Free Write

Im intrigued by the invincibility of the children in the material we've covered. When we are young there is the constant risk of danger because of the vulnerability associated with such a young age. But maybe this vulnerability is just an example of how corrupt the adult world is in comparison. Children have something that makes them chosen in the material we've covered. Potentially a higher purpose because of the pure intentions of children. They have yet to experience the world as harshly, therefore have more potential to do good. And their situations don't greatly hinder their action to be find themselves better situations. Father figures in the material we've covered show the lack of significance that biology plays in the concept of home. What is home, it seems that it doesn't have to be a specific place. Structures mean nothing, they hold little value in fostering family relations. Suzy and Sam found "home" in each other and the structure (if we have to affiliate home with something tagible) is a tent. The tent couldn't withstand the flood say, but because they were together it didn't matter. Huck doesn't find home with the widower or his biological father. In fact, he flees from these authorities in his life and finds the raft and his freedom as home. He creates his own stability, in the instability of his escape. Though his life is chaotic (being on the run) he values his freedom.

Ebert Review: Moonrise Kingdom

I agree with Ebert that the movie has a timeless plot. Kids escaping situations in search of a world of their own. Hoping to find freedom from the adults who don't understand. The message will be clear for years to come. Ive found that Ebert has a way of capturing many of my thoughts cohesively, explaining thoughts id have trouble forming into words. I also find the statement "On this island no one seems to live except for those involved in the story" incredibly truthful. It seems like such a distant place, like a world that characters have no connection with the rest of the world. They are so distant from anything society knows, adults acting like children, children like adults. I also find that the colors, so bright and unnatural, establish an artificial sense, unrealistic. As unrealistic as it may be, you recognize that the children are serious and although this brings humor in the film it also conveys a message. The children's behavior though funny, and often outlandish, represents a search for free will.

Second Impression- Moonrise Kingdom

My initial feelings were clearly rooted in my confusion. Society tends to be uncomfortable with things that don't follow specific guidelines. But in the film, there is intent in every choice the director makes, and all the subtleties in the movie are meant to convey something. What seemed to me like random and unnecessary scenes, had allegorical implications that I would not have picked up on in my initial viewing, or at all in all honesty. I like how in all the shots throughout the film the camera follows the characters, and focuses in on them. They are always the focal point in each shot. It makes the audience more involved. In this movie the children flee, as outsiders in their day to day lives. They flee and go to a place that completely separates them from what they are, who controls them. It is beyond an escape, it is a place where they are no longer outsiders, no longer labeled as "unstable", or "troubled." There are no longer restrictions on their lives. This movie also defines home not as a structure but as an individual. Sam and Suzy are each other's home in a sense, as is Huck and Jim. They're most comfortable on the run, fleeing than in a stationary place. In all of the material we have covered in class, children are the protagonists for lack of a better word. The adults are made a mockery of, and the children assume roles that exceed their ages. Children are put on a pedestal. So what does that necessarily mean? That adults are corrupted? Maybe adults aren't meant to have authority at the level they do, because in all the material we've covered the adults aren't accountable Children see past the adults, and have an intuition about their motives. Suzy recognizes that her mother is having an affair, and John sees the preacher, not as his step father, but as someone who threatens the safety of him and his sister. Children are outsiders to the adult world but have a clear perception of it.

Huck Finn Quote

"We said there wasn't no home like a raft, after all. Other replaces do seem cramped up and smothery, but a raft don't. You feel mighty free and easy and comfortable on a raft." After Huck has spent time in numerous temporary living situations, it's incredible to hear him identify with the raft as his home. He had gone from living with the widower, to living with his father, to living along the river, to living in the wild for lack of a better term with Jim. He finds himself in the Grangerford's, where they live at a level above that which he is used to. "i lit out" is a constant phrase he uses throughout the book, and it seems that the raft is evidence that he accomplished this finally. He is constantly on the run, looking behind his shoulder and getting caught i the cross fire, quite literally when Miss Sophia goes to meet her father's enemies' son. But the freedom he finds on the raft with Jim, leaving that situation is what he has been looking for. I don't believe he was escaping a bad situation necessarily. I think it was more of him finding someone who he values as a person (Jim) and no longer being under someone's authority. Whether he meant smothered in the literal context, or figurative is at Twain's discretion. But I believe Huck felt smothered by the restrictions that the widower puts on him, that society tries to impress on him. He mentions having the river to themselves (him and Jim), I believe he just needed one person in his life to respect, and value and I think that's Jim.

Moonrise Kingdom

In all honesty I have never been as confused about a movie until watching Moonrise Kingdom. I truly look forward to discussing this movie in class. Through seeing this movie i have realized how narrowed my movie watching has been. The movie frustrated me, because I didn't understand the plot as thoroughly as most movies I've watched. I look forward to hearing your feedback. I see the connection between all the material we've covered, the children escaping unfavorable situations and acting with more maturity than the adults around them. The idea that, with no biological support, they only had the support of those they meet spontaneously. I really can't wrap my head around this movie, especially the end. I found it ironic, with all all of the discussion surrounding religion, that the movie ended with the scouts (amongst others) finding refuge in a church. The rebellious nature of the children match that of the children in the Night of the Hunter, and Huck's spirit when he fakes his own death and hides along the river. There is a parallel through all the media we've watched with the children, under the pressure to be found, rejecting authority or "supposed authority" in the form of the preacher and Huck's father, that the children are nearly caught but manage to escape quickly.

Ebert Review

The movie review focuses intently on the impression that certain scenes of the movie made, and how these scenes have been taken and used in other film productions because they were so powerful. Some of these include Willa's body in the car, in the river and the image of the preacher approaching the stairs to find the children. The movie has a haunting quality, where as everything is set up to make the audience feel uneasy about coming events. The suspense is successful, as are the characters according to Ebert. When you began to feel the children would be safe, instantly the children are again threatened by the preacher. I would have to agree that Mitchum creates a character both menacing and intriguing.It is a movie unique in it's plot, and characters according to Ebert. The movie doesnt receive the credit it deserves because the director wasn't distinguished. I don't agree that it was as humorous as Ebert proposes, there was definitely a dark side to the film that had a stronger impact on me. The main character, the preacher, had a manipulative quality to him and a deep seeded dark side that you see right from the beginning. The legacy of this character is clear in Ebert's description, and the powerfully distorted righthand/left hand message when we know that the preacher doesn't have good intentions. This may be me, but I couldn't figure out the hiding place of the money until the middle of the movie. I think that it was under the protection of the children and within arms reach throughout the movie was a clever twist. Additionally I like the significant age difference between the children. This doesn't just encompass years but also maturity. The young boy was able to see through an adult's manipulation while the younger girl always went back to her step father despite her brother's actions and the danger that accompanied him. Also, I think the woman who played Willa depicted successful a submissive woman, whose naivety led to her demise in the end. Overall I agree with Ebert's rating of the film, but not as passionately. I don't consider this movie "timeless," as certain themes in the movie still seem relevant today, i wouldn't go as far to say that the movie as a whole has as great an impact as Ebert implies.

Night of the Hunter - concluding response

Initially I was indifferent towards the film, I neither liked nor disliked the film. I have never analyzed a film so in-depth before. I guess this would make me question all movies I've seen. When we discussed in class, it was interesting the contrasts that we found that were so blatant in the first viewing that I hadn't noticed initially. Such as the difference between the use of religion by Powell and Cooper. Yes it's obvious that Powell is "bad" and Cooper is the representation of "good" but it goes beyond that. Powell uses religion to justify the killings, and rationalizes his behavior as an act of god. Cooper uses religion to process the events that are occurring. I focused primarily in my first blog on the children's vulnerability and although it's still an aspect of both Huck Finn and John's situations and the similarities between their situations, that is not the sole observation i should've taken from the film. I didn't focus on the religion that foreshadows events throughout the movie. Additionally I failed to see the contrast of the woman in the movie. You have Willa who is submissive to her new husband, and even as he kills her believes his actions result from God's will. Then you have Cooper who has no male attachment, yet takes care of a number of orphaned children. Then Ms. Spoon who believes that a woman is nothing without a husband, saying specifically that it takes both a man and a woman to raise a child. Woman play such differing roles in this film. During this time woman had the right to vote, established in the 1920's, but the social views had not significantly changed which evident in this film. I also didn't focus much attention on the importance of stories. The stories foreshadow, but also act as an emphasis on the importance of religion for these characters. The allegorical nature of stories makes us question our initial observations, especially in this film. Looking at the surface is not giving yourself the full experience of the movie because your not grasping the true message.

Huck Finn- Jim

Jim seems like a character that buck will begin to be dependent on. Although Huck shows great capability, in staging his own death and surviving in the wilderness to avoid being found out, he seems relieved when stumbling upon Jim in the woods. Jim is religious on another level, his superstitions dictate his behavior and affect the actions he takes in the book. From the beginning, after seeing Huck alive in the wake of his supposed "death," Jim initially believes Huck is a ghost sent to haunt him. He speaks about a great respect for the dead in the hopes that Huck's ghost won't kill him. Jim gets bitten by a snake and his solution to this is to cook part of it and eat it. It's also shown that different superstitions have differing levels of affect. For instance seeing a new moon over your left shoulder means less bad luck than handling snake skin. Huck, who I believe is superstitious himself, takes great interest in Jim's suspicions. Meanwhile he mocked the widower in her religious convictions. He referred to Old Hank Bunker as a fool for not following the superstitions.

The Night of the Hunter

I did enjoy the Night of the Hunter, and i found it had alot of similarities with Huck Finn. The burden, to care for his sister and keep secret the hiding place of the money, took a great toll on the poor boy. It reminded me of the situation Huck is in with his father after his inheritance. But I felt that the boy in Night of the Hunter had a maturity that Huck doesn't seem to have. Additionally, the boy was incredibly intuitive about the intentions of his step father from the very beginning which threw me for a surprise. Again we also see the situations these incredibly young children are in, forcing them to make decisions that should be beyond their years. It was said that "it's a hard world for little things," which in both cases is accurate. In the movie though, the young boy has support that Huck does not receive from a guardian, and you see the boy slowly open up to the older woman as he begins to trust her. The phrases "flew away" and "went a runnin" caught my attention because they lead us to think about escaping which in both cases the boys do. The boys are both alienated by family, the supposed biological support that you are born into. Also, a binary that i had noticed was the right hand left/hand or good/evil contrast said by the supposed preacher. He made associations with both that the boy found rightly suspicious. His manipulative quality reminded me of Huck's father, who is using the idea of "family" to keep his son meanwhile his only concern is the money. Huck's dad says that they have no right to take away his flesh and blood but biological family doesn't mean he is an appropriate guardian by any means. And it just shows that some connections, those you are born into, could be the most harmful especially in Huck's case.

Huckleberry Finn

I have heard a great deal about this book but never took the chance to read it previously. It starts by Huck describing how trapped he feels in his current situation, he is staying with a woman who he depicts as conservative and "dismal." His mother is deceased, and his father is a drunk, so he has limited support besides the widower and judge who act as pseudo guardians. Him and his friend Tom Sawyer, who has an expansive imagination, spend time in a fantasy world of sorts. Im curious as to how old they are. I found it interesting that it seems Huck is highly superstitious but doesn't seem to value religion (what I gathered from his interactions with the widower). Personally, I wasn't incredibly impressed by the very beginning of the book, but it became more engaging as I read farther. When Huck is "kidnapped" by his father, brought to the cabin I felt it displayed two extremes. He went from a clean home, strict and proper, to living off of the land with his abusive father. I was slightly confused about his father's persistence to keep his son, but when I realized the amount of money Huck had it made sense. Huck seems stuck for lack of a better word and skeptical about those around him with the exception of Tom Sawyer. Sawyer often embellishes the truth, and Huck seems to idolize him. When reading I found my thoughts very scattered maybe due to his narration. I'm not sure how I feel about the book yet, it is definitely different than my expectations. Huck is a character you empathize with, and I found that he yearns for a sense of freedom from the mundane day to day staying with Widow Douglas.