The Death Penalty

       I agree with the death penalty but as long as the punishment fits the crime. It is up to the jury to decide that. Most likely if a prisoner is being sentenced to death the crime was something bad for instance aggravated murder. Since that is usually the case then the debate is whether or not it is better to keep the murderer in jail or give him the death penalty. If we kept people in jail who deserved the death penalty but don’t get it we end up paying taxes to feed them and pay for the jail. The less taxes the better especially because of the current economy. Another argument is that who are we to decide when someone dies but that argument is a double-edged blade. Why does the person who murdered someone else be allowed to take that life without cause but the supreme court cannot. In my opinion it is only fair that we use the death penalty for extreme cases as long as we are cautious on how much it is given out and make sure that the suspect is absolutely, no question guilty. I believe that no one should be able to play god with someone else’s life so if the sentence is given it must be for extreme cases only.

12 Angry Men

                Each juror in the film is under a ton of pressure with several different causes to that pressure. For example in the beginning of the film when the jurors first decide on guilty or not guilty juror number 8, played by Henry Fonda, is under a lot of pressure by the rest of the jury because he is the only one who voted not guilty in a case where the evidence was stacked against him. Another example is juror number 1 who is played by Martin Balsam. His character is in charge of keeping the jury in order and running the entire ordeal. He is under constant pressure to try to keep the room full of 12 angry men inline, focused and altogether efficient which means making sure they keep their cool.  

                Many of the jurors are effected by their past and this impacts their views and ultimately their verdict in the case. For example juror number 3, played by Lee J. Cobb, had a troubled past with his son. He taught his son how to fight after watching him run from a fight. Soon after they had an argument and that was the last time he saw his son. This incident is what final gets him to breakdown and change his vote in the end of the film. Another character affected by their past is Ed Begley who plays juror number 10. This character is very racist and obviously has something against Latinos and this is shown in his outbreaks and shocking comments about the boy.

                I disagree with the statement: “it is better for nine guilty people to go free than one innocent person to go to prison.” If someone who has committed a murder is not found guilty then there is a good chance they will do it again. Prisons are meant to set their inmates straight and to keep them out of the public until they are ready to reintegrate.  If 9 men are found not guilty of murder and allowed back on the streets then that  9 murders who feel almost untouchable even by the government because they were set free. Let’s take the boy for example. If he did kill his father he already has a troubled past and several other minor offenses so he would not learn anything by simply appearing in court and then being set free. There is a very high chance he will strike again. 

360 dunkin'....

                Sals from Do the Right Thing and the Chief from In the Heat of the Night have somewhat similar racial views yet they do differ. Both Sal and the Chief get along with African Americans better than most other whites around them. For example Sal’s son hates being around African Americans but Sal himself do not mind. The Chief is in a similar situation where he himself does not mind black people but the deputies around him are racist towards them. The two are different because in the end of each movie they are on different sides. Chief in the end respects Virgil where in the end of Do the Right Thing Sal becomes begins to dislike them. Mookie fights racism in Do the Right Thing by fighting back with violence where Virgil fights back by being hardworking and making an example of himself showing that blacks can do anything just as well if not better than whites.

                There were multiple acts of racism in Do the Right Thing. There were multiple racial slurs thrown around including the scene where the entire scene was racist stereotypes and insults. Both of these films were accurate in there depiction of racism because in 1989 they where countless riots like the one that occurred in the movie and in 1967 there were successful African Americans and there were white people trying to kill them.

                A major question that comes up when watching the movie Do the Right Thing is if Mookie did the right thing. The answer depends a lot on your race. As an all white class most people thought that Mookie did not do the right thing. The main consensus was that he did not solve anything by doing what he did. My opinion was that it depends who is viewing the movie. Me as a white kid who say no he didn’t do the right thing by harming other white people. But if I were black I feel that my opinion would be opposite and I would say that he did do the right thing by standing up for his race and fighting racism and intolerance. When asked if Mookie did the right thing Spike Lee had this to say “No person of color has ever asked me that.” Lee is saying African Americans know the answer. Yes he did.

                

Questions for Gasland and CI

Gasland


1) We you at any point afraid that someone would stop you from making this documentary because you were getting to involved?


2) Were there more people interested in talking to you or afraid of talking to you?


3) What role do you think your documentary will play in the passing of the Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act?


4) What restrictions if any were you given by your executive producers in terms of what you could investigate and how deep?


5) Did you have the chance to interview any CEO's or executives of any major gas companies?


Crude Independence 


1) Why did you choose to start the documentary with a talk about aliens?


2) What is your opinion on what is happening in North Dakota?


3) Where are you from?


4) If your film could clearly convey one message about the drilling what would that message be?


5) Why did you choose to show the parade?


This is the link to my source that I forgot to put into my last post:
http://www.opensecrets.org/

Political Action Groups Corrupt Government

The oil and natural gas lobby influence state and federal legislation by forming Political Action Committees or PACs. These PACs contribute funding and donations to certain candidates in order to gain power in the government. Companies like Chevron and Exxon Mobil, which ranked 73^rd and 74^th biggest donors respectively, have a lot to gain from paying for candidates campaigns. If elected that candidate would remember what and more importantly who got them to their current seat. They would vote in order to further help the companies which helped them.

For instance in the documentary Gasland major companies were able to influence the government so that their process called hydraulic fracturing would be exempt from laws like the Safe Drinking Water Act, Clean Water Act and other important acts that protect our water and air ultimately keeping us safe. Because hydraulic fracturing was exempt from such acts, water in places like Colorado, Texas, Utah and Wyoming is contaminated with natural gas as well as several of the 257 chemicals that are in the hydraulic fracturing liquid. As shown in Gasland reports ranging from animals hair falling out to actually being able to light water on fire straight from the tap.

                These companies are able to corrupt our government in ways we cannot imagine and until a law is passed where these companies cannot provide funding for candidates we will not be able to escape this corruption. Getting this law passed would be nearly impossible because more than 50% of the people voting on it are the ones who are corrupt.

Fable is more historical than fact, because fact tells us about one man and fable tells us about a million men.

Movies do far more good than harm when it comes to our understanding of history when you take into account that they are products that are usually stretched in order to add value to the finished products. The viewer must take into account that it is a movie and movies are designed to entertain but more importantly make money which does mean stretching the truth in order to create drama and excitement. After this is taken into account the viewer is able to get a somewhat accurate depiction of the past because films do incorporate true facts, where else would they get the story? Great examples of this are the films In the Heat of the Night and Birth of a Nation. Both of these films are based on true stories but are tweaked here and there to create excitement and a pleasurable viewing experience for the public.

                These films can be used as a primary source as long as a warning is given that it is a film and films do stretch facts, followed by an accurate explanation of the situation shown in the film and if possible inform the reader of the true facts compared to the movies stretched version.  Otherwise the reader may take the instance from the movie literally and either miss the point or believe a false truth shown in the movie.  

                When movies say in the opening credits, “Based on a true story” viewers tend to believe since the movie was based on actual events that all of the events in the movie must have also happened. This is a key mistake and can do harm to our understanding of history when not taken into account. Therefore viewers must be careful when seeing things like this that they acknowledge that not everything the viewer will see is true. On the opposite side when a viewer does not see this statement in the beginning of a movie they tend to not believe any of the events even if they did happen.

                Movies add to historical inaccurateness in a couple of ways but there is one major way. When an audience sits down in a theatre most do no attempt to separate true facts from wrong. They solely want to be entertained which is the main purpose of a movie.  This causes that audience to tell people about the events in the movie and in turn those false happenings become fact and common misconceptions. For example the movie Troy is based off the Iliad. Despite historians having little to no evidence on the happenings of the Iliad this example is still effective in that the movie is very similar to the epic however there are slight differences. These differences were apparent in my English class where we are reading sections from the Iliad and they were key differences between the two that cause many errors in class. This is the same in movies and real life in that people talk about the movies they saw which in turn becomes the new truth due to massive popularity of the movie. This can all be prevented if the viewer knows that not everything they see is factual.

                Films add another dimension to history, a dimension that textbooks can’t come close to touching.  Movies are able to create feelings and display ideas that are not possible to portray in textbooks. For example textbooks talk about the civil rights era and go into in depth analysis and provide graphs and statistics but hearing an African American living in the Ghetto talk about his/her experiences is worth much more than a statistic in a book. It touches people and motivates them to act more than textbooks can. Textbooks educate where movies inform and motivate.

                

Civil Wrongs (In font you can read)

The case of James Chaney, Michael Schwerner and Andrew Goodman is a famous case due to the massive scale of the investigation. This investigation stirred up a lot of hatred that was not widely seen throughout the country. Most northerners had never seen or heard of the hate filled acts that were committed almost every day in a small town of Mississippi. The three boys who were all Civil Rights activists were murdered by Klansman from the Ku-Klux-Klan. Chaney was a black boy and the other two were white which is where a lot of the controversy comes from, would the investigation had even happened had it been three black boys instead of one and two white kids.

The movie Mississippi Burning is a great film in its interpretation of the investigation of the case. The movie represents the case in an accurate way by showing the massive investigation as well as the feelings of many of the townsfolk during that time. It inaccurately represented the case by putting in several theatrical elements to create drama so that the movie was actually watchable. The movie also does not include the mafia involvement in the case. According to Linda Schiro her boyfriend who was involved in the mafia was given a gun and promise of cash in return for assistance. That member was able to find the whereabouts of the bodies by putting a gun in the mouth of a know Klansman and asking where the bodies were. (Reference)

Overall the film adds to our understanding of the Civil Rights. Before this movie I had no idea about this case however I did know of several similar case that caused a lot of the same commotion but this film is definitely a must in order to further one’s understanding of the Civil Rights time period.

Emit Till vs. Mississippi Burning

There have been many cases similar to that of the one portrayed in Mississippi Burning. One such example is the case of Emit Till. Emit was a fourteen year old black boy who was caught whistling at a white women in Mississippi. Emit was from Chicago, Illinois so he was not used to the violence of the south. Till was brutally murdered three days after the incident. His body was found three days after his murder in the Tallahatchie River. Till’s mother asked for an open casket so the world could see the brutality of his murder and maybe spark a change in the way things are done down south.

                This case is similar to Mississippi Burning because the victims of both cases were young boys. The boys were all innocent of any crime and were murdered because of simple things like supporting a civil rights movement to whistling at a white woman. These case are very different in several ways as well. One difference is that in the case portrayed in Mississippi Burning there were two white boys who were also murdered along with an African American boy. Some believe that this is why there was a massive investigation which leads to the next difference. The size of the investigation was much larger than that of Emit Till’s which was still quite large. Much of Till’s famousness comes from the thousands of people watching on the news that a black boy from the north was murdered in the south.

                This incident tells us a lot about the general feelings during the Civil Right Era. It shows the two very different opinions. The southern opinion was that African Americans are dirty, stupid and overall inferior to whites which meant segregation. The general northern opinion was just the opposite, African Americans are and should be equal under the constitution thus making segregation unconstitutional. 

Civil Wrongs

The case of James Chaney, Michael Schwerner and Andrew Goodman is a famous case due to the massive scale of the investigation. This investigation stirred up a lot of hatred that was not widely seen throughout the country. Most northerners had never seen or heard of the hate filled acts that were committed almost every day in a small town of Mississippi. The three boys who were all Civil Rights activists were murdered by Klansman from the Ku-Klux-Klan. Chaney was a black boy and the other two were white which is where a lot of the controversy comes from, would the investigation had even happened had it been three black boys instead of one and two white kids.

The movie Mississippi Burning is a great film in its interpretation of the investigation of the case. The movie represents the case in an accurate way by showing the massive investigation as well as the feelings of many of the townsfolk during that time. It inaccurately represented the case by putting in several theatrical elements to create drama so that the movie was actually watchable. The movie also does not include the mafia involvement in the case. According to Linda Schiro her boyfriend who was involved in the mafia was given a gun and promise of cash in return for assistance. That member was able to find the whereabouts of the bodies by putting a gun in the mouth of a know Klansman and asking where the bodies were. (Reference)

Overall the film adds to our understanding of the Civil Rights. Before this movie I had no idea about this case however I did know of several similar case that caused a lot of the same commotion but this film is definitely a must in order to further one’s understanding of the Civil Rights time period.

Dances With Geronimo

Geronimo or “the one who yawns” was a very famous Apache chief. He is famous for fighting against the westward expansion of the United States Army. He was born in what is now New Mexico into a family with four sisters and three brothers. He was married at the age of seventeen and he had three children. On March 6, 1858 while Geronimo and the rest of the men were in the town trading a group of four hundred Mexican soldiers attacked his town and among the dead where his wife, his mother and his children. He was given the name Geronimo by the Mexicans during a battle where he charged the Mexican soldiers with only a knife, ignoring the bullets being fired at him.

            Geronimo always thought of himself as more of a military leader than a chief. If there is one similar character in the movie Dances With Wolves I think it would be Wind in his Hair. Wind in his Hair is quick to jump to violence and intimidation which is similar to the philosophy of Geronimo who was always militarily inclined. In the movie Wind in his Hair says “We will shoot some arrows into the white man. If he truly has medicine, he will not be hurt. If he has no medicine, he will be dead.” This is a great example of Wind in his Hair jumping to violence and war before diplomacy. 

     These were my tasks: "You will complete three tasks: two brief questionnaires and an IAT in which you will sort words and pictures into categories as quickly as possible. You should be able to complete the tasks in less than 10 minutes total. When you finish, you will receive your results as well as more information about the test and the performance of others."
     This was my result: "Your data suggest a slight automatic preference for European American compared to African American." I somewhat disagree with this assessment of me personally but I think it is an accurate representation of my surroundings. I hold African Americans and European Americans at an equal level but maybe subconsciously I do not.
     I do not understand how the test makes it decision although the results were pretty accurate. Since I don't understand how this test works I am not able to fully answer the question because I am not sure how the test generates its results. Most of the mistakes I made was because I was trying to stay fast which in turn led to mistakes in my hand-brain coordination. 
     I do not believe that our true feelings are shown at a blink of an eye although some of the subconscious feelings are. If put in a situation that you must react quickly most of the time the result is subconscious and instinctual. However if given time to answer or react your thoughts are usually clearer and often but not always our true feelings. This is true for me but as for the rest of humankind I am unsure on how they would react if given time and allowed deep thought.    

Slave Narrative Analysis

    Walter Calloway was born in this country and as a young kid was sold to a plantation owner by the name of "Marse John Calloway at Snodoun in Montgomery County, ten miles south of de town of Montgomery." Marse bought both Walter and his mother. Walter recalls that Marse "treated us purty good, but we hab to wuk hard." By the time Walter was 10 he was already performing the duties of full grown men. One of the strongest memories Walter has of his time on the plantation was the time that a girl no more than 13 years old was whipped nearly to death. Walter was set free soon after some soldiers ransacked the plantation, took everything and burned the rest. Even though he was told that he was "free" he still had to work on another plantation and work even harder.

     American slavery is unique in that slaves were treated on average much worse than slaves from other countries. Walter Calloway remembers a black slave who was in charge of the whippings, "whupped a nigger gal 'bout thirteen years old so hard she nearly die, an' allus atterwa'ds she hab spells of fits or somp'n." This did not happen all to often in other countries but in America things like this were not uncommon. 

     Another unique attribute of American slavery that does not apply to most other cases around the world is the time period that this took place. All most every country had seen that slavery was bad and ended it with zero questions or bloodshed. That is the scariest part of American slavery, southern plantation owners did not see anything wrong with their black "property" was treated. They had no problem whipping a little girl almost to death. 

     Accounts like Walter's show us first hand accounts that textbooks and teachers cannot tell us. They give us the story from the people it happened to. This fact really allows the reader to get the closest possible feeling of what the black people went through for years. Textbooks cannot do this and teachers also cannot come near to this effect. The only other effective way to make this connection is showing these stories through film.    

Slave Narrative

http://xroads.virginia.edu/~hyper/wpa/callowa1.html

Walter Calloway was born in Richmond, Virginia, in 1848. Calloway and his mother and brother were purchased by John Calloway, who owned a plantation ten miles south of Montgomery, Alabama. By the time he was ten years old, Walter Calloway was doing a grown man's work. The white overseer used a black hand to administer the whippings; Calloway recalls seeing one thirteen-year-old girl whipped almost to death. Calloway also tells of worshipping in a brush arbor, the outbreak of the Civil War, and federal troops ransacking the plantation at war's end. He is pictured sitting on the front steps of his home in Birmingham, Alabama, where he worked for the city street department for twenty-five years.

Native American Terms and Sports Teams

                No, teams like the Kansas City Chiefs and the Atlanta Braves should not have to change their name because of the roots they have in Native American history. Many people argue that because of the way the Native Americans were treated in the past we should not be allowed to use names that make references to them as a people for things like sports teams. I disagree with this because despite what was done in the past they are simply names for teams. If anything I think it is good that teams pick these names because sports are Americas past time and people worship many of these teams and the players that play for them so in a way it is almost an honor to have you name used for something that everyone in America loves and watches.  While doing research I found this quote which I found explained my point quite well:

“Go out on the street and ask people, "What do you think of the Redskins?". If they give you an answer about a football team, then the name represents a football team. If they give you an answer about Native Americans, then the answer represents them. The football team took a derogatory and turned it into an honorable name.”

Yes, some names that were used for these teams are derogatory but many of these teams like the Redskins have turned these terms into less derogatory terms and made them honorable like the quotes says.

What makes a film great?

There have been many great movies over the years but there is a question that has yet to be answered. That question is what makes a movie great? I am sure that the Hollywood producers and actors already have a good idea on what makes the movies the release good and what makes them bad. The public however, besides the reporters and critics, have either not stumbled upon the answer or have not put any thought into much like myself. I have never left a movie theater after a good movie and asked myself, “Why was that movie so good? What about that movie made me want to watch it?” Was it the actors, the special effects, the plot or was it something else. Well now I have been forced to sit down and actually think about all the great movies I have seen and the ones that I have heard about and find an answer to this question.

                After some long and tough pondering I have come up with a couple of things that I believe make the difference between a great movie and a bad one. First off when I think great movies I think special effects. When I leave a theater and talk about the movie with my friends the following day the scenes that first pop into my head are the ones with the huge explosions, scary monsters and amazing light shows. This is a result of my generation. I was lucky enough to be born into the era of technology where every explosion is bigger than the last and each day graphics and special effects somehow improves upon itself.  Movies didn’t always have special effects like this so that is why movies like Star Wars were and still are so successful; they were at one point top of the line special effects which drew in crowds and are remembered for their special effects for their time.

                It is true that special effects play a big role but there have been many great movies with either poor special effects or none at all. For example, Jaws. This movie almost didn’t happen because they could not get there mechanical shark to work properly. The special effects in this movie were borderline terrible but somehow this move is still one of the greatest thrillers of all time. The main reason for this is the cinematography. Because the shark was not working the editor of Jaws had to edit scenes so that you only saw flashes of a fin or teeth. This actually improved the movie by increase the suspense and the scariness of the film. I cannot imagine this movie without the superb editing.

                Lastly the originality of movies makes them great. Star Wars and Jaws are truly great movies but the plot at its heart is relatively simple and predictable. However the movie series The Godfather is truly the first mob film of its kind. Every mob movie since The Godfather is strikingly similar. This originality makes this movie great. This is why movies like The Godfather and others with the same originality that I cannot think of off the top of my head are so great.

                My word count is now well over 500 so to save Mr. Jewett some time I will now cut my blog short. Those are my three main thoughts on why some movies are just good and why some are fantastic.

Star Wars Review

Star Wars Review

                Star Wars is a great movie for several reasons. The first is that for its time the special effects were amazing especially with the budget that George Lucas had to work with. The explosions, sound effects and models were amazing and that is a huge part of why Star Wars was successful when it came out. Effects like that had never been seen before.

                Another reason why Star Wars was so successful and is still a major hit is because of the originality of the movie. It is true that it is a movie where the hero wins in the end but the level on which the plot took place and the in depth story line provided not only from the movie but also the books makes it much deeper than just another hero persevering in the end. Star Wars’ ability to capture the audience and make them feel like part of the saga is, in my opinion, like no other movie. Star Wars has been able to withstand the test of time and is still a American household classic with the help of mass merchandising and multiple books as well as sequels and prequels to the movie.