In a Valiant Effort to Understand

Another one of my favorite obsessions is horror movies - not necessarily watching them, but reading the "spoilers" and descriptions on the Internet. I can't really handle seeing graphic violence on screen, but reading about it is okay (I coincidentally read an article in my mom's old Women's World magazine today about how that works) - example: A Clockwork Orange was wonderful, but don't expect me to see the movie anytime soon. But I do have a kind of intrigue for the stories in slasher films - I think it started with stumbling upon a Wikipedia article depicting all of the different traps from the Saw movies. Mind you, I've only ever actually watched the first movie as the edited version that runs on cable. But I remember thinking how ingenious the traps were; most of them even had a simple way out, if only the victims had calmed down or thought ahead. Even the drive of Jigsaw was clever to me - he threatened people (in, albeit, extreme ways) to show them the worth of their lives. But maybe people just need to be shocked in order to be changed sometimes.

Which brings me to my point: I have nothing but awe and respect for filmmakers that utilize influence over human sensitivity in order to make a point - appealing to their "pathos", if you will (fun fact: "pathos" is Greek for "suffering" or "experience"). And I have even more reverence for the director or writer who can create a story that is equally powerful, but in actuality has left most of the shock to be imagined by the viewer. Another fun fact: the first Texas Chainsaw Massacre movie from the 70s was made with limited sex, violence, and language in hopes of getting a PG rating from the MPAA so that more people would go see it.

Naturally, it's the films that have equal shock value but little gore that I look out for. But in light of today's techonology and desensitivity, mainstream movies like that are rare, and the ones that are given a chance, like Paranormal Activity, are acclaimed (I still can't get over the fact that they made the movie with a budget of like $15,000, and grossed almost $200,000,000). The effect of being exposed to so much violence on people in society is something that has been studied and wondered about for as long as horror movies have been aroud. I came across a list of the "Top Ten Most Controversial Horror Films" in Bloody-Disgusting.com's article, "Culture Shock: The Influence of History on Horror". I found it interesting that the majority of the films on that list weren't the slice-and-dice "horror porn" movies that are popular now, but movies - some of which I hadn't heard of - from the 70s and 80s. Odd, considering what modern movie-making can do today (but, of course, pretty much all ten movies have either already been remade, or is in the process of being redone).

The movie that earned the number one spot was Cannibal Holocaust (1980). It's about an anthropology professor who goes into the Amazon to look for a missing documentary crew. He gets hold of the film that they made before they dissappeared, and goes back to NYU to try to salvage the documentary, only to find that the film reveals what happened to the crew and what they did - basically, it's a "found footage" movie, like Cloverfield, where part of the movie is filmed in a "home video" format for a more realistic feel. But Cannibal Holocaust was so genuinely messed up that the director, Ruggero Deodato, was arrested because viewers truly believed that the footage was real - and that people were really murdered (of course, it didn't help that the actors signed a contract saying they wouldn't appear in other movies for a year to mess with the public, making it look like they were dead). Oh, and they really killed animals! Like, they actually took animals and violently killed them, as opposed to using special effects. Deodato was eventually cleared of the charges after demonstrating to a courtroom how one of the violent scenes was staged. He, as well as the screenwriter, producers, and film studio, was convicted of obscenity and violence. They each received a four-month suspended sentence.

Anyway, other than just being incredibly offensive, the idea of Cannibal Holocaust was the classic Pocahontas moral - that people who are considered "civilized" can be more depraved than indigenous "savages" (and look, Disney proved it with a G-rating and no lawsuits). But the bottom line is that the movie meant something. As did the other controversial movies on the list. I noticed after a while that, while reading the movie synopses, I had the habit of looking for some kind of meaning - some justification, if you will, for all of the violence and controversy. I was judging them by weighing the moral with the content. Most passed, but then I got to thinking about the "horror porn" we have now - Hostel, for example. I don't know about you, but I can remember to not follow strangers without being traumatized, thank you. Then I realized - not all movies have a "hidden meaning" or justification. They're violent for the sake of being violent. It's like people have lost the respect for movie-making, and are taking advantage of society's love for violence in order to make money. But why, for goodness sake, is violence so seductive?

You're Not That Bright Now...But You Will Be, Someday Soon

I think I should start a running tally of all the things that make me genuinely happy no matter what:

1) Disney movies. For a variety of reasons (some of which are more cynical than light-hearted. But we'll have this talk some other time). SIDE NOTE: The Princess and the Frog was the very best thing ever. And I mean that. No cynicism involved.

2) Weddings. I'm not even kidding.

In all honesty, the past ten months or so have been pretty rough. Maybe even a little bit before that. It's just been a nonstop stress-filled trip, basically. Almost like the future decided to rush me to see if I could take it.

Like I said before, going away to college has always been part of the grand plan - and it's always felt like if the plan didn't work out, it must mean that I failed at something, somewhere along the way. Well, four or five rejection letters in a row are staring that plan down at this moment. Anyway, let's just say this past week or so hasn't been the greatest.

However, today, we received the highly anticipated wedding invitation from Sharon, the second oldest daughter of our longtime family friend. I read every word, and broke into an uncontrollable smile (yes, I do realize this makes me unreasonably sentimental).

Later, I realized: That invitation meant more to me than any college acceptance letter could have. Because it means something more than getting into a designer label school, or appeasing my parents - or meeting someone else's requirements for happiness.

I think William Faulkner had it all figured out.


In other college news, (which is mainly why I started this blog - to talk about college stuff):
My financial aid offer came in from Tulane today (about an hour before we got Sharon's wedding invitation, actually). Basically, they'll give me about $39,100 total. $8,500 in loans from the school, $3,000 in exchange for me taking a part-time job there, $20,000 as my original scholarship offer upon acceptance, and an extra $7,600 thrown in as a gift for good measure. In the end, my family would have to come up with about $15,000 a year, not including paying back the loans (you can do the math).

Basically, college doesn't come cheap. Although my dad so eloquently described it yesterday, "All the scholarships and discounts and numbers - it's not real money". Which makes sense when you think about it.
Sadly, however, the less fake money you're offered, the more real money you've got to hand over.