Response to _To Kill A Mockingbird_

       For the next film, we have been watching To Kill A Mockingbird and it has really struck a chord with me. I found the fact that the main characters that initially drew the audience's attention to the story were children to be highly purposeful. The author truly set the stage for the audience to recognize growth or a change in the little girl nicknamed "Scout" from the beginning to the end of the film. This dynamic character perceived as an innocent tomboy child believing scary superstitions about their neighbor nicknamed "Boo Radley" in the beginning, clearly developed into a more mature, adult like state by the end as she accepted Boo as a person like herself rather than a fictitious monster. This transition reminds me of the children Holden imagines falling off the cliff that leads to adulthood in The Catcher In The Rye where innocence is lost, but more knowledge is gained. There still is the unanswerable question about whether or not this knowledge learned/experienced is for the better of the individual or not, but maybe it is inevitable that there will come a time when innocence is lost in an individual's life. One of my favorites scenes in this film was when Atticus was making his closing statements during the trial where Tom Robinson had been accused of raping a white woman. During his last remarks, he made it a point to declare that he himself recognizes that the court/justice system is not completely effective and it too has it's flaws. After reading that article that Ms. Bavaro had given is in class, it makes me question government and the justice systems we have in place. Everything that we as individuals perceive as natural in this day and age is only naturally because some people made it that way. The fact that I acknowledged that "some people made it that way" means that any invisible rules in place were created in a biased fashion. This makes me infer that the justice system can never truly be effective because it really was the "educated and rich" white men who created the laws in the first place. These "laws" everyone takes into account are only as good as the people who wrote them. I'm not even sure how we could go about "fixing it". Are films like this just replicating the ideal that these laws are "right and just" when we watch poor Tom Robinson be convicted of guilt after a perfectly winning argument made for him by Atticus? I don't know about you, but I was a bit pissed off at that. 

Response to _Precious_

       For our next film adaptation of a work of literature, we watched Precious. This was the first time that I've ever watched of or heard of this film and boy was it terrifying to watch!! The horrific topics it addresses from domestic violence to sexual abuse and people in poverty were so hard to watch I almost had to look away during some scenes. I believe that my profound reactions to the movie were just exactly what they intended on the audience having in order to get people to listen. I believe the movie's main goal was to force people to recognize the horrors in our society that they would normally choose to ignore in reality. The only reprieve from fear and disgust was located in the repetition of Precious' fantasy moments where she displayed an alternate happy version of herself with her ideal man. The significance of this repetition is for the audience to compare and contrast the dreams that Precious has with the reality she truly faces. At the end of the film, yes Precious receivers custody of her children and can read at an eighth grade level and it seems like a happy ending with her mother kicked to the curb, but in truth, Precious' fantasy life will probably never be in her grasp. The movie demonstrates that one can get through major conflicts and suffering in one's life if he or she perseveres through it, but this does not mean one's life automatically becomes perfect. I think it also forces people to be greatful and thankful for the lives they lead when they see horrible circumstances that cannot compare to their own trivial life problems. This movie was scary thought provoking! 

Reponse to _Monty Python and the Holy Grail_ Movie

       After watching the last half of the movie because I was absent when the first half was played last Friday, I can say that this movie was an extremely odd, but in a good way. I caught on to the fact that that King Arthur was obviously on a quest for the "Holy Grail" and every direction they turned, there was yet another silly highly exagerrated obstacle in their way. For instance, at one point in their path to the castle stood a bunny. One would think the bunny would be absolutely harmless and easy to get through, but it turned out to be a rabid and violent murderer of a bunny killing several of the men as they approached it. I found there was a lot of irony and jokes like this throughout what I watched that obviously culminated together into one hell of a parody of King Arthur and life during that time period. I also found the Bridge of Death scene to be pretty hilarious even though I anticapated that travelling across the bridge would not be as easy as Sir Lancelot made it seem. I noticed they used the technique of repetetion in order to make the scene even funnier, utilizing the same first two question and switching up the third. The only thing I did not expect that literally made me laugh out loud was when the bridge-keeper was unable to answer a complicated question in return and was removed and thrown to death. It's always funny when you realize as an audience member that the characters you think are safe from harm are not really safe at all. I noticed that basically all the main characters die in the end, which was extremely abrupt that I didn't even realize it was the end at first. I think it was clever and sneaky of the movie makers to produce an ending so bizarre as this. Overall, I can understand why this movie was such a hit with a lot of people, but I don't think I could sit through it again.