Pleasantville (1998)

The 1998 movie Pleasantville is a two hour long film written and directed by Gary Ross that tells the story of a sister and a brother from the 1990s that become characters of a 1950s TV show called Pleasantville. When the values of the 90s collide with the idealized values of the 50s, the results are tumultuous. The two teenagers unknowingly turn the perfect world of 1950s Pleasantville on its head while the townspeople learn about themselves and grow to accept social change.

The main character of Pleasantville is David, a socially awkward teenage boy who finds comfort in the perfection of the characters in Pleasantville, a popular TV show set in the 50s. His sister Jennifer however, is vain and promiscuous. When the remote control breaks one evening before a marathon of Pleasantville, an old man in a van happens to stop by offering to replace it. Upon realizing that David is an avid Pleasantville fan and can answer any trivia question about the show, he decides to give the siblings a special remote. When David uses the remote the turn on the TV, he and his sister get sucked into the world of Pleasantville as the main characters of the show, Bud and Mary Sue. Mrs. Betty Parker and Mr. George Parker are Bud and Mary Sue's parents. Bill Johnson is a cook at the restaurant where Bud works. He later falls in love with Mrs. Parker. Big Bob is the mayor of Pleasantville and represents order and tradition within the town.

The citizens of the 1950s utopia Pleasantville follow very particular social guidelines that the teenagers David and Jennifer find difficult to meet. For instance, Jennifer brought her values of being sexually active to a town where sex is hardly even understood let alone practiced. When the teenagers of Pleasantville began experimenting with sex, they took a big step away from the traditional values of their society. A similar transformation happened to Mrs. Parker, who began to realize her needs and desires outside of her marriage.

Another example of social change that the teenagers brought to Pleasantville is art. Bill loved to paint, but was never able to because art was not something that the people of Pleasantville did or understood. When David brought him a book of paintings from his own world, Bill was so inspired that he began to paint expressive pieces in color. This of course, was considered highly inappropriate to the people of Pleasantville and it caused a riot in the town.

The books of the Pleasantville library had covers but were empty inside. When Jennifer explained the plot of the story The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn to the teenagers of Pleasantville, the words began to fill in the pages The teenagers were fascinated by these new stories and began reading. Likewise, Jennifer learned to broaden her mind in ways she hadn't before by reading books.

A final social change occurred when David was speaking to Mr. Parker in front of the town. David was able to bring out the humanity in his father when he asked him to look at his wife for who she really was. Rather than viewing his wife as a robot that was there to fulfill his needs and routines, he realized that he really loved her. At that moment, most of the town had come to terms with the social changes with which they were initially so uncomfortable.

While most of this social change was greeted with suspicion and resistance at first, little by little, the town was “converted” to this new way of living that the two teenagers sparked. At the same time that Pleasantville changed, David and Jennifer also underwent changes of their own. For example, they began to appreciate the little things in their lives back at home like a rainstorm. David became more sympathetic and more open to thought and change, while Jennifer moved beyond her obsession with appearance and boys and started expanding her mind with books. Even though the social change that Pleasantville experienced was rocky, the people were happier to see their town blossom into color.

Pleasantville is a movie exploring the circumstances surrounding social change in a society. For Pleasantville, the change that occurred was an opening up of the society. Before David and Jennifer came to town, all of the means by which members of a society could be able to reach beyond their society and think bigger were missing in Pleasantville. But the teenagers arrived, they were able to fill in these gaps with their own values and knowledge of a freer society and thereby bring about social change. I loved this film. Not only was it funny and entertaining, but it also explored the issue of social change in a very accurate and sophisticated way.

The Trap: What Happened to Our Dream of Freedom (2007)

The Trap is a three segment BBC documentary by Adam Curtis exploring post-Cold War ideals of democracy, the role of government and the economy, and freedom.

The Trap consists of the three one hour-long episodes: F**k You Buddy, The Lonely Robot, and We Will Force You To Be Free. The documentary begins by introducing a perspective on humanity and society that was developed during the Cold War. Nuclear threats between the United States and the Soviet Union led to the creation of game theory, a mathematical theory involving making the best choices based upon the possible decisions of another. In the case of the Cold War, theorists decided that it would not be possible for each side to agree to eliminate nuclear weapons because there was no guarantee that the other would not break the promise. Thus, nuclear arms buildup based upon distrust and self interest was the strategy of the Cold War. This same idea of success by betrayal and suspicion was then carried over as a theory of human interaction by famous mathematician John Nash. A new idea of humanity based upon calculations of the Cold War resulted in a change in the meaning of freedom.

In this new idea of freedom, people are viewed as individual computing machines driven solely by self interest. The implications of this theory are enormous. If true, it is believed that the idea of a “greater good” is a myth and so politicians will only ever act in their own self interest. To keep people motivated in the workplace, “targets,” or workplace goals, are assigned to give the illusion of personal independence and freedom from enslavement of the ruling class. Unfortunately, it is shown that these targets often compel people to act in irrational ways just to meet them. Finally, a prevalent theory took hold that the marketplace is the arena for democracy where people voice their opinions by choosing what they want. However, little governmental regulation puts power in the hands of corporations, which in turn, can manipulate the bureaucracy. The Trap thoroughly explained each of these consequences of a new view of freedom.

The film continues by explaining that it is this kind of narrow freedom in which we live that is what democratic nations try to instil in unstable, revolutionary, and authoritarian nations. The problem with trying to spread this type of freedom is that it conflicts with older ideas of freedom as seen by violent revolutionaries. That is, the sense of freedom brought on by terrorism, and active revolutions - freedom inspired by the beliefs of philosophers like Frantz Fanon and Jean-Paul Sartre, who advocate violent rebellion. Because of the contrast in different ideas of freedom, such intervention by democratic nations often create economic and political turmoil to the point where many citizens would prefer order over freedom.

Because of the complexity and sheer quantity of ideas, people, and events explored in this documentary, I will personally discuss only one aspect of the film that I found to be particularly interesting.

In the course of understanding and experimenting with the theory of people as calculating machines run by self interest, R. D. Laing, a Scottish psychiatrist visited a mental institute. While observing how schizophrenic patients were treated in the hospital, he noticed that the nurses handling the patients rarely ever spoke with them. To experiment, Laing spent time with these patients and talked to them about themselves and their lives. Eventually, the patients were well enough to return home. However, after spending time at home, every single patient was readmitted to the hospital just as before. Predicting that there must be something going on within the households, he conducted another experiment.

Members of families in Britain were given complex surveys designed to gather data on how and why each family member treated and felt about the others at given times throughout the day. The startling results revealed that the actions of the family members seemed to be driven by hidden, self interested motivations relating to the actions of the other family members. While the movie was not explicit, it certainly seemed that the mental illness of these schizophrenic patients may have had some link to the stress and distrustful nature of human beings as magnified by the intimacy of family dynamics.

Another experiment during this time tested the credibility of psychiatry in America. David Rosenhan, an American psychiatrist, directed a group of volunteers to visit various mental institutes with the false claim that they heard voices. Other than that, they were instructed to act normally. All were admitted to the hospital. The “patients” were given powerful drugs and were not allowed to leave. They found that the only way to be permitted to leave was to admit that they were actually insane and then pretend to be getting better. When the results of the experiments were published, psychiatrists were defiant. One doctor at a mental hospital challenged Rosenhan to send any number of fake patients to the hospital and swore he would be able to tell the truly ill patients from the pretenders. Later, he claimed to have found  a significant number of fakers. In actuality, Rosenhan had not sent any.

The movie went on further to describe a shift within psychiatry from diagnosis based on personal judgments by doctors to a checklist method of symptoms. There was no attempt to look into the root or cause of the problem. At this point, one cannot help but feel that there is a problem when a computer can match up symptoms with a checklist to make a broad statement about what a human being is experiencing.

What stuck out to me in this part of the movie was both the frequency of prescription drug use paired with the desire to live a so-called normal existence. Everyone at some point, when faced with a physical or psychological change, has probably visited a doctor because they fear that their experience is not normal. But what is it that we consider to be normal? Where did this personal idea of a normal body come from? Who's to say whether a feeling is normal or abnormal? Doctors have just as good a guess as any, and unfortunately, humanity's unreasonable desire to fit the illusion that they have in their minds of “normal” often leads to overdiagnosis by doctors and a lack of personal insight by patients. For instance, a person going through a natural period of depression after the death of a loved one might very well be prescribed pills to regulate their mood. Instead of thinking about and working through the deeper feelings that are causing the grief, they instead numb their minds while pushing the problems down further. That is not solving the problem nor is it creating a free society of healthy individuals.

All of these issues play into the creation of new kind of freedom in which people are viewed as emotionless machines. Such a freedom dramatically narrows the scope of life's experiences and can create a feeling of hopelessness for people in both stable and unstable countries. The Trap ended with a surprisingly brief blurb on how the era of viewing humanity as emotionless, target-fulfilling,  calculating machines may possibly come to an end. It is my opinion that in order for such a thing to happen, people need to take initiative of their very own to create something greater than themselves. The passion of the old kind of freedom needs to take hold without the violence accompanied by such liberty. Once people are able to break free from the beliefs of the system in which they experience narrow freedom, they can begin to have real freedom.

As a film, The Trap was extremely well done. My only criticism would be that is was difficult to uncover the main idea behind the film, as it often seemed to jump around from topic to topic with little or no transitions. I found myself needing to take notes on all of the different topics to be able to piece together a main idea at the end. This may partially be due to the length of the episodes and the amount of material the filmmakers chose to include in the movie. However, the content of the documentary was superb. I do believe that the main idea of the film involved some opinion, but it was certainly an interesting and well developed perspective. As an American, it was also very interesting to note some of the cultural differences demonstrated by the film. For example, I was a bit surprised by how blunt the movie was about corrupt government relations and human psychology. I would guess that if a similar documentary was made in the United States, it would probably be less direct and more sensitive. I would highly recommend this program to anyone interested in politics, economics, and sociology.

Landmarks of Western Art: Romanticism (1999)

Romanticism is a documentary segment in the series Landmarks of Western Art. The short film described the period of Romanticism and introduced some important artists from the Romantic period, including Jacques-Louis David, Theodore Gericault, Sir Edmund Burke, Eugene Delacroix, Francisco de Goya, John Constable, J.M.W. Turner, and Caspar David Friedrich.

Romanticism was a cultural movement during the later half of the eighteenth century. Heavily influenced by the French Revolution and the philosophy of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Romanticism marked a shift from adhering to the constraints of a conventional neoclassical period to focus on the individual. Sometimes featuring frightening, disturbing, and stormy images, Romantic artists strove to represent personal emotion on canvas.

The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters etching by de Goya

Because Romanticism emphasizes the individual and his emotions, it follows that a common motif within Romanticism is that of the lonely hero and his experiences with society, emotion, and identity. The isolation of the individual is often emphasized by the prominence of nature as another essential theme within the Romantic Movement. Nature is often depicted as overpowering the individual, and contrast between society and nature is a topic within many Romantic paintings.

Wanderer above the Sea of Fog oil painting by Friedrich

I was particularly inspired by the work of J.M.W. Turner, an English painter. His use of contrasting warm and cool colors and his conveyance of motion using unfocused images within his paintings create very interesting pieces. Somewhat abstracted, his paintings are vivid and passionate.

Rain, Steam, and Speed – The Great Western Railway oil painting by Turner

Romanticism is a fascinating period in art history. Modern, passionate, and quietly heroic, Romantic art is a tribute to the newfound liberty of the people of its time.

Nova: Einstein's Big Idea (2005)

E=mc² is an equation that most people know and can associate with Albert Einstein. Many, however, don't understand its meaning or significance. E=mc² is an equation built upon the genius and lifetime dedication of scientists around the world in the past centuries. It is a synthesis of the studies of chemistry and physics, and it is the means by which Einstein was able to bridge the gap between matter, energy, and light. The NOVA documentary Einstein's Big Idea explores the scientific discoveries that led to and created Einstein's breakthrough equation.

In France during the later half of the 1700's, chemists Monsieur Antoine Lavoisier and his wife Madame Lavoisier made great contributions to the study of matter. Most importantly, they demonstrated that in any transformation, no amount of matter is ever lost and no amount of matter is ever gained. While this law of the conservation of mass did not have the same meaning at the time of its discovery that it did after the discovery of the relationship between matter and energy, it is an essential principle of matter that is used to this day by modern chemists and physicists.

Emilie du Chatelet was an aristocratic French scientist who lived during the first half of the 18th century. She pursued her interests in science and math, and followed the latest developments in physics. One particularly interesting development of her time was the dangerous belief that Newton had a flaw in his studies. By conducting a simple experiment, a Dutch scientist had determined that an increase in the speed of an object would not create an equal increase in the amount of distance it took that object to stop. Rather, an increase in the speed of an object would require a stopping distance equal to the square of that increase. For instance, a car traveling at 20 miles per hour will have a particular stopping distance, x. A car traveling at three times that speed, or 60 miles per hour will have a stopping distance nine times as long, or 9x. This use of squaring to describe the relationship between and object's mass and its velocity was an extremely important development in physics. It became a useful way for scientists to understand the energy of an object and it provided some founding for the squaring in Einstein's equation E=mc².

Michael Faraday was a British scientist who practiced during the 19th century. His contribution to E=mc² is one of the most important because he discovered the connection between electricity and magnetism. Faraday believed that electricity did not simply flow through a wire as was thought at the time. Instead, he proposed that a current of electricity created magnetic forces around a wire. Likewise, when forces of magnetism were moved, they created a flow of electricity. Faraday also theorized that light consisted of this flow of electricity and magnetism. The connection that Faraday found between electricity and magnetism was remarkable. First, it could be used to create kinetic motion, which led to the idea of the motor. Even more remarkably, James Clerk Maxwell, a 19th century British mathematician, performed calculations on electromagnetism that proved that Faraday's suspicions about light were correct. He found mathematically that electromagnetic radiation traveled precisely at the speed of light. This was an incredible discovery because it created a model of electromagnetic radiation.

Einstein took all of the knowledge that scientists before him had gained about matter, energy, and light, and synthesized them into one small formula with huge implications. He made the assumption that no object can travel faster than 670 million miles per hour, or the speed of light. He then theorized that any more energy fueled into an object traveling at the speed of light would not make it go faster, but make up its mass. This means that matter (an atom, for instance) is a dense packet of a tremendous amount of energy. The amount of energy it contains can be calculated by multiplying its mass by the square of the speed of light. In other words, mass can be converted into energy, and energy can be converted into mass. To modern physicists, matter and energy are one and the same.

With Einstein's big idea published, it was ready to be put to use. Lisa Meitner, a Jewish woman living in Germany under the Nazi regime, would do just that. While she faced many hardships and had to leave her university position in Germany to escape the Nazis, her contribution to modern science is significant. She and her colleagues in Germany knew that an atom of uranium had the biggest nucleus yet known. Attempting to make an even bigger nucleus by bombarding a uranium atom with neutrons, their discoveries yielded a strange fact. Barium seemed to be contaminating the sample, yet barium had an even smaller nucleus than uranium. It was Meitner who realized that in fact, the large and unstable uranium nucleus was splitting, and as a result energy was being released that could be predicted with Einstein's equation E=mc². Immediately, and in time for WWII, scientists around the world dedicated themselves to the creation of the atomic bomb.

Einstein's Big Idea was an excellent film. One particularly good quality of the documentary was that it provided a great deal of information in a clear and understandable way. The use of visuals and interviews with scientists and physicists were very informative and helped the viewer understand the ideas in the movie. The film was fairly well organized. While it did jump around a bit chronologically, it provided a thorough break-down of the equation E=mc². The acting was beautifully done. The actors did a great job of giving life to the scientists and their discoveries without overwhelming the documentary's factual message.

The equation E=mc² is a remarkable step in our understanding of the natural world. Its implications are so incredible that even Einstein wasn't sure if it could be true. Yet we have been able to use the energy of matter for better and for worse. Einstein's genius in relating matter, energy, and light certainly earns him the title of the Father of Modern Physics. Einstein's Big Idea is a film that I would recommend to anyone interested in understanding the meaning of the world's most famous equation.

Nova: Hunting the Hidden Dimension (2008)

What do broccoli, coastlines, heartbeats, and trees all have in common? They are all fractals. Fractals are shapes whose smaller parts are replicas of the larger figure, layered ad infinitum. Upon “zooming in” on the fractal, the image appears to be the same over and over again. Mathematically, fractals are the product of endless iteration, or repeating calculations. Benoît Mandelbrot, a Franco-American mathematician, was the first person to describe fractals by fractal geometry and realize their remarkable potential. This fantastic potential was revealed in the hour long Nova documentary Hunting the Hidden Dimension.

Fractals can be better understood by the well-known paradox about the length of Britain’s coastline. Basically, this paradox lies in the fact that the length of the British coastline is determined by the units and specificity in measuring it. For instance, measuring in mile-lengths excludes the curvatures in the landscape that are, say, yards long and thus will result in a smaller value than if these curvatures are included. Measuring in yard-lengths ignores smaller variations along the edges of the shore, and will result in a smaller value than a measurement that includes them, and so on. The smaller the unit of measure, the closer the fit to the coastline and the more accurate the measurement. But at what point does this conundrum of measurement end? At what point does a unit yield a completely accurate measurement? Theoretically, never, and that is why Mandelbrot considered coastlines to be fractal.

The applications of fractals in technology are surprising, varied, and powerful.

In 1978, Loren Carpenter was working with experimental aircraft engineers to simulate a flying airplane. He wished to put mountains behind the airplane to make the animation more realistic, but mountains involved thousands of hand-drawn frames. Inspired by Mandelbrot’s book Fractals: Form, Chance and Dimension, Carpenter was the first to use fractal geometry in animation. He simply began with jagged triangles, and then divided them multiple times into smaller and smaller parts, thus creating fractals. The result was amazingly realistic digital imagery of a quality that had never been seen before: a breakthrough in computer animation.

In the 1990’s, Nathan Cohen, a radio astronomer, discovered that fractal shapes make very effective antennas. After attending a conference where Mandelbrot was a speaker, Cohen had the idea to shape antennae like fractals. What he discovered was that fractal-shaped antennas were both smaller in size and picked up more frequencies than a regular antenna. He attributed this to the self-similarity of fractals, and mathematically proved that fractals are the only shapes that pick up greater frequency ranges. Virtually every cell phone in use today has fractal antennas to detect different signals like Bluetooth and Wi-Fi. This was a major advancement in communications.

There is another essential aspect to fractal science. Fractals had been recognized in nature by scientists for years, however they were regarded as non-mathematical until fractal geometry allowed scientists and mathematicians to understand and perform calculations on “rough edges” in addition to smooth curves. This was an extraordinary development. Finally natural structures and systems could be understood through the eyes of math and science.

The medical industry has benefited greatly by applying fractal math. For instance, cardiologist Ary Goldberger discovered that variations in heartbeat intervals, when plotted, formed a particular, repeating fractal edge. With this knowledge, doctors may be able to detect unhealthy hearts before serious problem arise. Biophysicist Peter Burns discovered that the overall movement of blood conforms to a fractal pattern of tiny blood vessels, and irregularities in the pattern can signify small tumors. Like the heartbeat, this could allow doctors to identify tumors very early in their growth.

Fractals provide a multi-dimensional key to the natural world; they can be applied on many different levels. Brian Enquist traveled to Costa Rica to conduct a remarkable forest experiment. How can we know how much carbon dioxide a particular area of forest can absorb? Enquist hypothesized that that one tree in a forest could reflect the structure of the whole forest. In other words, the forest system and the structure of each tree are the same fractal pattern. Enquist selected one tree in the forest and measured its branches. Then, his team measured the diameters of the trees and found that the distribution of branch sizes on one tree was comparable to the tree trunks in the forest. This means that the amount of carbon dioxide absorbed by one tree can indeed be used to estimate the capacity of the forest.

Unlocking this incredible fractal relationship between the part and the whole leads to so many exciting implications for science, technology, mathematics because the fractal is essentially a natural pattern with real-world application.

I loved Hunting the Hidden Dimension. It contained all of the mathematics that I had hoped Between the Folds would include. I also found that it was much more informative than Between the Folds. Where Between the Folds piqued my interest in the possibilities of the math and techniques therein, Hunting the Hidden Dimension provided enough substance to be genuinely exciting!

I was truly captivated by fractals and their amazing potential, particularly in technology. If fractals can be used to make computer and communication technology more compact while allowing us to further our understanding of nature, they may play a major role in the pursuit of clean and efficient energy systems. With environmental crisis at hand, easy, simple, and sensitive solutions are being demanded. Perhaps fractals can help us find these solutions to some of the biggest global issues of the day. This is definitely a topic that I would look into further!

Between the Folds (2008)

Paper is an everyday object that most people don't think twice about. Whether is it is used for communication or a craft, it is a boring fact of life for most. Origami, or paper folding, is generally thought to be fun craft for kids, but what the PBS documentary Between the Folds by Vanessa Gould shows is that origami is the crossroad between the mundane, mathematics, and art.

Origami as an art is quite varied. Paper folding can be done with the intention of imitating particular animals, people, or objects. It can be a study of simple form and curves, like the one-fold origami discussed in the film. Or, paper can be used to explore movement, such as the spring-like action of folded paper.

Art requires ability and practice. It usually takes years of discipline to develop the skills to excel at an art form. This is just the case with origami. Creating something like this scaly dragon out of paper required time, patience, practice, and skill. Origami is a creative process in which an artist translates his or her ideas into the physical. Paper, like clay or painting, is versatile, moldable, and detailed. An artist uses their hands to tweak, mold, and perfect the paper into a figure with emotion, meaning, and interest. Origami is as much a result as it is a process. In this respect, any material is art once it is intentionally changed in the hands of the artist.

The mathematics of origami is intricate and very complex. The remarkable thing about it it that it encompasses all types of mathematics. Origami can be used to teach geometry and trigonometry for the obvious reason that it involves shapes, angles, and their properties. Paper folding even draws parallels to calculus, which is what makes it such a powerful tool. It is essentially a problem solving puzzle. How can you transform 2D paper into a specific 3D form? And what will that 3D form look like in 2D? Like art, the mathematics of origami requires abstract, multidimensional thinking.

I would have liked for the documentary to address more mathematics and science than it did. It would have been very interesting to know specifically how origami relates to calculus and engineering, and what principles of paper folding mathematicians and engineers might use in their work. Between the Folds also hinted that mathematics of origami may have the potential to explain the universe. To make such a grand statement as that, more explanation was needed.

The film still leaves the audience with some excitement about the potential of paper. If paper folding is such a powerful thing, what can we learn about the world around us from between the folds?

The Last of the Mohicans (1920)

The Last of the Mohicans is a 1920 silent film directed by Clarence Brown and Maurice Tourneu. The villainous Magua is played by Wallace Beery and Cora Munro is played by Barbara Bedford.

The setting of the story is colonial New York during the Seven Years War, and it focuses on the conflicts among the French, English, and Indian tribes. Uncas, the last Mohican, arrives at Fort Edward to warn the English of the French-Huron alliance. Cora Munro falls in love with Uncas, but English Captain Randolph is jealous of her attention to Uncas.

Colonel Munro, Cora and Alice Munro's father, sends Magua to Fort Edward to ask for troops to defend Fort William Henry. Cora and Alice travel with the reinforcements and Magua takes them on a shortcut. He ditches them, and the sisters meet Uncas, his father Chief Great Serpent, and Hawkeye. The next day, treacherous Magua and the Hurons kidnap the sisters. They are freed by Uncas and Hawkeye, and brought to safety at Fort William Henry.

Jealous Captain Randolph meets with the French and secretly tells them how they can take the fort. Magua encourages complete disorder, and in the confusion, captures Cora and Alice. The Delaware Indians grant Cora to Magua and Alice to Uncas and Hawkeye.

Cora runs to the top of a cliff and threatens to commit suicide, while Magua waits for her to fall asleep. Once she does, Magua grabs her wrists and Cora hangs off the cliff. Just then, Uncas arrives and Magua forces her off the cliff to her death. Magua and Uncas fight, and finally, Magua kills Uncas. Just then, Hawkeye finds Cora and Uncas' bodies and he shoots Magua.

There are tearful funerals for Cora and Uncas. Chief Great Serpent's laments, "Woe for the race of red men! In the morning of life I saw the sons of my forefathers, happy and strong - and before nightfall I have seen the passing of the last of the Mohicans!" 

The 1920 version of The Last of the Mohicans is a bit difficult to follow, but that's probably because the film is old and it relies on black and white visuals and written dialogue. The plot, once understood however, is very engaging and memorable. The imagery and music were beautiful and added greatly to emotional aspect of the storyline.

In general, this is a good movie of great importance. It is a classic in the sense that it is an acclaimed film from the 20's. The cinematography is well done and the plot is compelling. Most importantly, what makes The Last of the Mohicans such a critical film is its major theme. The European "discovery" of the New World had a tremendous impact on native civilizations. War and culture-clash ultimately led to the extinction of the Native American natural culture, thus "The Last of the Mohicans."

The movie definitely had its sympathies with the Indians, and in this respect, may have been somewhat biased. From the British imperialist point of view, colonization and expansion came before the lives of the natives and other European competitors. The story may have been a bit stretched in the idea of "the last of the Mohicans." Applying such an absolute statement to a broad and ambiguous situation is not too realistic. Neither is the perfect, tragic romance between Cora and Uncas. But the film is a drama, so devices like exaggeration and symbolism are to be expected.

However, there is a lot to be learned about history from The Last of the Mohicans. It can be concluded from the movie that Exploration and the Colonial Period were times of competitive fighting and general disorganization. The French and English were still concerned with controlling the still unknown American continent and Indians added another dimension to the front. Natives were pivotal in the war, and they formed alliances with the French and English that turned the tables quickly. Indian attacks were also a very real concern, as shown in the movie. Power struggles and Indian forces distinguished New World warfare.

The Last of the Mohicans is an honorable historical piece. It offers a good glimpse at the Seven Years War and tells an excellent and entertaining story. The film is definitely significant and holds a solid place in American history.

The Crucible (1996)

The play The Crucible by Arthur Miller is a fictional story that takes place in Salem, Massachusetts in 1692. During this dark time in Salem’s history, suspicions of witchcraft and devil-worshiping floated across towns, tearing families and entire communities apart. The famous Salem Witch Trials occurred in the same year and a multitude of books have been written on the subject. Indeed, this makes an interesting setting for Arthur Miller’s play, and explains a great deal about the context of the story. However, there is one important question that any reader or viewer must first ask themselves before embarking on such an adventure. That is, why did Miller name his play The Crucible? After all, there is no mention of a crucible in the script. It turns out that the reference in the title to a crucible plays a major role in understanding and appreciating this classic in its entirety.

By definition, a crucible is a pot used for melting materials at extremely high temperatures to undergo chemical reactions. Crucibles were commonly used by alchemists in their search for gold. With this in mind, it is clear that “the crucible” is simply an allegory for the overall events of the play, which the alchemist will reenact.

For a chemical reaction to take place, several things are necessary: ingredients, a catalyst, energy or heat production, and the creation of a new product.

The “ingredients” of the play are the characters (their backgrounds, their personalities, etc.)  and the setting (including cultural, religious, and political circumstances that may shape the outcome of the plot). Once the alchemist has placed all of these reactants the same vessel, the stage is set for the experiment.

A catalyst is something that prompts or sets off a series of events like a domino effect. The catalyst in The Crucible is the accusation of witchcraft, which in itself, leads to the turmoil that ensues. The spark has been lit.

Next comes the melting, churning, and intermingling of the original ingredients of the experiment. This is witnessed by the intense emotion, fiery anger, sheer terror, and general state of extreme tension or stress in the story. Accusations are flung, secrets are discovered, relationships are betrayed, and sides are changed on the spot; it is a state of all out neighbor versus neighbor war, as the expectations and proceedings of normal society are turned upside down. The heat of the situation as the ingredients churn in the crucible can be felt through the pages.

Finally, the reaction has taken place, the heat has dispersed, and an entirely new scene emerges through the soot. A husband is dead, friendships are shattered, points-of-view are altered, and a community’s history has been shaped for centuries to come. Something entirely unforeseen and irreversible has resulted.

That is the story of the alchemist’s experiment, however one more important step remains. The scientist must peer into the crucible and determine if that treasured golden substance has been created by the chemical reaction. What the alchemist sees in that pot is a whole, ugly stew of undesirable waste. However, a glimpse of yellow has caught the alchemist’s eye in the form of a John Proctor. Though his fate may be morbid, he, of all, has found his truth. While the rest around him have helplessly sunk, Proctor remained honest, stayed true to himself, and emerged as the hero in the story; a small, but very bright strip of gold, lost, but shining through the debris.

Balseros (2002)

Balseros is a 2002 documentary film by Carlos Bosch and Josep Maria Domènech about the journeys of seven Cuban refugees to America. Due to political policies, emigrating legally is practically impossible for many Cubans. Instead, Cubans build rafts out of whatever materials they can acquire, including their own houses, and they set afloat across the Caribbean to Florida. Some survive, some do not, and the experiences of those who do succeed in reaching America are uniquely different. This candid documentary gives the world a real and personal look at the experiences of the balseros.

“Balseros” is a Spanish word meaning “rafters,” and specifically applies to Cuban rafters escaping to America. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Cuba fell into such extreme poverty that a great number of its citizens illegally left the country in hopes of a better life.

The film begins in Cuba, where we are introduced to the seven balseros and their families: Juan Carlos and Misclaida are one couple; Misclaida’s sister Mericys; Oscar, who leaves his wife and daughter behind to find a better life; Guillermo, whose wife and daughter are already in the US; Miriam, who leaves behind her daughter; and Rafael, who is independent and wants “a car, a house, and a good woman.” In Cuba, the balseros are struggling to find enough materials to build their small rafts. The materials are expensive, and money is limited. One, Mericys, even submits to prostitution to earn the money for the supplies. Her raft fails and she is forced to stay Cuba for seven years.

In 1994, President Clinton announced that the balseros would be taken to Guantanamo, a US naval base located in Cuba. This is just what happened to the six. They were eventually found by the US and held at Guantanamo with thousands of other balseros. The immigrants there are then interviewed and many are granted visas into the US. Many however, must remain in Guantanamo for years until they are let into the United States. Luckily the six characters receive their visas and meet with a church organization that sends them to particular cities and provides them with a house.

It seems that many of the balseros did not have the experience of living in America that they were expecting to have. Juan Carlos and Misclaida split up after Misclaida had an affair. Juan Carlos went to live with a friend of his, while Misclaida moved to Albuquerque, NM to sell drugs. Mericys wins a government sponsored visa, where she and her daughter are admitted to the United States. They stay with Misclaida in Albuquerque despite Mericys concern about her sister’s actions. Miriam, who had another child in America, must wait years to bring her first daughter to the US from Cuba because she incorrectly filled out the necessary forms.  Rafael has no contact with his family when he reaches America, and for many years, nobody knows where he is. Finally, he is found in San Antonio, TX, where he had become a passionate Christian preacher at a church. Oscar struggles quite a bit in the US. He moves from city to city, woman to woman, job to job, and eventually ends up in Pennsylvania after a great deal of personal and legal trouble. Guillermo is reunited with his family in Miami for the only happy ending of seven.

What exactly happened to these young, determined refugees is hard to say. It almost seems as if they went from good to bad. Most of them neglected their families back in Cuba and a handful of them adopted unsavory characteristics by becoming criminals, drug addicts, prostitutes, and gangsters. Those who did not fall into crime became either materialistic consumers, or suffered scarring emotional problems. It seems that the balseros expected to find in the United States an easy life. However, they found that without the proper education, skills, and work ethic, living in the US is not a piece of cake. Most importantly, their internal personalities were the primary factors in their undoing once they arrived.

Without a doubt, the reason for the dismal endings of most of the characters’ stories is as complex as the characters themselves. Their beliefs, motivations, relationships, and personal qualities all played a role in the outcome of the story.

Balseros, an Academy Award nominee for best documentary, is an excellent film. Bosch and Domènech did a tasteful job of addressing the different personal and emotional aspects of the balseros, while maintaining cohesion within the film. An example of this is the recurring singing of Lucrecia, a Cuban singer who provided the music for Balseros. Many times throughout the film, she would sing the same certain lyric in order to emphasize a connection within the film. For instance, Rafael stated that he wished for “un carro, una casa, y una buena mujer,” (a car, a house, and a good woman). This became something of a mantra for him and summed up his goals for his new life. So every time Lucrecia sang the motif “un carro, una casa, y una buena mujer,” it was an auditory representation of that ongoing mantra which compelled the balseros to risk their lives and leave their homes behind.

I was impressed by Balseros. Though the ending was not what I had expected or hoped it would be, I learned a lot about the political aspect of illegal immigration from the movie. Since illegal immigration is a growing issue in the United States, it is wise to educate American citizens about the controversial topic so that informed, unbiased decisions can be reached. Bosch and Domènech chose to further narrow the focus of Balseros to the human aspect of immigration, which I see as extremely important because it gives the public a more personal outlook on the realities of illegal immigration. This too, will contribute to a better educated and more open-minded population.

However, I see another important goal of Balseros, and that is to make a statement about the facts of human nature. Instead of being fed an idealized and unrealistic story about illegal immigrants and their lives upon reaching their destinations, the honest movie allows the audience to watch the blanket unravel. But rather than be angry or disgusted when it does, the filmmakers leave the film without judgment and with a touch of empathy for humankind. The realization emerges that we are all human beings, bounded by our physical capacities, intellectual aptitudes, and emotional stirrings. It is human nature to act in self interest and we all fall at times, as well as rise up. This suggests that empathy and a nonjudgmental eye are the some of the most generous gifts that humans have to offer to each other.

Gattaca (1997)

Gattaca is a 1997 sci-fi drama about a futuristic space station where employment status and opportunity are not determined by past experiences or learned skills. At Gattaca, the only thing necessary to nail an interview for a top ranking position is a urine test for genetic perfection. This award-winning film gives the world a sobering glimpse into not so far stretched world.

In the realm of Gattaca, infants are born through preimplantation genetic diagnosis, or PGD. PGD is a technique in which desirable traits are specifically chosen from each parent and an embryo with those traits is grown in vitro. This results in a child with flawless genetic makeup. These children are superior to their "naturally conceived" counterparts in strength, intelligence, health, and life expectancy.

     "Keep in mind, this child is still you. Simply, the best, of you. You could conceive naturally a thousand times and never get such a result." --Geneticist

Gattaca is a space station where only adults with excellent genes, or "valids," are permitted to hold positions. The degenerates, or "invalids," have no hope of prestigious employment and must settle for the dirty work, like janitorial service at Gattaca. Such is the plight of Vincent, the intelligent, yet sadly imperfect hero of the story. Conceived in love and predicted to suffer heart failure by the age of 30, Vincent is nonetheless determined to follow his lifelong dream of going into space. In order to do this, he must secretly cooperate with a retired, paralyzed valid to fake his identity and get a position at Gattaca. When the mission director is murdered however, Vincent must be extremely careful. Something as inconsequential as an eyelash could be enough to ruin his dream forever. With the police on his trail, a budding relationship with his coworker Irene, and an irresistible twist, Vincent is put to the ultimate test. Gattaca gets an A+ for a fascinating story and thrilling plot.

Gattaca is a film that will be remembered as perhaps the best science-fiction movie ever made. Aside from the pure entertainment value of this film, Gattaca carries an undeniable relevance to today's science and sparks some serious ethical debate about the human genome. Perhaps the best place to begin is with the issue directly addressed in Gattaca: career discrimination.

Job discrimination based on sex, race, and religion has already been outlawed by the US government. How about discrimination based on genetics? Is it right for a person to be born with limited opportunities simply because of their genes? What about a case like Vincent, where his determination was greater than his physical limits?

Following are just a few of the ethical issues surrounding PGD, genetic testing, and societal impacts.

There are concerns that insurance companies could raise rates based on knowledge of our genetics. Is this fair? Should insurance companies have access to that information? Who, if anyone, should be granted access to our personal genetic information and what could that effect be?

What would a person's social life be like if all of their acquaintances and friends knew that they are genetically inferior? Would they treat that person differently, and how would society respond to this?

Imagine a scenario where you and your entire family were told as soon as you were born that you are very likely to be affected by a deadly genetic disease, and your life expectancy is around 40. Would you wish to have this information about yourself? How would your family or your children feel knowing this? Would you live your life any differently? Is this for the good or the bad?


Is it ethical to be able to choose exactly what qualities your child will exhibit? Is this natural? Is it right to say that some children are better than others?

Is gender determination a safe and justified use of PGD? Utilizing preimplantation genetic diagnosis for that purpose could increase the frequency of gender imbalance. The effects of gender imbalance are apparent in countries like China and India, where the valued male population is significantly higher than the female population.

In Gattaca, Vincent has a brother who is born via PGD. Automatically, his brother will have more opportunities than he will. Vincent must live his childhood being the inferior child, while his brother is the perfect boy. Is this a fair situation? How would a situation like this effect family life?

PGD can be a very effective means of preventing the birth of children with genetic diseases. For instance, if you or your partner know that you have a likely chance of having a child that will suffer from a genetic disorder and possibly die and untimely death, is it a good idea to pursue PGD? Is this perhaps the only context in which it is acceptable to use PGD?

Finally, is the actual process of PGD ethical? During preimplantation genetic diagnosis, multiple eggs are fertilized. Those that are not wanted are disposed of. Those that are desired are implanted in the mother and a normal pregnancy follows. Is the disposal of these embryos ethical?

There are huge implications behind mastering human genes. The subject matter of Gattaca is not surprising, given that it was made in the midst of the Human Genome project (1990-2003), in the same year as the first mammal cloning, and during a time when the future and reality of genetics was being realized. Gattaca is a beautiful movie, because it clearly suggests a handful of concerns involving the advancement of genetics, while leaving the myriad of others up to the viewer to determine.

It is the responsibility of geneticists, scientists, and citizens around the world to carefully consider the ethics of PGD and "peeking" into a person's genes to predict their medical future. We are faced now with an unprecedented decision, as we have forever changed the definition of "human." These technologies could be used to save lives, or discriminate, alienate, and exterminate. If people do not address these issues in their own personal lives, there is no saying what could result. A world like Gattaca may be much closer than we think.

Nova: Absolute Zero (2008)

What used to be humanity's most fearsome and dangerous enemy has become a friend. Without it, we would have no freezers or quantum computers. What is it? Cold. Absolute Zero is a documentary about the science and history of cold. This Nova program unveils the truth about the incredible potential of a few frigid degrees.

The documentary begins by showing reenactments and interviews to tell about the history of cold. For some time, cold had been thought to be simply the absence of heat. Many theories, such as the caloric theory that heat is a liquid matter that acts upon atoms, were formulated and modified throughout the years until our modern understanding of cold was formed. Once the knowledge of how to create cold was gained, inventions like refrigerators, air conditioners, and ice machines took off. The inventions had a profound effect on modern society.

The term “absolute zero” refers to the temperature at which a given substance is under no pressure. This originates from the idea that pressure and temperature are directly related. The higher the pressure, the higher the temperature, and so the lower the pressure (0), the lower the temperature (calculated to be around -273°C, or absolute zero). The idea behind absolute zero is that this is the coldest temperature possible in the universe, because there is nothing less than zero pressure. This idea was first suggested in the early eighteenth century by French physicist Guillaume Amontons, who made a major contribution to the science of his day.
The Race for Absolute Zero, the second part of the program, tells of the quest to achieve absolute zero. Heike Kamerlingh Onnes and James Dewar were two scientists who raced to liquify gasses such as hydrogen and eventually helium in order to maintain extremely low temperatures. Onnes finally succeeded in liquifying helium at 5° above absolute zero. These were major milestones along the temperature scale. A group of researchers won the Nobel prize in 2001 when they at last produced Bose-Einstein condensates, particles extraordinarily close to absolute zero.

What is interesting about absolute zero is that at such low temperatures, quantum mechanics comes into play. Atoms begin to form into wavelike structures and lose their individual identities. Atomic particles are at different locations at once, and there is no clear separation between them. Quantum principles rule in this world of confusion, probability, darkness, and cold.

Since then, scientists all over the world are using condensates to achieve such feats as slowing down light waves and storing information. The potential of these new innovations is obvious. Not only are we able to harness everyday chill for use in our refrigerators and air conditioners, but now we can use ultimate cold to do even more fantastic things. An entirely new realm of science, technology, and engineering has opened up, and we owe it all to the cold.

The Seventh Seal (1957)

The Seventh Seal is a 1957 Swedish film directed by Ingmar Bergman about a medieval knight named Antonious Block and his mystifying confrontation with Death. The Seventh Seal is recognized as an ingenious, world-class masterpiece.

Antonious Block has returned from a long, exhausting fight in the Crusades. His squire, Jöns, is with him as the two travel across their homeland of Sweden during the Black Plague. The disease-ridden country is a dangerous, scary place. Bands of flagellants venture from village to village, humiliating and preaching to others. Entire towns are wiped out, and corpses are everywhere. A sense of clenching fear grips Antonious' entire world. It is not long after the very beginning of the movie that Antonious, sitting near the edge of a cliff overlooking the ocean, looks up and sees the black, cloaked figure of a man with a white face. The character is recognized as Death. Desperate, Antonious strikes up a deal with Death. The two will play a game of chess. If Antonious wins, Death must let him free. If Death wins, Antonious will go with him. Finally, Antonious will be allowed to live as long as the game is in session. These terms are agreed upon, and so begins Antonious' daring bet with Death.

The scene changes and the audience meets a poor family of traveling actors. The husband, a juggler named Jof, wakes up before his wife, Mia, their baby son, Mikael, and the director of the company, Skat. As he leaves his wagon, Jof has a vision in which he sees the Virgin Mary walking with the Child. She looks and smiles at him, but when Jof blinks his eyes, the two disappear. Jof tells his wife about what he saw, and she gently laughs at her husband and his visions. It is clear that Jof and Mia love each other and their baby tremendously. Though they are poor and hard working, they are perfectly content.

In the meantime, Antonious comes upon a church where he speaks with a monk who is sitting in a gated booth, hiding his face. It is during this dialogue that we learn the most about Antonious and his person-hood. He reveals a great desire to know God, and questions the many mysteries of religion, fate, God, and Satan. He shares his doubts of religion and wishes for a sign that will give him the answers he yearns for. Antonious wishes to accomplish something significant before he dies. Finally, he tells that he is engaged in a chess game with Death, and when asked by the Monk how he intends to win, Antonious tells his strategy. Suddenly the monk turns to him and reveals his identity. Antonious shared his game strategy with his very opponent.

Antonious and Jöns next come upon a deserted village. There, Jöns catches a priest named Raval taking valuables from of dead victims of the Plague. He chases Raval away, and by doing so, also saves a girl from being harmed by Raval. The girl, who never speaks, and whose name is never told, becomes Jöns' housekeeper. They become close throughout the movie.

Antonious, Jöns, and the girl arrive before an inn, where the acting company from the previous scene is performing. A group of flagellates arrives during the performance and the leading monk speaks words of hate and sorrow to the audience. Skat leaves the stage and sneaks away with the wife of the town smith, Lisa.

Later at the inn, the smith, Plog, learns that his wife ran off with an actor. Since Jof is an actor, Raval and the smith humiliate and are rough with Jof. Jöns arrives, marks Raval's face on his word, and helps Jof.  Jof, Jöns, the girl, Mia, Mikael, and Antonious all meet on a hill and have a meal of fresh milk and strawberries. For the first time in the entire film, the viewer sees that Antonious is happy. The group goes to the village to continue their trip. Jöns talks with Plog about his wife and humorously comforts him, saying, "It's hell with women and hell without them." "She's gone now, rejoice." Plog asks if he may travel with Jöns and his party, and he apologizes to Jof for tauting him earlier.

Antonious and Jöns lead Jof and his family through the forest to Antonious' castle, where he will meet his wife for the first time in ten years since he left for the Crusades. While going through the forest, two incidents occur. First, Lisa and Skat encounter the group. Plog and Skat have an argument, in which Jöns adds a touch of comic relief by assisting Plog in insulting Skat. Lisa switches sides and joins her husband. Skat escapes further fighting by faking his own death. The group departs, convinced that Skat had indeed stabbed himself. After his act is over, Skat climbs up in a tree. Death comes to Skat and saws down the tree he is perched in.

Second, the group comes upon a group of soldiers, on the errand of burning a young girl accused of being a witch. This fascinates Antonious, who speaks to the girl and wishes to learn how to contact Satan. The girl says that she can see Satan, and asks if he can too. Antonious looks around him, and answers no. Realizing the girl could not help him, he gives her a pill to lessen the pain of her cremation. Jöns is angered by the treatment of the girl but decides not to act, since the girl has been tortured close to death anyway. The girl is burned, staring in terror at the cloaked Death standing nearby.

Later, when the party is taking a break for the night, Raval approaches the group in the woods. He is dying of the Plague, and screaming for help. The girl stands to aid him, but Jöns stops her. Nobody approaches him and he dies a horrendous death in front of their eyes, screaming that he is afraid of dying and he doesn't want to die.

Shortly thereafter, the knight continues his game of chess with Death. Jof sees the incident and wakes Mia. Though she does not see Death playing chess with Antonious, Jof convinces her that they should leave. Right before he is about to lose, Antonious knocks over the pieces on the board, giving Jof and his family enough time to escape. The family flees, and Antonious loses the game. Death says that the next time they meet, it will be his and his friends' times to die.

The next day, the group arrives at Antonious' castle. Antonious meets his wife, Karin, and she says that she had waited for him. She says that he looks much different from the boy who left her a decade ago. During dinner, Karin reads a passage in the bible about the Seven Seals. Death arrives. Everybody approaches the ghost in awe. Karin welcomes the stranger. The girl drops to her knees and whispers "It's finished." That is the only time in the film she is heard.

In the following scene, Jof, Mia, and Mikael are seen on a grassy hill in the sun with their wagon. Jof has a vision where we see Death, Antonious, Skat, Jöns, Raval, Lisa, and Plog, holding hands in a line and dancing on a hill. Mia again laughs at his husband's visions, the family continues down a path near the ocean, and the movie ends.

A thorough analysis of The Seventh Seal would be difficult, as the subtleties and intricacies of the film are many. For the most part, interpretation must also be left to the individual viewer. There are a variety of radically different ways of approaching the organization, purpose, and meaning of The Seventh Seal. To me, the characters, or personas, are the focus of the film. Each character seems to represent a different type of individual, and the movie is about the ways in which each person handles the realization of their own mortality. For this reason, I will explain my understanding of each character and what they represent universally.

Antonious is a man who is always searching. He has so many questions, but even in the face of Death he never reaches resolution. He is confounded, careful, intellectual, and not emotional. Being an intellectual, he tries to use logic (chess) to escape Death, but logic fails him. His thoughts fail him too. No matter how much he thinks, he can never find answers. Antonious is very into himself, and rarely pays attention to others around him. When he does however, open himself emotionally to outsiders (such as the event of eating strawberries and talking with the others on the hill), he finds momentary happiness and a release of the tension in his mind.

Antonious' wife has kept herself in a state of waiting. She remained behind while everyone else in the castle fled. Her tragic fate is to die along with her husband.

Jöns is humorous and unconcerned about searching for God. He believes and accepts that life is meaningless, and so he lacks much caution. Because he is not wrapped up in deep personal thoughts like the knight, Jöns is very sociable. He expresses his emotions outwardly, by reaching out to others (sympathy for the witch, saving the girl, protecting Jof, and injuring Raval). He leads with his heart, not his head, like Antonious.

For me, the girl who was burned at the stake for being a witch was a bit of a mystery. It doesn't seem too clear what message she brought to the film. The witch did tell Antonious that she saw Satan and asked him if he saw him too. Towards the end of that scene, the audience realizes that what the girl had been seeing was the character of Death. Maybe the men that burned her were frightened by what the girl claimed to see. They, too, were terrified of Death, and so they did not like the girl bringing attention to the dreaded Grim Reaper. The men (symbolic of society) were suspicious and afraid of anybody who acknowledged Death, and therefore they accused the girl of being a witch and burned her. Humanity as a whole fears Death, and hates anyone who brings Death to attention. The witch's situation seems to be the reenactment of "death by society." The girl died as a heroine; she kept her eyes on Death up until the last moment.

The family of Jof, Mia, and Mikael, represent purity, happiness, health, love, and innocence. Jof is aware of things that are beyond the others' view (his visions). What he sees saves his family's life. In the end, Jof, Mia, and Mikael escape, untouched by the hand of Death and left to prosper.

Plog, Lisa, and Skat represent infidelity, insincerity, and pleasure only in "cheap thrills." By the end of the movie, they have all been visited by Death.

Jöns' housekeeper is susceptible, easily swayed, weak, and quick to be a follower. She joined Jöns without much hesitation, never said a word, was prepared to assist Raval despite the danger of the Plague, and was the only person to get on her knees before Death. Another confusing character, she was faced with Death and had no choice but to accept him.

By the end of the movie, all of the major characters are dead except for Jof, Mia, and Mikael. They are the only survivors. But even though they survived, they have not altogether escaped Death. They do not have all of the answers that Antonious sought, they know no special secrets, and they have no particular luxuries or wealth, yet they are able to live a simple, fulfilling, and loving life. Perhaps this is because there are no secrets, there are no answers, and there are no material things that will bring real value to a person's life. The family is not seeking these things. They are content not knowing, and not owning. They are merely living their lives in the moment, and deriving pleasure from each situation.

The Seventh Seal is an allegory of a person's search for God and an acceptance of Death. The title refers to a passage in the Christian Book of Revelation about the Seven Seals. When he opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour. Revelation 8:1. It was this silence that Antonious wanted so desperately to break. He felt that in order to find God, God would need to reveal itself to him, not remain silent. The silence of the seventh seal may also refer to the profound silence that existed in the moments before death. This would be another possible conclusion, given that the Seven Seals signify the end of something.

The dance with Death that Jof relates to Mia is probably the most famous image from The Seventh Seal. It is a powerful, emotional, graceful, and artful image that reflects earlier depictions of "The Dance of Death." It almost comforts the viewer to see the characters all connected, moving with the cloaked figure on the hillside. Jof says that "the rain cleanses their cheeks of the salt from their bitter tears." We realize that despite all of the hardships, trials, doubts, fear, suspicion, and mystery in their lives, they all end up letting it go. Perhaps the dance with Death can be viewed optimistically; that is, all of the characters became one with Death, whether on their own will or because they were taken. Our main character, Antonious Block, did not defeat Death, nor did he ever witness the manifestation of God. He spent his life tied up in knots, and these knots were never resolved. But when he died, the knots were dissolved and like the others, he danced with Death.

The Seventh Seal had a tremendous impact upon me. The cinematography was extremely appealing. The story was personal and engaging. There were even some funny parts to break up the tension and make the movie more palatable. I would definitely watch this movie again and would recommend it to anybody who wants an entirely unique audiovisual experience. The Seventh Seal was stunning.

Frontline: Heat (2008)

The deserts are expanding. The ice caps are melting. The ozone layer is disappearing. Violent storms are brewing. Sound familiar? That's right - global warming. But chances are An Inconvenient Truth did not compel you to install solar panels on you roof, get a wind turbine, or buy a hybrid car. Instead you continued living your life as usual and hoped that the bright scientists and engineers, or savvy politicians in Washington, could fix the problem. What you probably didn't realize is that the nation, if not the world, is tied and progress has been stunted. There is a lot less action being taken than you may think.

Heat, a Frontline program, is a documentary on the role of big businesses in the threat of global warming. The film describes the struggle among the states, the public, corporations, the federal government, and its administrations.

In brief, energy corporations are focused on fossil fuels. The United States has had an abundance of coal, petroleum, and natural gas, and the infrastructure of the nation requires their use as its primary energy source. For this reason, corporations in the energy sector, such as Exxon and BP, have become some of the most powerful forces in the world economy. On the whole, there is a lot of money to be made by extracting, processing, and selling precious fossil fuels.

Adding to the gravity of the situation is the fact that the nation is built upon corporations. Corporations, by principle, are powerful, money-making machines. When money is the only motive, nothing else matters. For an oil corporation like Exxon, for example, to revolutionize and offer sustainable, clean, and renewable energy sources, it would have to commit a tremendous amount of time, materials, work, and most importantly, money to accomplishing the task. Essentially these questions arise: Should Exxon be required to be an energy company rather than an oil company? Should it even be expected to be? And how should an oil company function in a 21st. century market?

But how could we expect anything less tumultuous when our country is fueled by fossil fuels?

Unfortunately, the government is so entangled and influenced by big businesses that any attempt to pass regulations on manufacturers is squashed. Corporations lobby, intimidate, and use any means they can to prevent bills like the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act in 2008 from passing. They are aided by members of Congress, who, for either personal or political reasons, try to stop these bills in their tracks.

The problem of fossil fuel dependency does not just apply to the United States. Developing countries such as China and India are following in America's footsteps and joining the world ranks as the largest contributors to greenhouse gasses. This, obviously, is an issue that will need to be addressed and handled on the global level.

Though faced with an environmental catastrophe, it's stunning to see that the habits of human life across the globe are carrying on as usual - more consumption, and faster. Economists call is "growth" and it's supposed to be "good."

 

Though a change of the actions of individuals, and particularly corporations, could have a significant impact on the reduction of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere, this is not a realistic expectation. The benefit of a society is to enact major changes that individuals cannot implement - for lack of vision or power - on their own. Individuals in a society rely upon authority to implement rules for the benefit of all. As for corporations, they are an undeniable aspect of the economy, and they were designed to make money. It is not necessary or plausible to completely do away with corporatism in America, but energy corporations, being among the largest in the nation, must be compelled take a different route. Corporations respond to changes in market demand and politics, however, when the market is slowing down and there is a lack of consistency, things will continue on their original course. Ultimately, it has to come down to the government to step in, lay down some serious regulations, and enforce them. Whether or not this will happen due to the intimate ties between the government and the corporate world remains to be seen. However, it is an absolute fact that nature will not wait for the world to get its act together and change.

Citizen Kane (1941)

A world famous, 1941 Orson Welles American drama, Citizen Kane is considered one of the best movies ever made. The film focuses exclusively on the mysterious life of a fictional newspaper owner, politician, multimillionaire, and overall celebrity, Charles Foster Kane. Rich symbolism, deep themes, and film and directing techniques revolutionary to its time are what make this movie the groundbreaking film of the century.

The movie opens with a series of transitioning scenes of a tall, dark tower on a cloudy night. As each scene inches the viewer closer and closer to a certain room of the tower, the audience passes by many different abandoned-looking objects, such as some boats on a lake, a cage of monkeys, and a wooden crate next to a park bench. One is really given the sense that they are delving deep into the unknown. Once the room is finally reached, we see a man, apparently on his deathbed, clutching a snow globe. In a frenzy of excitement, the man utters the word "rosebud," and dies. The snow globe falls from his hand onto the floor where it shatters.

Following the opening scene is an enthusiastic, high energy film clip of an obituary on News on the March. The old black and white video tells of about a man who recently died named Charles Foster Kane. (At this point, it is assumed that Kane is the man who died in the previous scene.) Kane became a wealthy man when he inherited an old mine shaft from his mother in which gold was discovered. With this money, we learn that Kane built an enormous pleasure-ground called Xanadu, which was constructed on a man-made mountain and is the world’s largest private zoo in history. Besides the pyramids, Xanadu is the most expensive monument ever built for personal use. As a young man, Kane was interested in newspapers, and started running the daily New York Inquirer. As his newspaper gained popularity, Kane gained more personal, economic, and political power. He eventually became the most powerful man in the country, if not the world. He was married twice, and divorced twice. He was a politician, both loved and hated equally. Kane experienced a major downfall, however. His political career ground to a halt when he was caught cheating on his first wife with the woman who was to become his second wife. His newspaper eventually floundered. His relationship with his second wife was fruitless. In the end, Kane was left abandoned in his palace at Xanadu alone to die. He was no longer in the public eye and he no longer had any influence in the nation.

Suddenly, the camera looks away from the film to show a group of men all watching the clip. The man who seems to be in charge of the group states that what the film is lacking is any insight on who Charles Foster Kane really was. He asks the group if they remember what Kane’s last words were. One of them answers “rosebud.” From there the man who is in charge suggests that the group find out the significance of his last word in order to find out more about Kane as an individual. Mr. Thompson, one of the news reporters, takes on the task of interviewing several of the people who were close to Kane when he was alive. The movie now follows a series of flashbacks of Kane's life.

First, Mr. Thompson travels to Atlantic City, where he wishes to speak with Kane’s second ex-wife, Susan Alexander Kane, a former singer, and current owner of a night club. Susan is shown sitting at a table in her empty club in the middle of the night, sad, lonely, and drinking. Mr. Thompson has no luck talking to her, as he is informed by the waiters, she never talks to anyone since Kane’s death. He does learn however, that Susan had never heard of the word "rosebud.” Mr. Thompson leaves the club.

Next, Mr. Thompson visits the Thatcher Memorial Library in Philadelphia, where he gets permission to look through Mr. Thatcher’s personal diary regarding Mr. Kane. Mr. Thatcher was a banker who became Kane’s guardian when he was a boy. Mr. Thompson can find no reference to the word “rosebud,” but he does learn quite a bit about Kane’s childhood. A flashback begins where we see a scene of Charles Kane as a boy, living with his mother and father at his mother’s boarding house. In this scene, Mrs. Kane sends Charles away to live with Mr. Thatcher so that he can receive an education. When Charles finds out he is leaving and his parents are not coming, he hits Mr. Thatcher with anger in the stomach using a sled he had been playing with in the snow. Later in time, we see Mr. Thatcher as an older man explaining to Kane that his 25th birthday is approaching and he will become independent from Thatcher. Further, he will receive the world’s sixth largest inheritance (that is the mine shaft inherited from his mother where gold was discovered). Kane states that he is not interested in gold mines, oil fields, or real estate. As a career, he wishes to run a newspaper.

Kane runs the New York Inquirer by creating eye-catching headlines that are not based on fact. He is extraordinarily successful selling the papers. The goal he states and publishes in his Declaration of Principles is to look out for the interest of the poor, and underprivileged, while providing entertaining and honest news. In this way, it is clear that Kane is a considerate and thoughtful man. We also learn in this scene that he never invests any of his fortune. Rather, he spends and loses money year after year without earning. This is ironic, given his tendency towards expensive things, such as building Xanadu. Kane even admits at one point that had he not been rich, he could have been a great man. In this statement, he is stating that he believes that wealth spoils great men and great men are not made by wealth.

Following, Mr. Thompson interviews Mr. Bernstein, Kane’s old general manager. Mr. Bernstein also has no real knowledge of the word “rosebud.” He tells Mr. Thompson that Kane never wanted money. He says that both he and Mr. Thatcher had trouble understanding Kane at times. Charles Kane was charismatic, intelligent, successful, a leader, and an entrepreneur. He did things in ways that they had never been done before. He was unique, and individual; everyone looked at him in awe.

Next, Mr. Thompson visits Mr. Leland, an old friend of Kane’s. Mr. Leland provides the deepest insight into Kane's personal life than any other character interviewed. Mr. Leland did not particularly care for Kane, but he did respect him. He believed that Kane had no other beliefs or convictions about anything but himself, and what he represented. In a way, he was an empty shell with only a tremendous amount of energy, personality, and wealth as an exterior. He was always trying to prove something or another, even if he was bound to lose. He was a private man, or at least did not share any of his inner being with anyone else, not even his wives or friends. His marriage to his first wife, Emily, began deteriorating when Kane started spending more and more time at his office and stopped participating in the marriage. Mr. Leland continues, saying that Kane did everything out of a desire for love. He wanted everyone, the entire nation to love him. Yet he had no love to give back, and that is how Charles Foster Kane lost everything.

Afterwards, Kane met Susan Alexander, a silly young woman whom he later married. It was around this time that his wife found out about his affair with Miss Alexander. A certain Mr. Getty, a political rival of Kane, knew of the affair and threatened to have it published in the newspaper unless Kane agreed to “disappear for a year or two” during the impending election for governor between Kane and Mr. Getty. He refused, and the story was printed in the paper. Kane lost the election to Mr. Getty, and the incident marked the end of his political career.

Finally, Mr. Thompson revisits Susan Alexander Kane, and she speaks to him. Susan sang as a young lady, and her goal was to be an opera singer. Though she lacked the talent and ability, Kane used his wealth and power to further her career by providing opportunities for her to sing in public and even building her an opera house. Susan lost interest in singing opera and wished to stop, as she was continually embarrassing herself. Kane would not agree however, and persisted in pushing her dead-end career onwards. As Mr. Leland said earlier, Kane was always trying to prove something. That was exactly the reason he pressured Susan into singing. Susan left Charles at their home in Xanadu. She felt that her husband only ever acted for himself and did not care about her. He never gave her anything meaningful, or demonstrated that she was important to him separate from himself and his own interests. He did not really love her. In a fit of anger after Susan left, Kane tore apart her room. He came upon the snow globe that appeared earlier in the film, held it in his hand, and muttered “rosebud.”

At this point, the story returns to present time when Mr. Thompson visits Xanadu after interviews. Confused and disappointed that he never found what Kane's last words meant, he tells the group of newspaper reporters that he doubts “rosebud” had much meaning to Kane’s life. He suggests that “rosebud” may be something that Kane lost; after all, Kane lost everything he had.

Towards the end, the audience witnesses thousands of Kane’s belongings in Xanadu being carelessly tossed into a fire to be disposed of. The viewer tragically realizes that all of Kane’s attempts to earn love and respect were futile. A connection can be drawn here to the beginning of the movie when the viewer passes by all of the broken-down remains of Kane’s estate. We come to understand that it is necessary to get past all of the “things” that acted as barrier between Kane's inner and outer worlds. In this sense, what Kane’s possessions did was guard him from intimate engagement with others. He never opened himself up to anyone. Instead, he surrounded himself with objects, opinions, words, and personality so that nobody could know him on a personal level. It could be argued that perhaps that was what he wanted. Ultimately, it was his obsession with maintaining a persona that lead to Kane’s downfall. This is also the reason that the audience cannot connect with, relate to, or know Kane on a deeper level.

On the whole, the essence of Charles Foster Kane remains in the dark. Though so much information is gathered by both Mr. Thompson and by the audience, we will never know what drove him to do the things he did. He had little success in his relationships. His career was fraudulent, and in the long term, unprofitable. He spent lavishly and built an entire miniature world with his money that never won him the love, companionship, respect, or satisfaction he sought. (In the words of Mr. Leland, "He [Kane] was disappointed with the world, so he built one of his own.") And despite all of what is known about him, his personal feelings were never expressed, nor his beliefs or intentions revealed. He was an oxymoron: High class, but with an eye for the common man. Extremely rich, and generous. Seemingly happy, though not fulfilled. Lonely, yet surrounded by people. Abandoned, while served hand and foot.

Finally, we are shown a familiar sled with the word "rosebud" painted on it from Kane's childhood burning in the fire. The movie promptly ends. At last the connection is made. This can be seen as Kane's sorrow over the loss of his childhood. Rosebud was the sled that Kane used to push Mr. Thatcher away when they met each other. Mr. Thatcher represents the undesirable adulthood that Kane was destined to lead after being separated from his youth with his mother and father. Rosebud represents the happy, hopeful early years of Kane's life. The action demonstrates the young Charles' resisting the intrusion of adulthood.

Rosebud also represents the obscurity of a person's internal world. Thus, Mr. Thompson's inability to determine the meaning of "rosebud" portrays his inability to understand Kane personally.
For that matter, can we ever really know a person? We can watch them, we can see their actions, we can admire them, we can live with them, we can even love them, but that is it. His life cannot be summed up in a word or two. He was, like everyone else, unpredictable and complex.

Citizen Kane is a triumph of the film industry. It beautifully shows the struggles and complexities of humankind. Kane was a particularly enigmatic man. He may or may not have loved. He may or may not have been loved. We do not know what motivated him to act or how he felt about his own actions. However, there is one thing that we can see: We recognize his sadness and loss, and we can sympathize with it because it is an experience common to all people. But beyond common sympathy, as Citizen Kane demonstrates, truly understanding another human being makes about as much sense as "rosebud."