noelleuytuazon Reviews

The Young and the Damned (1950)

Nature vs. Nurture

[7/10 · 13 June 2011]

This movie made me really despise the character of Jaibo. It's so unbelievably frustrating how many times evil prevails in a certain movie. I recall our professor telling us how the director was perceived negatively by Mexico for creating this film, but I don't believe it depicted the Mexican culture in a negative connotation whatsoever. If anything this film truly appeals to family values, love and the outcome of children based on their upbringings.

The message to me was more on the lines of psychology's biggest debate on: nature vs. nurture. This film just confirms my stance that children turn out the way they are due to nurture. Human beings are not born evil or unsuccessful, they are a result of their environment and experiences throughout life. Honestly life is a never ending learning process and this movie just justifies that in order to be successful we must make choices and decisions. No one is perfect therefore we must attempt or at least strive to do good both at home and school/work.

In this film, we see that Pedro is a result of his environment at home in particular because his mother's lack of love for him. However, the struggles and predicaments he comes across are always a choice and in the end his outcome is his own doing. The lesson in this film is that no one is to blame for your situation because in life you always are given a choice. It saddens me that the protagonist Pedro lacked motivation to stand by his belief which led to his demise. He could have chosen to eliminate hanging out with Jaibo but he doesn't.

Also another issue that I found strongly piercing in this film was that of ethical responsibility in terms concealing lies. When Jaibo kills Julian, both Jaibo and Pedro decide to bury the truth. The constant lying catches up in the end. What happens is one lie leads to another lie until you are faced with a tangle of lies that you just can't undo the situation any longer. As a result the lies back fire and catches up to you. In this film, the lie caught up with Pedro and ate him literally alive which resulted to his death.

This film is meant for a serious audience because in order for a person to understand the film, one must really ponder at the back of his head regarding behavior, psychology and mental stability. Even though I did not enjoy this movie as much as other films, I still think it's worth watching it. It gives the audience an insight on ethical responsibility.

I would honestly say this film was not very enjoyable to me at a personal level. I found it rather difficult to watch for certain reasons. It was very disappointing because the protagonist just kept on being bombarded by tragedies. Pedro was overshadowed by Jaibo's constant bullying. I found myself unable to completely connect with the film. I thought the themes were fantastic regarding poverty, motherly/family love and ethical responsibility.

Once Were Warriors (1994)

Humanistic approach/self-actualization

[8/10 · 13 June 2011]

The idea death and the universal fear of losing one's life was greatly seen in this movie. I think as humans adapt to the changing world, people tend to form this unconscious fear of death itself. However this movie clearly exemplified how death is not the end. A tragedy more often than not is the only wake up call that can start changes. Sadly something extreme is the only thing that can arouse people's realization of their wrong doings. This film is very effective emotionally and socially. People should bear in mind that even though the modern world introduces us to more civilized and advanced things; we must not forget to remember where we came from more importantly ---culture.

This film further touches the outcome of colonialism and also globalization/westernization. I found it refreshing to watch a movie regarding an indigenous culture of the Maoris. I thought that there was this element of cognitive dissonance in relation to Beth played by Rene Owen. To me she kept on coming up with reasons to justify the domestic physical and emotional abuse her husband (Morrison) does to her. At certain scenes I would cringe because of the violent actions Morrison illustrates. It really saddens me how a man can just hit a person whom he loves at point blank as if that person was not a human being at all. Beth would just take the beating as if she deserved it. On top of that it so ridiculous how she can still face her husband knowing that he is capable of killing her.

This movie depicts so much domestic abuse and as an audience I truly empathized with the children. I could only imagine going through such circumstance of having such a dysfunctional household and coping with adolescence. I strongly believe that if you don't think you can provide your children with an ideal life in terms of emotional caress and love then you should not have brought them into this world. You don't have to be financially rich or stable to be good parents. All that children need is affection, love and emotion. This film also covered a strong sense of cultural identity for the Maoris. The visceral language of the Maoris sounded beautiful to my ears. I admire how much Beth was able to retain such strong sense of identity.

Overall I would say this struck me mostly in terms of reaching one's full potential or in humanistic psychological approach to "self-actualize". I think that this movie serves as a great reminder for the youth that no matter how tragic one's life is, one is still capable of reaching peace and success. It all lies in one's inner strength meaning mentally and emotionally. If you put your mind into channeling out positive actions then you can truly accomplish and endure anything even a tragic loss of a loved one just like how Beth loss her daughter Grace. I also think that this movie conquers a whole lot with making sacrifices and consideration for others.

This movie I must say really had such kick. The cinematic violence in accordance with actors' performance was stupendously admirable. I thought the violence used was effective in bringing out the message on domestic violence as well as possessing a strong cultural identity.

The Battle of Algiers (1966)

"Survival of the fittest" -- the driving force of terrorism

[10/10 · 13 June 2011]

It is so critical to be the leader irregardless of which side you are on. I felt as if both the French in particular Col. Mathieu and the FLN leaders, the Algerians were forced to engage in evil in order to create some form of good that is deeply rooted with freedom as well as cultural identity. Behind the uprising for the Algerians lies nationalism and behind the French lies the ideals of colonialism.

Overall the movie was truly brilliant and well thought out. This is one of my favorite movies of all time in cinema. It really opened my eyes to the art of film making. The ability, creative force and dedication that is required in order to produce a real work of art was clearly behind this particular film. I admire this film mostly because the footage looked very realistic as if they were the "real deal", having known that all the shots were recreated and not archival just impressed me moreover. Also I am so astounded and fascinated by the ideology and issue of war as depicted in this film. I even ended up writing my research paper in English class regarding terrorism mainly inspired after watching this film.

It makes me wonder what truly drives terrorism and war itself. Out of all the movies I've seen in my college film class, this one is the only one that truly struck me the most. When one watches this film, one can't help but think about the ethics of war and people's ethical responsibility when one is faced to deal with it. At certain scenes such as when Algerian women would drop the bombs in public places that were surrounded with a great deal of civilians, I can't help but feel that helplessness for the civilians. Then again when I see scenes like the French blatantly disrespecting Algerian culture such as the scene when an Algerian couple had to marry in a rush in secrecy because they are not allowed to get married in their native tongue, I can't help but also sympathize as to why they are trying to revolt against the French.

One of the reasons why this film is so moving is because it is not biased. As a viewer, you get to see both sides of the coin. Many would most probably side with one side, but I could not. I really believe that this film is something future generations can refer to in terms of critically analyzing the roots of war and terrorism. Obviously terrorist acts like 9/11 should not be condoned but we must try to at least understand it at a deeper level. This film has so many implied lessons that we can learn from. From tactical lessons of acquiring success like empathizing with the enemy or perhaps proportionality in terms of the outcome of people's actions.

At the end though I just can't help but trace myself back to human nature and Chrales Darwin's theory of evolution: "Survival of the fittest". I think that partly the reasons for war lies in human nature's biological component of trying to adapt with change also it's human nature to feel such strong emotions that more often than not result to disputes or disagreements. It is not a question why this film should be watched. It MUST be seen that's the bottom line.

The Other Conquest (1998)

"what may seem common to you, may not be common to others"

[10/10 · 13 June 2011]

This movie was very moving. It was so efficient in bringing out history without creating boredom to the audience. I think this film covered the idea of Euro-centrism, hatred and this film can even be used to examine America's history on race relations as well as modern day race relations. Different groups have difference in criteria meaning each culture possesses different ideas.

There is that saying regarding common sense: "what may seem common to you, may not be common to others". I think this quote may be applied in some way for this film in that the Spaniards wanted the Aztecs to see the world in their eyes. Topiltzin was the sole remaining survivor who served as a defender of his culture. The Spanish seemed disgusted by the idea of human sacrifice and religious difference. They wanted to force their traditions and beliefs on indigenous people; but to me it appeared as if they thought of themselves as superior than the Aztecs. Also they did refer to themselves as mestizos and even in one scene when one of the soldiers inquires on what happened to the old mistress of General Cortes and his child, they refer to the child as a half-breed like some sort of mongrel who is unacceptable in their world.

I can only infer that the idea of Euro-centrism is the driving force behind the Spaniards' belief. They think that all things or the center of good things is based on Europe. In a way it is very racist to stand by such belief and it's not fair to treat or look at people differently based on complexion. Another factor in this film was the search for gold which can metaphorically translate to the dangers of modern day foreign-policy when political leaders become consumed or heavily influenced by moneymaking. Money is highly influential and a major driving force for colonization. In this case, gold can be translated to money.

The Spaniards were blinded by their chauvinistic and derogatory ways. Also there was that element of coping/adaptation and the response to otherness. I think just as indigenous people fear the unknown or anything foreign in their eyes, so does today's society universally speaking. Today people tend to be consummated with the idea of perfection and when faced with something bizarre they result to defensive reactions as a coping mechanism. I believe that is what the movie in a way was portraying. The Aztecs wanted to preserve their cultural identity and they do have the ability to cope with change; while as the colonizers (Spaniards) wanted to widen their influence and empire by eradicating the Aztec culture. The problem lies with both sides. The Aztecs and the Spaniards both don't respect each other. The Aztecs refuse to accept the new ideas while the colonizers refuse to show any form of respect to old tradition. I clearly saw both sides in this film and thus I can say it was not biased.

I still think that even in today's changing world, people struggle to cope with globalization. The result of this struggle is the future generation whether children will retain that sense of cultural identity and uniqueness or succumb to becoming a collective and uniformed group. This film is an excellent tool in drawing parallelism to modern day race relations and history. Without a doubt I enjoyed the film and felt a connection.