Category: Columns

Categories
Columns

Southern Tier Symphony

Written By: Grace Vuolo (’24)

Saturday night, the Southern Tier Symphony performed at the Regina A. Quick Center for the Arts at St. Bonaventure University, continuing their twenty-first season, “Journey On!,” with its second series, “Adventure.” The symphony features Houghton’s own Dr. David Clem on viola, Daniel Zambrano on cello, Dianna Clem on piccolo, and graduate Jack Smith on trumpet. The music director and conductor, Benjamin Grow, opened the concert by conducting the ensemble and audience in The Star-Spangled Banner before smoothly transitioning to John Philip Sousa’s The Star and Stripes Forever. Grow’s conducting was lively and displayed precision that would set the tone for his conducting throughout the rest of the concert. This Sousa composition featured portions that highlighted Dianna Clem’s proficient piccolo playing as well as Jack Smith’s strong trumpet and a well-synchronized string section. The next piece played was Giacomo Rossini’s Overture to The Barber of Seville. Grow conducted the dynamic changes with clarity that encouraged accurate playing for the ensemble. The softer sections stood out as the strings and winds maintained an impressive quality of sound through soft dynamic levels. The violins remained well in sync throughout the piece, following the concertmaster, James Ieda, who led with serenity and prestige. The Waltz from Sleeping Beauty by the illustrious Piotr Illych Tchaikovsky stole the show from the moment it began. Commonly associated with the classic Disney film, this Tchaikovsky piece bore much nostalgia that was phenomenally brought to life through the sweet strings, rhythmic winds, and soaring brass. Grow’s conducting perfectly communicated the style of the song and gave clear cutoffs for a synchronized orchestra. The next piece, Hungarian March, was composed by Hector Berlioz. The strings sounded loud and full as the other sections played in good harmony with one another. The brass section entered strong upon the conductor’s cue yielding an even fuller sound. The fast-paced sections within the piece also were played with precision and distinguished talent. Roses of the South by Johann Strauss followed, bearing the same excellence in dynamic and stylistic transitions accomplished by the ensemble and conductor as the previous songs. This piece was succeeded by another one of the best performances of the night, another Tchaikovsky composition, Act 1, No. 2 from Swan Lake. I was excited to see this in the program and surprised when the conductor had a lapse of memory and nearly skipped over it. Fortunately, members of the ensemble reminded him, and the nostalgic, powerful sweetness of the piece enveloped the audience. The brass and percussion played in perfect synchronization, and the featured oboist played out the melody beautifully, making this a highlight of the concert. Leroy Anderson’s Bugler’s Holiday featured Jack Smith along with the other trumpeter who were both surprisingly joined by Grow also on trumpet. A brief intermission followed this piece. During intermission, there was an undeniable anticipation building. If the first half was so incredible, what did the second half have in store?Apparently, not much. The second half opened with the Poet and the Peasant Overture by Franz von Suppé which was a rather generic composition compared to the other songs that had been played. The percussion was overpowering, particularly at the end, and the piece overall brought down the level of anticipation for the rest of the performance. The following well-known piece, The Blue Danube by Johann Strauss II, although played well stylistically, featured tired strings and poorly-timed percussion that contrasted the lively conducting and strong brass section. Next was Radetzsky March, written by Johann Strauss I, wherein Grow encouraged audience involvement by clapping to the beat during the main musical motif. The audience kept the beat well, but the strings majorly messed up rhythmically and harmonically, possibly thrown off by the external involvement. At this point, with such a blatant mistake, I had lost hope in the rest of the performance. Fortunately, the show was pulled together beautifully for the Waltz of the Flowers from The Nutcracker, another piece by Piotr Illych Tchaikovsky. Perhaps this reviewer is just partial to Tchaikovsky, but this was the third highlight of the entire performance. Cristin Kalinowski opened with a harp solo free from the conductor. This lilted throughout the room, encouraging dynamically balanced winds and unified strings that followed Grow’s masterful guidance. Finally, the symphony closed out the performance just as it was opened, with a piece by John Philip Sousa, The Washington Post, which was an upbeat, precise, and successful end to the concert.Overall, despite the mistakes, watching the Southern Tier Symphony was a beautiful and inspiring experience for this young musician and reviewer. Given the opportunity, I would certainly encourage going to see them perform, as I would hope to as well at the next chance, which will be again at St. Bonaventure University on May 4th. ★

Categories
Columns

The Creator (2023) Review

Written By: Joseph Schmidt (’24)

Set in 2070, 15 years after a nuclear detonation in Los Angeles that started a war against AI, Sergeant Joshua Taylor, played by John David Washington, an ex-special forces agent, is recruited to hunt down a mysterious terrorist going by the name Nirmata, or “Creator”. The United States military has gained valuable information that Nirmata has created a super weapon which could cause the US to lose the war against the AI threat. But when Joshua discovers the super weapon is a robotic child, he finds himself at a loss of what to do.

“The Creator” honestly surprised me as a movie. When I first saw the trailers for the movie, it looked like it was nothing more than a Star Wars rip off, which I suppose is what happens when you get the fantastic Gareth Edwards, the same director who created “Rogue One”. But when I first watched the movie, I was pretty interested in all the concepts of robots, humans and AI all interacting together in a shared universe, only to have AI become the main threat. However, “The Creator” shows an interesting perspective from both sides of this war against the AI. It shows the fear and anger of the US and the US military, who have vigilantly fought against robots, simulants and AI in order to make sure there is no more threat of nuclear extinction, but it also shows the perspective of New Asia, the country harboring and supporting the robots, simulants and AI because they believe that these beings are as real as humans are.Yet, the story never shifts away from Joshua and the super weapon child known as Alphie, played by Madeleine Yuna Voyles.

Joshua’s reason for going after this super weapon is because he’s trying to find his wife, who is in New Asia and supposedly helping the New Asian forces create Alphie. Joshua’s mission was to collect the super weapon or destroy it in order to find his wife and return home with her. However, after the mission goes wrong, Joshua and Alphie must find their way across New Asia and avoid the New Asian forces looking for them both. As Joshua understands what’s at stake, why begin to see and understand more of the perspective of New Asians and how that convinces Joshua to switch sides over the course of the movie. This was something I appreciated, that Joshua didn’t have a quick moment where he changed sides in the middle of a battle, but instead slowly began to understand why Alphie was created as a defense for the New Asians, not an offense.

Overall, “The Creator” is definitely one of my new favorite movies. A compelling story, a new approach of conflict and love and trying to understand that just because something isn’t alive doesn’t mean it’s not real. We watch Joshua struggle as a soldier taking care of Alphie as she learns the world, trying to avoid threats while guarding what he had considered a threat. We watch Alphie gain more understanding of her enhanced abilities and how they impact the people of New Asia in many different ways. We watch the brutality of war, the tactics used in the midst of fear, and the sacrifices and losses that come as a result. No one in this movie is safe. It made the movie seem so real despite being set in 2070.

However, some things were predictable in the movie. While deaths are inevitable and some are definitely shocking and surprising, some events are incredibly predictable. In fact, some are pretty stupidly coincidental as well. And while these coincidences and predictable events aren’t relied upon for the story to continue, it did make me a tiny bit disappointed by such cliche scenes.

In conclusion, I did enjoy the movie. I loved this movie. It surprised me, made me emotional on my first watch through in a few parts, and played into tension beautifully. Not to mention that the cinematography was impressive. It’s definitely worth the watch if you’re a Sci-Fi fan, and it keeps you engaged from start to finish. Seriously, watch it for yourselves!

Final Grade: 8.7/10 ★

Categories
Columns

2023: A Beautiful Culmination of Cinema

Written by: Caleb Tiedemann (’25)

With Oscar nominations released and the award ceremony around the corner, it is time for another yearly review of the ups and downs of the entertainment industry that is known as Hollywood. 2023 was both a very serious and silly year for film. With films like Cocaine Bear and Five Nights at Freddy’s being released the B-movie representation was present. Marvel released two critically panned and theatrically bombing films in the form of Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania and The Marvels. Their third, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3, managed to defy expectations but mostly due to the quality of the Guardians movies. James Gunn, as usual, pours heart, soul, and humor into his films and Vol. 3 was no different. With these critical flops appearing almost back-to-back and continuing off of the superhero flops from 2022, Marvel is slowly treading water but losing energy. DC seems to be in a very similar boat with 2023 being the final nail in the coffin for the DCEU before James Gunn does a creative overhaul. A sequel to Shazam! came out and though I found some personal enjoyment in the movie, many other fans did not, resulting in a flop for DC. The Flash was also released and was mostly disliked for its convoluted storyline and ugly visuals (both of which I can confirm to be true). The final flatulent note of the DCEU came in the form of Aquaman: The Lost Kingdom, a film of muddled messages and ideas, inconsistent humor, generic storytelling, and the almost universally disliked Amber Heard. But it was not just the superhero franchises that suffered, there were many sendoffs to beloved franchises aside from the previously mentioned ones. Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny was met with very mixed reviews among fans and critics and it provided me with one of the most disappointing, dumbest, plot-hole-ridden, and truly revolting portrayals of modern storytelling that disguised itself as an Indiana Jones film. Poor 80-year-old Harrison Ford is dragged through a terribly written movie that has none of the adventure, character, and heart that the originals contain. Apparently, my feelings were similar to those of others as it drastically underperformed. In other news the pen-ultimate two-parter of the Mission: Impossible franchise came out to fans such as myself who have been watching Tom Cruise do insanely crazy stunts for the past decade. Another send-off came in the form of John Wick: Chapter 4, the well-deserved and intense action film to put the beloved franchise to rest. One of the biggest upsides of this year came from the release of films helmed by popular and beloved directors. M. Night Shyamalan, the beloved horror/thriller director, released Knock at the Cabin, a tense and wonderfully acted film that dealt with familial love and sacrifice in an unconventional and heart-wrenching way. David Fincher released his assassin-led drama The Killer which explored more of the downtime between each job and was received with mixed reactions. Famed director Martin Scorsese released The Killers of the Flower Moon, a brilliant period piece about the horrors the Osage Native-American nation experienced at the hands of greedy and evil white colonizers. The biggest and best releases came around the middle of the year starting with Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse. Across the Spider-Verse was a beautiful, emotional, and well-done film that touches upon a lot of heavier issues than expected and draws so much heart from its main ensemble. But, the undoubted magnum opus from this year is “Barbenheimer.” These two movies that managed to shake the entire internet up by the vast differences of their subject matter. Christopher Nolan’s epic boasts a talented cast of characters, rushing to create the first atomic bomb. As they get closer and closer to succeeding the weight of what they are doing sets in and the aftereffects shock the entire world. With one of the best endings, stellar pacing, and an around amazing cast, Oppenheimer was a true treat and is definitely worth the awards it is receiving. Barbie, on the other hand, did not meet my expectations in the same way. It was still a very fun movie and I am very aware that I am not considered the target audience. The movie boasts a colorful ensemble of characters and heart and seeks to define questions surrounding womanhood and femininity. Though I do think the morals are a bit clunky, and the writers bit off more than they could chew in terms of the message they sought to convey, I would be foolish to deny Barbie’s cultural impact. This year was another great one for movies as we got a wide variety from all across the film-making spectrum. The summer blockbuster season has never been more ominous and exciting and with independent and unique films coming into the limelight, it seems that Marvel and DC are being pushed back to the shadows. Alas, who knows what the future holds? One thing I can say is that 2024 already has a good roster of films to look forward to! ★

Categories
Columns

The Grinch (2018)

Written by: Kat Wojsiat (’24)

The Grinch (2018) was a controversial movie upon release. The 1966 Dr. Seuss story already had a classic cartoon rendition that lived in the hearts of all, and a 2000 goofy, well-known live action film featuring Jim Carrey.

When the 2018 remake was announced, many people felt as though it was unnecessary, and that Benedict Cumberbatch was not a good fit for the role of the Grinch. I, myself, did not have high hopes for the movie, and I actually didn’t even bother to watch it for the first couple of years after it was released. During the first Christmas of Covid, I was in desperate need of more Christmas movies to watch, so I gave it a try – and quickly fell in love.

The rich, vibrant colors of the animation, the aggressively intense Christmas decorations, the lack of physics, the carolers chasing people down… No movie better captures the Christmas spirit for me. It has become a yearly staple of the Christmas season for me to wrap myself in a fuzzy blanket with a peppermint hot chocolate and watch this movie. Benedict Cumberbatch’s energy is goofy and fun, but it also brings something new to the table that separates it from the first two movies.

This Grinch is given more of a backstory and a more fulfilling redemption arc. He also appreciates Max more than the previous two Grinches, which I greatly appreciate as an animal lover. I also love the addition of Bricklebaum, a jolly Christmas-loving man who lives at the bottom of Mount Crumpit and thinks he and the Grinch are best friends. It adds a psychosocial dynamic to the story of the Grinch only being able to accept love when he lets go of his deep-seeded bitterness.

One of the best things about this movie is that it is wonderfully ideal for us college students who are in the finals season leading up to Christmas, because it is only 90 minutes long. It is the perfect short, easy-to-watch, light-hearted Christmas movie to take your mind off finals for a few minutes before diving back into work, and I look forward to it every year. ★

Categories
Columns

Our Town Review

Olivia Kleinau (’23)

The Houghton University Lyric Theater’s rendition of Our Town, told a heartfelt story of love, life, and death.

I appreciated the message of the play, which was to Enjoy your life. Both the simple pleasures and simple moments.

This was best conveyed in Act 3, when one of the main characters, Emily Webb (Played by Lydia Reich), tragically passed away (which destroyed me). During the act, we got an interesting look at the perspective of the characters who died throughout the play, as the tone turns somber. The characters reflect on their lives, realizing how much they took for granted. It is also interesting for the audience to reflect on their own life and morality. Life is short, and should be lived with every day being important. 

The message is clear: Every moment matters, even the ones that feel like our mundane everyday life. Don’t take it for granted.

I think everyone did a fantastic job in the show. It was very easy to connect with the characters as well as the message. 

There were also many moments of humor which were well appreciated amidst the tragedies. The actors did a wonderful job at blending humor into the dialogue without it being forced or out of place. It added an appreciated lighthearted element as we watched the characters go about their day to day lives. 

The town the story took place in was an important character as well, helping to further convey the message that everything changes, even when it seems like nothing does. The world keeps spinning even when everything around us is changing. Nothing is permanent, but sometimes change is gradual. It was an impactful story that thoughtfully used a narrator, the Stage Manager (Played by Cody Johnson), to aid in communicating the changes in the town between acts that we couldn’t necessarily see.I found the fourth wall breaks to add to the story, rather than take away from it, which is a difficult balance.

Overall, it was an impactful story, one that should make everyone contemplate living and being alive. ★

Categories
Columns

Five Nights at Freddy’s Review

Written by: Joseph Schmidt (’24)

Five Nights At Freddy’s is a movie set in the year 2000, where Mike Schmidt (played by the talented Josh Hutcherson), the main protagonist, is struggling to find any work to take care of his younger sister, Abby and avoid eviction. His only hope is a night shift at Freddy Fazbear’s Pizza, an abandoned family restaurant. Mike soon finds out that “where fantasy and fun comes to life”, so do other things, as the abandoned animatronics Bonnie, Chica, Freddy, and Foxy are still active, and they are not friendly. With the help of a local police officer, Vanessa, Mike struggles to survive each night shift at the pizzeria and figure out why the animatronics are out for blood.

If any of you know the famous games this movie is based off of, then you can probably relate to how excited I was to finally see this movie completed and released. The movie gives you a first hand look into how the animatronics operate during the night within the opening minutes. It gave a sense of anticipation but also the uneasiness one could expect from a thriller. The movie also has a great sense of mystery, as we follow Mike’s journey as he tries to figure out why the animatronics are so dangerous as well as his nightmare of his brother’s kidnapping. The plot bounces back and forth between the shifts at Freddy’s and Mike battling his aunt for custody over his sister, Abby, which does provide a tiny bit of contrast to the dangers of Freddy’s with a grounding real-world challenge which we can sympathize with. The sense of danger and intensity, however, is kept up really well through the first half of the film until they interrupt with a very out-of-place montage. The movie took a turn there, and everything became far less serious.

However, the movie does slowly and carefully redeem itself near the end. The feeling of intensity didn’t really come back entirely, but the dangers became obvious again in the final chapter as stakes were raised for all the characters. The ending of the movie felt satisfactory as the mysteries all came together and the final villain was revealed.

Overall, I did enjoy the movie! It was a fun watch, and the acting was great. Every character had a necessary role, and nobody felt out of place. The cinematography is nothing too special, but that helps lend a hand to the deadness of Mike’s life as he struggles to stay afloat. However, the movie is definitely more based off of the books instead of the original video games, which I did find to be slightly disappointing. The movie’s story stayed partially faithful to the game’s lore, though it seemed as though it wanted to take a new approach to the franchise and its threats.

Personally, I wish the movie relied on the games’ story and lore more heavily, as the animatronics felt dangerous but never truly threatening to the characters. They felt more like creepy obstacles than scary threats, and I hope they change that. The PG-13 rating for the movie also hindered its creative capabilities, I believe. Much of the original Five Nights at Freddy’s lore involves darker topics than the movie is able to touch on and any topics the movie does bring to the big screen aren’t translated very well. However, for a rating of PG-13, I will say that Blumhouse did a fantastic job of convincing us otherwise. Could it have been more creative if it had a different rating? Yes. But it did not disappoint me, it simply made me wish for more.

In conclusion, I liked the movie! It did well overall, and I was genuinely surprised and excited by some of the details and reveals. With a sequel already confirmed to be in pre-production, I’m excited to see how they build off of the first movie into the second one, and with hopes that they’ll improve and grow the overall story of Five Nights at Freddys.  ★

Final Grade: 7/10

Categories
Columns

An Echo in the Darkness

Written By: Julia Collins (’26)

Last month, we left off reading A Voice in the Wind, Francine Rivers’ first book of the Mark of the Lion series. This week, we will be looking at the second book in the trilogy, An Echo in the Darkness!

Hadassah, a young Christian girl from Jerusalem sold into slavery in Rome, has survived a brutal attack after being betrayed by her master, Julia Valerian. Hadassah was rescued by a doctor, Alexander, who she begins to assist in his medical jobs. Personality wise, Hadassah is the same, but since the attack, she has scarring on her face that makes her almost unrecognizable (I say “almost” because she IS recognized- more on that later). Julia, meanwhile, is sick- actually, more than sick, terminally ill from an STD. She is in a relationship with a man who doesn’t love her, and she is neglected by her friends. No one likes her, and she keeps getting sicker. But then she meets a servant who loves her and cares for her. What Julia doesn’t realize is that this servant is Hadassah! Although Hadassah was recognized by Julia’s now-Christian mother, Phoebe, Julia does not know that her new servant was the girl she had sent off to be killed! 

Meanwhile, Hadassah’s almost-boyfriend/crush, Marcus Valerian, thinks she’s dead, and he is heartbroken. To get closer to the memory of Hadassah, he goes to Jerusalem, and is eventually converted to Christianity. He eventually goes back to Rome after sensing that God wants him to go see Julia and forgive her for sending Hadassah to be killed. However, Marcus struggles with how to forgive. With his mother being sick, he blames Julia for not being with her. When he and Julia finally see each other again, things are bad. Can the two of them get along again?

The ending of this book, which I will not reveal myself, is a good wrap-up on the lives of Hadassah and the Valerians. The journey that the four main characters go through shows early Christianity, and how it impacted people’s lives in unexpected ways and through interesting people. ★

Categories
Columns

Jordan Peele Spotlight

Written By: Caleb Tiedemann (’25)

Jordan Peele is a name many people know. Perhaps not associated with his films but rather due to his comedy sketches with his good friend Keegan-Michael Key. The two appeared as the comedic Key and Peele with various SNL skits that originally prompted them to fame. But comedy reaches only so far, and Peele wanted to do more with his writing talents. Thus, he began writing and creating movies in an effort to “expose the “lie” of post-racial America.” Through this, Peele not only casts very talented African American actors and actresses, but he also steers clear of the “black guy dies first trope.” Each of his movies has a message behind it – one that needs to be deciphered through his magnificent writing. After watching the movies multiple times, I still have not discovered every single detail, yet that is what continually brings me back to his films – the message (Spoilers for all of Jordan Peele’s movies beyond this point).

His first film, Get Out, released in 2017 to much critical acclaim as it explores the race relations between a Caucasian family’s daughter who brings home her African American boyfriend. Built from the very beginning with tense foundations, Get Out exposes the clash of cultures, lifestyles, and racial differences. The psychological horror element is on full display as the Armitage family attempts to take over and use Chris’s body; virtually enslaving him. The most positive aspect of this movie is its atmosphere. The tensions are dialed up to 100, but Peele keeps you guessing. He maintains the 0-20 range with ease, and then, out of nowhere, it spikes! And when it does… man, your heart starts beating, and blood starts pumping. The plot is very odd, but it’s unique, and the movie operates as more of a thriller than actual horror. The score is very reminiscent of John Carpenter’s Halloween with the tense build-up and spike of music. The message received from this movie is the desire, specifically in earlier America, but possibly in modern-day, to possess the African American body. 

Jordan Peele’s second film, Us, was released in 2019 and praised as a great horror thriller. I tend to agree; while Get Out works on a psychological level, Us works on a more personable horror level. It’s far more bloody and violent as the Shadows (Clones) of every person finally break from their underground prison and take revenge on their counterparts above. The general theme of Us is that there are clones of every human trapped beneath the surface of the Earth, copying the movements and experiences of everyone above. When one of these “shadows” traps a human girl and switches places with her, living her life, the human leads the rest of the Shadows on a brutal killing spree across the globe. This “spree” is exactly what makes Us more terrifying. In Get Out, the Armitage family did not necessarily want to hurt Chris – he was a good product. They wanted to replace him and use him. The entire movie operated on a less scary and more thrilling premise. Us is scary because the good directly mirrors the bad and vice versa. Peele perfectly encapsulates the feeling of being hunted and trying to survive. Us boasts a stellar cast of all ages with a wonderful score/soundtrack and some good classic horror tropes. Peele’s intended message is a more complicated one involving a bit more thought. One of the first things that is explored is the class division between the richer and poorer and the classic “money doesn’t buy happiness” cliche. The second message is one of isolation and how the isolation of communities such as the rich and poor can contribute to an “us vs. them” mentality. Upon my first watch, I had trouble connecting the two, but upon my second viewing, I was able to navigate Peele’s careful insinuations. The Shadows refer to themselves as “tethered” to their above-ground clones, and only when they cut those tethers are they set free. This commentary seems to insinuate that society is often “tethered” to certain things that cause division among people who could just as easily be our friends but are rather portrayed as enemies. 

His third and most recent movie, Nope, was released in 2022 and follows the same lines of being another thriller type of horror film. It, again, released to much praise, and I even got the chance to see it in theaters. The best aspect about Nope is the unknown. Nope is more of a creature feature than anything else, and therein is where the commentary lies. The movie boasts a strong cast, with each member holding their own, as well as some net-level impressive cinematography and score. The sound design alone should have won this movie an Oscar, and though it was nominated, it did not win. When strange occurrences happen on Haywood ranch, OJ and Em look to the clouds to discover a large alien UFO hiding within. They quickly learn that the “saucer” is animalistic; it hunts at night, flying over the valleys and abducting horses from the ranch, and as the plot progresses, it becomes more and more active. The sound design on the saucer was where the technical aspects shined the brightest. The fading of the whooshing and screams from within the saucer were truly bone-chilling. At one point, a nearby amusement park attempts to set free a horse for the saucer to abduct for the viewing pleasure of an audience. It goes all wrong, however, when the saucer instead abducts all the viewers and kills them. From that point forward, the UFO rejects being “tamed” and treated as a spectacle and becomes more active and territorial. This scene is essential to understanding the core message or, more accurately, a keyword within the movie. Spectacle. Each facet of this movie revolves around animals in the entertainment industry. The Haywood ranch specializes in training horses, a brief subplot features a trained chimpanzee that went berserk on an old television show, and an attempt to control the UFO all act as a message to watchers about “spectacle.” We often do not think about the live animals used in films – trained animals to entertain and enthrall audiences. But Peele’s message is clear: wild animals are not to be domesticated. The movie-making industry is very exploitative and attempts to make the impossible possible, but Peele offers up a counter-question: “What happens when you try to domesticate nature?” Nature is not meant to be tamed or controlled and lashes out in multiple ways and forms throughout this film. Unsurprisingly, Nope is another magnificent commentary on the entertainment industry, with both old and new being applicable.

Jordan Peele is one of the newer faces in the movie-making industry and has already made an interesting and provocative name for himself. I eagerly look forward to his next projects hoping for deeper exploration and commentary on societal norms or stereotypes. Hopefully, I have given everyone reading a couple of movies to look into and enjoy themselves. 

Get Out- 9/10

Us- 10/10

Nope- 10/10

Categories
Columns

Barbenheimer Review

Kat Wojsiat ('24) and Caleb Tiedemann ('25)

Now, normally, movie reviews are Caleb’s thing. However, the Barbie review obviously had to be written by a woman, so here I am. The Barbie movie, directed by Greta Gerwig, took the world by storm this summer. I spent the summer interning in London, where there was a Barbie pink telephone booth on the bank of the Thames River for a week! I have never seen such astounding, impressive, and overpowering marketing as I have with this movie. It did wonders for the color pink. It brought a sense of community to all women in a way that was desperately needed after the division brought on by quarantine- and yes, I did get dressed up in pink to go watch it.

While in the movie, I was thoroughly entertained. I thought it was cute, hilarious, and very enjoyable. The set was highly impressive, the acting was great, and the plot was fascinating. However, the more I reflected on the movie, the more problems I found. The plot, however, had a few holes (how on earth did a grown woman dressed as a pink cowgirl just walk into a school?!), and I think that America Ferreira’s speech did not live up to its potential- that is just a personal opinion, though. But my biggest problem with this movie is actually quite controversial- I think it was rather anti-feminist. Hear me out! In Barbieland, men basically hold the position that women did just a few decades ago. The Kens aren’t even allowed to have houses to sleep in! After the Kens try to earn some equal treatment (and unfortunately take it too far), instead of trying to find some middle ground of equality, the Barbies’ response is just, “You are Kenough.” They aren’t even allowed to have representation in the Supreme Court! If the beg for equality between men and women had no further outcome than “you’re enough” in the real world, I wouldn’t even be allowed to write this review right now! (And yes, I understand that it took many attempts and centuries to get to where we are today, but keep in mind that Barbieland is meant to be a perfect world.) I think the movie had a chance to express feminism in a real and meaningful way to those not impacted by it, and it missed that opportunity. Other than these few shortcomings, I think the movie was a great experience and an excellent performance by all (especially Michael Cera as Allen!)

Barbie: 7/10

Oppenheimer is nothing short of a masterpiece. Christopher Nolan delivers in every possible way. This movie was my first ever IMAX experience, and WOW, what a picture! From start to finish, Nolan thrusts you into the harrowing stress of Oppenheimer’s mind. His obsessions, his passions, his regrets, his sadness, and all of his deepest emotions are on display for the audience to see. Cillian Murphy plays Robert J. Oppenheimer and gives an awe-inspiring performance. There is so much conveyed in his silence, his blank stares, and his remorseful mannerisms. Robert Downey Jr. plays Lewis Strauss, and also gives an excellent performance, rivaling Murphy’s quiet genius with vengeful jealousy. Nolan managed to make every single actor bare their heart and soul on this screen. Very few movies impact me the way that this did. The contrast of joy from the masses happy that the war ended against the realization of the evil that was created by the atom bomb. This contrast of morality and ethics is where the movie truly shines. 

Never before have I understood and related on an emotional level the catastrophe and horror of an atomic weapon. This movie has some of the best camerawork ever. The editing is stellar- the pasting together and switching perspectives on a dime encapsulates a feeling of stress and anxiety. Ludwig Goransson’s score permeates every single scene. It is loud and prominent, and it raises the tension and stakes to the max. The contrast of color and black and white gave a whole new layer to the film; it added to the political game and power plays that get used to achieve such devastating power. The juxtaposition of color and passion in such a project that would help win the war contrasted with the black-and-white harsh reality of its after effects drove certain elements home harder than Nolan had any right to. The mere fact that any government has these weapons at their ready and can start a war or annihilate millions in a matter of seconds is horrifying. This movie masters every single technical aspect in a way that I do not think I have ever seen before. I very strongly encourage everyone to see this film as it is a once-in-a-lifetime experience that will leave you thinking about the morality, the ethics, and the philosophy behind such a weapon. 

Oppenheimer: 10/10

Categories
Columns

Review- “A Voice in the Wind”

Julia Collins '26

Hello again, dear readers!

This semester, my idea was to read some of the books from the Houghton Library and review them! 

My first book that I’ll be reviewing is “A Voice in the Wind” by Francine Rivers. This book is an older one, but it has a good message and a bit of a historical background on the early Christians. 

“A Voice in the Wind” is the first of three books set in the decades following Jesus’ ministry, death, and resurrection. The story starts in Jerusalem, with a girl named Hadassah. Hadassah’s entire family have been killed by the persecution from the Romans, and Hadassah is expected to die as well. Yet, she survives, and is then sent to Rome to be a slave. 

In Rome, a slave named Enoch convinces his master, Decimus Valerian, to buy seven jewish slaves, including Hadassah. Decimus doesn’t want to do this, but his wife, Phoebe, has pity for Hadassah, knowing she will suffer more if they do not take her. So, Decimus and Phoebe decide that Hadassah will be the servant of their teenage daughter, Julia. 

Julia quickly realizes that she can trust Hadassah, who is kind and gentle to her. But Julia makes many bad decisions, and Hadassah has to suffer for Julia’s mistakes. While all of this is going on, Julia’s brother, Marcus, finds himself attracted to Hadassah. He sees that Hadassah is a good servant, and that she has something that everyone around him didn’t have- a faith in a loving God. Throughout the story, Marcus is torn between loving Hadassah, and loving the sinful culture of Rome. Hadassah, meanwhile, tries to teach the Valerian family about Jesus, and his love for them. At the end of the book, the reader will find out if she succeeds, or if the Valerian’s will reject her and her faith. ★