that could have fallen flat had they been poorly executed. His character is stuck doing paperwork with this bozo of a cop, Will Ferrell’s character, not because he is a bad cop, but because he accidentally shot Derek Jeter during the World Series playoffs. He somehow portrayed this guy as a misunderstood, temper having nice guy who delivers these impeccable lines. He did it. And he did it well.
Will Ferrell is someone who you either love or you hate. I happen to love him so I appreciated his humor as usual in this film. Sometimes I find myself getting tired of his usual loud, screaming, make-lots-of-noise-for-easy-laughs type of humor, however, in this film, I laughed out loud. His character carries around a wooden gun for most of the movie because he lost his carrying privileges after he “office pops”…aka he fires his gun at the ceiling of the office. I first saw this film alone in theaters when my mother and I disagreed on the movie to go see, and we decided to agree to disagree and see two different movies. I was sitting in the theater alone, laughing out loud. And I’m not talking about a little weenie giggle here and there, I was cackling. Embarrassingly loud.
The next one who was rather memorable to me was Michael Keaton. Now this is someone I was not very familiar with prior to this movie but he plays the Captain of the police department Will and Mark work for. His character continuously quotes the old girl group TLC and is oblivious to the fact that he is doing it. Every time he says “don’t go chasing waterfalls” made me laugh. When he went on to say “we don’t want no scrubs” and “creep, creep”, I lost it. He was this very casual character who only comes in every once in a while to drop these lines from old 90’s songs and make his character just about my favorite one in the movie.
2. The One-Liners
This movie has them. They were the best ab workout I’ve had in a while. I think my two favorite parts would have to be when you find out that Will Ferrell’s character was an unintentional pimp in college and the fact that the reason Mark WahlBerg’s character is stuck with Will as a partner is because he shot Derek Jeter in the knee. This movie has such outrageous stories that you just have to let out a laugh. I keel over every time I see it. Between Will Ferrell’s gorgeous wife that Wahlberg can’t seem to believe he is married to and the Captain’s second job at Bed Bath and Beyond, this movie kept me laughing. Throughout all 107 minutes of it.
3. The Mindless Nature of It
This is the type of movie you go to see if you need a distraction from life. As I said, I went to see this movie on a boring weeknight over the summer when my mother and I had work together in the morning and just wanted something to pass the time. We decided to go to the movies but I ended up going to see The Other Guys and she saw some chick flick. I laughed out loud at the ridiculousness of the movie. It wasn’t one of those dumb movies though, that you just cant stand to see, it was actually hilarious. Right from the start you see these two big-shot cops catching criminals and then it zooms to Will and Mark in the background snapping pictures on their digital cameras. They are total opposites in the movie as well as physical opposite in real life and yet they mesh perfectly for cinematic, not to mention comedic, genius.

Three things I love about the movie The Other Guys

1. The Cast
There is just something about Marky Mark Wahlberg that I adore. I loved him in Invincible, I loved him in The Fighter and I love him here. Perhaps I love him here the best if only because of the one liners he delivers—which I will get to in a later point. I think Marky Mark is someone that many people adore. He is just someone from a humble upbringing that you cannot help but respect. He is wonderful to watch and, after personally seeing him in only serious movies, I appreciated his ability to deliver these lines that could have fallen flat had they been poorly executed. His character is stuck doing paperwork with this bozo of a cop, Will Ferrell’s character, not because he is a bad cop, but because he accidentally shot Derek Jeter during the World Series playoffs. He somehow portrayed this guy as a misunderstood, temper having nice guy who delivers these impeccable lines. He did it. And he did it well.
Will Ferrell is someone who you either love or you hate. I happen to love him so I appreciated his humor as usual in this film. Sometimes I find myself getting tired of his usual loud, screaming, make-lots-of-noise-for-easy-laughs type of humor, however, in this film, I laughed out loud. His character carries around a wooden gun for most of the movie because he lost his carrying privileges after he “office pops”…aka he fires his gun at the ceiling of the office. I first saw this film alone in theaters when my mother and I disagreed on the movie to go see, and we decided to agree to disagree and see two different movies. I was sitting in the theater alone, laughing out loud. And I’m not talking about a little weenie giggle here and there, I was cackling. Embarrassingly loud.
The next one who was rather memorable to me was Michael Keaton. Now this is someone I was not very familiar with prior to this movie but he plays the Captain of the police department Will and Mark work for. His character continuously quotes the old girl group TLC and is oblivious to the fact that he is doing it. Every time he says “don’t go chasing waterfalls” made me laugh. When he went on to say “we don’t want no scrubs” and “creep, creep”, I lost it. He was this very casual character who only comes in every once in a while to drop these lines from old 90’s songs and make his character just about my favorite one in the movie.
2. The One-Liners
This movie has them. They were the best ab workout I’ve had in a while. I think my two favorite parts would have to be when you find out that Will Ferrell’s character was an unintentional pimp in college and the fact that the reason Mark WahlBerg’s character is stuck with Will as a partner is because he shot Derek Jeter in the knee. This movie has such outrageous stories that you just have to let out a laugh. I keel over every time I see it. Between Will Ferrell’s gorgeous wife that Wahlberg can’t seem to believe he is married to and the Captain’s second job at Bed Bath and Beyond, this movie kept me laughing. Throughout all 107 minutes of it.
3. The Mindless Nature of It
This is the type of movie you go to see if you need a distraction from life. As I said, I went to see this movie on a boring weeknight over the summer when my mother and I had work together in the morning and just wanted something to pass the time. We decided to go to the movies but I ended up going to see The Other Guys and she saw some chick flick. I laughed out loud at the ridiculousness of the movie. It wasn’t one of those dumb movies though, that you just cant stand to see, it was actually hilarious. Right from the start you see these two big-shot cops catching criminals and then it zooms to Will and Mark in the background snapping pictures on their digital cameras. They are total opposites in the movie as well as physical opposite in real life and yet they mesh perfectly for cinematic, not to mention comedic, genius.

Overview!

After Getting Dumped by his slutty girlfriend Fiona on his graduation day, Scott Thomas takes a trip with his friends to Europe to meet his German pen pal Mieke, which at first he thought was a boy; so when she asked to meet up, he told her in one of the crudest ways possible to leave him alone. It is only when his little brother tells him it’s the hot chick in the picture she sent him that he packs his bags and stops being “Predictable” as we hear throughout the movie.

As they travel through Europe, they experience several mishaps that lead them going from place to place; creating what I think is in the top ten funniest movies I have ever seen.  From the Crazy soccer hooligans, to the nude beach filled with only guys, to the depressing Eastern Europe, the movie is filled with non-stop laughter. Of course they finally find Mieke, and Scotty becomes in love, and everyone lives happily ever after. But even the part when they finally get to where they needed to go, and things become somewhat serious is hilarious (considering 1 minute after Scott meets Meike is a sex scene in a confessional booth in the Vatican!!)

Cast!

The Cast consist of several young actors that are not very well known, and they all play their part amazingly. The casting was great!

Scott Mechlowics- Plays Scott Thomas, The predictable nice guy that decides not to be so predictable and heads to Europe!

Jacob Pitts- Plays Scott’s best friend Cooper, that convinces him to go to Europe. He is the base of most of the comedy. Great Job as a supporting actor.

Michelle Trachtenberg- Plays Scott’s friend Jenny. She is already in Europe with her brother checking out the sites, when they meet up. She plays the girl they consider a guy, until they realize she is hot. Best known actress in the movie.

Travis Wester- Plays Jenny’s Twin Jamie. He is a smart nerdy kid that is obsessed with the historical sites. He creates comedy by people laughing at him.

So many great cameos in this movie: Matt Damon at high school party( Wait…Matt Damon…What the hell..), Scotty’s Dad, Creepy Italian guy on the train, French robot, soccer hooligans, German truck driver, and so many more!

Notable Quotes!

Jenny: Sorry to hear about Fiona. She’s a whore.
Scott: Well, that’s very sweet of you. Thanks.

Cooper: I’m taking a nap. Wake me up when the train gets here.
Jenny: It says here this town has a famous nude beach.
Cooper: Alright, look, we can’t all just lie around all day, we’ve got to get out there and experience the culture first hand!

Cooper: How the hell could this happen? We all go to Amsterdam and *Jamie’s* the one who hooks up? For shame!

Cooper: Check this out! I’m the Pope!
Scott: Cooper, take off the Pope hat!
Cooper: Oh no, it’s okay, I’m Catholic.

Cooper: What the hell is that?
Jamie: It’s a traveler’s money belt. Frommer’s says as long as you have one of these, no-one can rob you of anything.
Scott: Except your dignity.
Jamie: No, you just put that in your… wait, what?

Cooper: Oh, here it is. Bratislava. Hmm. Capital of Slovakia. Oh, here’s a fun fact: You made out with your sister, man!

Miscellaneous!

This Movie was made in 2004, directed by Jeff Schaffer.

It contains so much comedy but I don’t want to give away the plot too much because it is just simply hilarious. Start to finish just an all-around funny movie.

There is a lot of nudity, so don’t watch it with your parent, that’s awkward.

The movie’s soundtrack is very good too, if you are interested in that

kind of thing! (Scotty doesn’t know…)

Scotty Doesnt Know- Lustra

This playful, hilarious movie is guaranteed to result in non-stop laughs throughout the room. The plot is centered around three groomsmen, Phil, Stu, and Allen, who head off to Las Vegas with their best buddy to give him an unforgettable bachelor party. Instead, the morning after none of them can remember anything that happened, including where the groom, Doug, is. They started of the night with a toast to “a night we’ll never forget” and some simple shots. Little did they know, they wouldn’t remember a thing. Waking up the next day, hung-over more than ever before, they had no recollection of where or what they did, or where their best friend was. As the movie proceeds, these three fully-grown men piece together their night one clue at a time. This hilarious comedy brings laughter like no other movie as the men go through a series of obstacles and hardships to find their friend before his wedding the next day.

With absolutely no clue where to begin, Doug missing, a chipped tooth, a stolen cop car and a tiger in the bathroom, the three men set off on a wild adventure to find him.  Not only is the idea of the movie a great one, the dialogue will have you laughing every couple of minutes.  Along with that, the music is just as good. The best part of this movie is not only the laughter it brings, but its mysterious side that always keeps the audience guessing what will happen next. The director did a great job by slowly revealing and unfolding each part of the movie one obstacle by another. I really enjoyed myself as I watched the three backtrack their steps in Vegas. From the hospital, leading to an alter and encountering a mobster, it is revealed that their friend may be held hostage by a comic Chinese man. In order to get him back, the Chinese man demands the money he won and they apparently stole the night before. Allen is forced to step up and use his unexpected but impressive gambling skills in an effort to win back some of the money. Hey, after all that’s what Las Vegas is known for isn’t it? No one, that I know at least, can resist this wild comedy.

Many famous quotes are from this movie such as Allen’s well-known wolf pack speech, Mike Tyson’s scene, or Stu’s piano song; “What do tigers dream of when they take their little tiger snooze? Do they dream of mauling zebras, or Halle Berry in her Catwoman suit? Don’t you worry your pretty striped head, we’re gonna get you back to Tyson and your cozy tiger bed. And then we’re gonna find our best friend Doug, and then we’re gonna give him a best friend hug. Doug, Doug, oh, Doug, Dougie, Dougie, Doug, Doug! But if he’s been murdered by crystal meth tweakers, well then we’re shit out of luck.”

The reason this movie is so great and epic is because so many people can relate. A ton of people can relate to drinking too much, blacking out and not remembering anything that happened. All the fun is in piecing your night back together, the only difference in this movie is that someone’s life is at stake. Will they find their friend Dough and make it back home in time for the wedding? Or will one night in Vegas ruin what would’ve been the happiest day of Doug’s life? You’ll find out as you watch what has said to be “Comedy of the year”.

Before watching Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind for this class, I had already seen it once. I pretty much remembered what happened but forgot some of the small details. The first time I watched this film it made me cry. I think because I put myself in Joel and Clementine’s shoes and imagined what it would be like for that to happen to somebody that I loved and myself. In the film, Joel (Jim Carrey) and Clementine (Kate Winslet) fall in love but then, when their relationship starts to go bad, undergo a procedure to erase each other from the other’s memory.

Most of the movie consists of Joel’s memories with Clementine as they are being erased by the doctor’s assistants. I found watching this happen to be quite upsetting. The movie shows each of Joel’s strongest memories of Clementine and him being slowly erased; the walls of the house that they are in will slowly collapse or the ocean around them will suddenly disappear. After a couple memories are erased, Joel’s brain realized what was happening, even though he was asleep. In his memories he kept begging to have the procedure stopped and once he even opened his eyes while tears fell out of the corners of his eyes. He kept trying to hide Clementine so that the people who were taking his memories away could not find her. Although this procedure is not possible in real life, it was still really depressing to watch it happen to others. I cannot imagine what it would feel like to consciously know that the person you love is being erased entirely from your memory. It makes me feel angry and upset that anybody would actually wish to do so.

The only part of the movie that I didn’t think was necessary was the very first scene. That exact same scene was played again later when Joel and Clementine meet again after their memories of each other are erased. There was no point in having it be the first scene; it only made me confused. The director may have done that to allow the viewer to develop two different opinions of the same exact scene. Meaning that when the viewer sees the scene for the first time, they make think nothing of it and just see two individuals meeting on a train. But then when they see the scene as the last one of the movie, they will have an entirely different perspective on it. Also, the actor that portrayed Joel, Jim Carrey, has been in various other comedic movies that I have seen, which caused me to have difficulty imaging him in such a serious role. But other than those two minor issues, if the viewer really pays attention, he or she will know what is happening and will most likely be constantly engaged in what is going on. I tend to get bored during movies easily and when I first watched it, I found that I was always engaged and wondering what was going to happen next. Movies that evoke emotion or expressive actions such as laughter, anger, sadness, or fear usually are the ones that end up being my favorites.

I felt that this movie conveyed the messages that love can overcome any obstacles. If two people are meant to be together, then in the end they will end up together. This particular idea has relevance to my life right now, so I found it comforting and thought-provoking to see it explored in a movie that I watched. The plot of this movie was complicated yet well thought out. It was nice to watch because it was a creative idea that has not yet been used in another movie.

Three introductory statements on Atonement.

1.Atonement is based off of a novel written by Ian McEwan about a wealthy family and a poor boy who falls in love with one of the daughter’s while a white lie and a big mistake threaten to separate the two lovers for eternity.
2.The movie is surprisingly just as exciting and well done as the novel itself was and still just as powerful.
3.Keira Knightley and James McAvoy are incredible together and create a realistic love that any person who sees this film can enjoy for a long time. The love they create is simple and yet very powerful.

Three statements about the artistic integrity of the film.

1.The cinematography is beautiful, the small details and sudden camera shifts are well done. Certain scenes like the wartime shots are simply unbelievable and very very powerful. Every shot helps enhance the love story that is central to the plot. The way the director sets up the flashbacks scenes so that they hit you suddenly with the actual gravity of what is happening before you is something not to be missed.
2.The period era clothing and scenery is well placed and recreated to give a sense of accuracy and time to the film. The clothing and backgrounds make the cinematography all the more special and poignant.

3.Finally the script is incredibly well written, simple and yet very strong. The script carries the viewer all the way through the film showing the love and power of the people involved in this harrowing story of lies and love and the cruelty of fate.

Three surprises about Atonement that you will be happy to know.

1.The ending contains a plot twist that will send you to tears and leave you reeling with emotion. The power behind such a sad and simple ending will hit you harder than a freight train at full speed.
2.The younger members of the cast hold their own. Keira Knightley’s sister in the film and their young cousins do a wonderful job of filling out the plot as well as setting in motion the disastrous lie that causes the devastating separation of our lover’s. They are simple and small in their roles except for the younger sister but they all play a crucial role in the series of events that take place. Without such small roles the plot would never come to fruition the way that is should.

3.While the movie is very sad in nature you won’t leave feeling completely disheartened you leave with some sense of accomplishment for the characters and a somber happiness despite quite a few horrific moments and sad times in the movie. Personally I don’t think any sort of happy ending would have worked in this particular movie. The director Joe Wright does a wonderful job of making all the important pieces fit together so that even the saddest of scenes gives something back to the viewer.

Three people you should watch this movie with.

1.Your mother, if you at all get along with her and can stand her potentially tearing up at several points, also if she has read the book which mine did and absolutely loved the movie.
2.If you are a girl, all of your girlfriends, even they aren’t the sappy romance type this movie has a little bit for everyone and is in no way a dull predictable romance. Emphasis on the unpredictable.
3.Your significant other, boy or girl they will enjoy this movie. Boys will like the wartime scenes and the sexual tension in several scenes as well as even some of the love scenes as they are not overly feminine they are realistic. If your partner is a girl they will enjoy the clothing and beautiful scenery, the underlying love story and the painful beauty that follows the movie throughout as well as many of the scenes the men would enjoy, this film is very easily watched by either gender (my brother even enjoyed it).

This story is told by a group of young boys with an infatuation with the girls next door, it all started with the death of the youngest sister Cilia. The movie is directed by first time moviemaker Sophia Coppola and based off the book written by Jeffrey Eugenides. Making this movie was a bold move for Sophia because it is a very depressing story to portray into a movie. As well as addressing the issue of teen suicide and many different issues of teenagers that range from boys to parents. After reading the book I had assumed I would be walking out of the theater feeling down and depressed, however the movie had a good balance of sadness and story. Although nothing about this movie is happy I found myself wrapped up in the girls and the boys who were telling their story. While the girls seem to separate themselves from all of the people surrounding them, with the exception of Lux, the always seem to be happy around each other. Kirsten Dunst who plays Lux is the exception to all of the girls because while she is just as tuned out to the world as the rest of the girls, when it comes to guys Lux is extremely friendly. The story of Lux and Trip adds further heartbreak to this film, you feel for Lux and it makes her seem more human. The girls mother has everything to do with the way the girls are, keeping them locked up in the house under strict Catholic morals. The tight upbringing is what seems to drive Lux into her wild ways.
This story is seemingly all about the Lisbon sisters but also about the boys who live next door. The boys desperately try to understand the girls, watching them from a distance and doing the same things they did. They ordered the same travel magazines as the girls and read them while imagining being in all of the amazing places with the sisters. This movie is a great way to portray how young boys were reaching out desperately trying to understand why the girls were the way they were. By the end of the movie the boys believe they have gotten through to the girls as they are invited over to hang out with the girls and when they arrive they do not get anything close to what they expected. The girls are looked at as the object of their affection, all of them dying to get a date with any of them but never having the courage to ask. The great thing about the sisters in this movie is that from start to finish they are together and happy to be together, they never once fight or bicker like normal sisters do, they don’t care who talks to them or who stares at them.

My mom has always recommended some of the best movies I have ever seen.  The kinds of movies that make me realize the crap I usually watch is just that, crap.  One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest is one of those movies that you think about for days after watching it.  As one of Jack Nicholson’s first films, we see why his acting career has been such a success.  For the first time in 41 years, Milos Forman’s 1975 movie took all five major Oscar awards (actor, actress, screen-play, director and picture)! 

            Jack Nicholson plays Randle McMurphy, who doesn’t really take anything too seriously and has been charged with sagitory rape and nine assaults.  To avoid incarceration, McMurphy pleads insanity.  “I fight and fuck too much” was his self-dianoses.  Louise Fletcher is cast as the controlling nurse, Mildred Ratchet.  Through this character, we see how those in power can corrupt and dictate systems that cannot afford this sort of abuse. 

            Within the first half hour of the movie, McMurphy sees how Ratchet controls the patients and manipulates them to keep everything and everyone in their place.  It becomes his goal to piss her off, “Wanna bet?…One week. I bet in one week, I can put a bug so far up her ass she don’t know whether to shit or wine…One week that’s all I need.”  He encourages the other patients to push against Ratchet as well.  When this begins to play out, and patients that once abided without question begin to challenge some of the rules, things start to get interesting. 

            One of my favorite parts begins in one of the typical group therapy meetings.  At this point in the movie, we have seen Ratchet pry and pose difficult questions to her patients.  She begins doing this to a young patient, Billy.  Asking questions regarding the reasons behind his suicide attempts and why he doesn’t share certain parts of his life with his mother.  Billy has a difficult time speaking to begin with, and these questions really put him on the spot.  Another patient, Mr. Cheswick asks if he may ask a question,

“Kay, uh, you know if, uh, Billy doesn’t feel like, uh, talking. I mean, uh, why are you pressing him? Why – Why can’t we go on to some new business? Huh?” 

Ratchet:  “The business of this meeting, Mr. Cheswick, is therapy.”

Mr Cheswick: “Oh. Well you know I – I don’t understand this Miss Ratchet because, uh, I know, uh, Mr. McMurphy – he said something about a World Series… baseball game? You know, and I have never been to a baseball game and well I think I would like to see one. And that’d be good therapy too, wouldn’t it Miss Ratchet?”

With the extreme innocence of a mentally ill patient, Mr. Cheswick certainly allowed the group to see that something was not right in the way she was running things. 

Unfortunately, McMurphy’s distressing (to Miss Ratchet) actions come back to bite him in the ass because he didn’t realize he was going to be in that hospital until they released him.  Because Ratchet grew to dislike him so strongly, she vouched for him to stay even though she knew he was sane enough to be released.  This gave her power over his life. 

            He befriends an Indian man he calls Chief.  For reasons of his own, Chief pretends to be “deaf and dumb” and remains in the mental hospital.  When McMurphy realizes that he isn’t going to get out of there, he and Chief create a plan to escape.  Chief is worried, his father was a “big man” like McMurphy.  In attempt to explain his nerves he says, “my papa was really big, he did like he pleased. That’s why they worked on him…I’m not saying they killed him, they just worked on him the way they are working on you.”  This quote says so much, and really digs into the theme of the film.  Those in power will not tolerate people who question or think differently.  The message of the film struck a nerve with me, and I think that is why this film has made such a lasting impact on my thoughts.

Hi all, I was thinking of your movie reviews, and sites I knew of that might be helpful to you.  Of course, there are the movie reviews found in mainstream media, such as those found in the arts pages of the New York Times.  There are also the movie reviews on online sites such as Salon Magazine (here’s their movie page).

But some of my friends have their own movie review blogs, and here you’ll often find the style to be even more casual/quirky, and that it shows a lot of the personality of the reviewer.  One is the White Tank Top, written by my friend Kirk, who also reviews movies for the Seattle City Arts Blog.  Another is Poets on Film, done by two poets here at Umass.

For your assignment, compare different Jane Eyre movie reviews.  Look at how the New York Times review is different from the reviews found on the personal blogs.  Do a one-page write up (to hand in) discussing the writing style found in each one (how is the style different from source to source? etc), making sure to quote the different reviews.  Here is the Jane Eyre NYT review, the Jane Eyre White Tank Top review, and the Jane Eyre Poets on Film review (review one and review two).

The above image is from “Pale in Comparison,” a Umass art exhibit by Ryan MacDonald.  You can find his arts blog here.  Also, I added a new banner image–we can discuss if you don’t like it.