I RECCOMEND: Black Mirror

      We live in a world submerged in technology. Every year it seems our phones get smarter, homes more connected, and information easier to access than ever. With this comes the promise of greater avenues for learning and prosperity. Bright times for bright eyes.

      Yet, one would be remiss to simply dismiss the one greatest pieces of adversity to humanity's success: ourselves. For it can surely be certain that for every new success, someone finds a new way to fail. This is where the series "Black Mirror" comes in. An anthology series, much like "The Twilight Zone", each episode revolves around a theme related tp technology. For example, the first episode deals with the danger and power of online anonymity, and even a touch of our obsession with technology.

I personally favor the second episode, "15 Million Credits." It deals with gamification and its possible dangers. It, much like all the other episodes, found a way straight to my heart...then proceeded to rip it out and consume it right in front of me. At the same time, each impressed me as an interesting examination into our relationship with technology. Sort of an Aldous Huxley to our H.G. Wells.

The one other thing I should say is that the show is rather rough, at times. It most certainly earns its TV-MA rating, but due to its depth, I'd say it's better for it.

Check this show out on Netflix and possibly on YouTube as well.

MOVIE REVIEW: The Fault in Our Stars

UNPACKING "THE FAULTS" in "THE FAULT IN OUR STARS"


********DISCLAIMER*********DISCLAIMER************




There are definite spoilers in this, as I will be discussing various sections of the film.





Turn back now if you want to know nothing of the film before viewing it. Otherwise, I apologize in advance if the structure of this is a bit wonky, as I am typing this on Pages, so the format might not transfer as well as I'd like.











You're still reading? You're either brave or stupid. Let's hope it's the former.







As I sat, musing quietly to myself over the trailers that had just been shown, I came to a realization: I was the only male in the entire theater. Out of nearly sixty to seventy people, I was the only male. This was both humorous and curious as the trailers seemed to make this a film targeted towards the 15 to 21-year-old demographic, and lo and behold, that seemed to be the ages on display in the crowd. The sea (really puddle) of faces was made of mothers and daughters, many of whom I assume read the novel of the same name by John Green. This lead me to really wonder if the film would give me the unparalleled "joy" of another in a flood of movies that take from the Big Bag of Stock YA Fiction Components. The answer proved more interesting than not.

This is a film of dualities. With that comes my opinion that I had both great admiration and great disdain for it. The components within play themselves in different shapes and shades in my mind, so I was honestly left more confused and conflicted than not. So, I thought best to look at these elements in some sense of an orderly fashion.

Augustus Waters, love interest to Hazel Grace Lancaster, felt as though he was pulled from that aforementioned Big Bag of Stock YA Fiction Components. They meet on her way to a cancer support and from the first second he plays as the smirking, charming, affable "bad boy" that many YA novels seem insistent on thinking girls want. I'm going to go so far as to say that it is his role, along with the film's affectations with music that contribute the most to one side of my feelings for this film. I couldn't help but feel that this film felt insincere, as it was swinging for the fences, or at least seemed to be. Oh, OF COURSE Hazel meets Augustus in the support group. Oh, OF COURSE they fall in love. Oh, OF COURSE he takes her to Amsterdam to meet the author of her favorite book. Oh, OF COURSE his cancer reemerges and kills him. Even more, the music seemed to fit the stereotype of what's commonly held to be "indie" music within an "Indie" film. All of these things seemed to be working to MAKE me feel rather than ALLOWING me to feel.

Honestly, that sort of sentiment seems designed for the lowest common denominator, as a means to get butts in seats and to use basic emotional manipulation to pull emotion out of the viewer. It gives the sense of importance but does nothing to facilitate the examination and introspection typically needed to examine "great" films. Yet, at the same time, this doesn't seem to be the case at all. Despite all of the negativity, I believe there is another reading of this film that starkly contrasts the preceding one.

This reading begins with Hazel and Augustus's meeting with Peter Van Houten, the author of "An Imperial Affliction," her favorite book. They go there expecting him to tell them what happens to the protagonist's family after the book ends. Instead, what they receive is a series of runarounds, are made to listen to Swedish hip-hop, and are verbally assaulted about their supposed naïveté about true state of things and over the importance of what happens to the characters in a book after the book ends. They find that the brilliant and thoughtful man they THOUGHT wrote the book turned out to be a spiteful drunk. I feel there is great importance to this.

This moment and the character Perter Van Houten elevates an otherwise sickeningly, forcefully sweet film into a deeply philosophical one. It's here, when once again faced with the harsh realities of their conditions, that we learn of the depth of the internal mechanisms sustaining them. Of course they are more than aware of the depths of sorrow in which they may possibly exist, but they seek to live despite that. All that "emotional manipulation" may have really been a reflection of their resolve. This point is further solidified by where they go after meeting Van Houten.

They arrive at the Anne Frank museum, and while some may see it as a monument to pain, I believe this film wanted us to see it as a monument to hope. Contained within are a collection of quotes from Anne and quotes of hers are relayed over speakers that play the whole time. These quotes serve to highlight Anne's resolve to be positive and try to live and thrive, despite her circumstances.

In order to reach the apex of the museum, Hazel must ascend a series of flights of stairs, which proves difficult due to the cancer affecting her lungs thus her ability to breathe. She carries her oxygen tank up each flight, struggling along the way. Anne's quotes play as she does this, and the whole event almost seems to parallel Hazel's struggle up to this point. Though the adversity is more than obvious, she chooses to persist. Perhaps that may mean a sort of willful naïveté must come about, but that's a normal human coping mechanism. Much like Anne, Hazel chose not to revel and wallow in the pain, but to keep moving. The greatest victory in this lies, ironically enough, with Augustus.

Upon reexamination, Augustus may represent the best of that mentality. He is positive, hopeful, and energetic. Despite his loss of a leg due to cancer, he seems endlessly bound to the path of bringing joy to those he cares about. Even more, between the two of them, Hazel and Augustus share the joys and passions of young, new love. Contained within that are all the feelings and excitement I feel lie within every person: the desire for adventure, for comfort, and for love.

Yet, even after all of this, I'm still left conflicted. While there's all of the positive sentiments I've listed, I'm still left wondering if it's hopeful examination on my part. Am I just seeking to make sense out of what I feel is actually a series of insincere sentiments, or is it really as it seems? Even more, the conflicted feeling may be the point. Sure, you could say that the optimism on display is false and naive, but it pays to consider the possibility that the people going through the hardships are more than aware of the pain and hopelessness. They are more than aware of the creeping Specter known as Death. They know it approaches, yet they stare into Oblivion and smile. Why? It's because, quite simply, they're human.

While Humanity is capable of great evils, we are also capable of great good. This is something that transcends all creeds and colors. It is a uniquely human thing for, unlike other inhabitants of this Blue Marble in the infinite vastness of the cold of space, we can change our perspectives and thusly our whole interpretation of the universe. So, the question to ask yourself is where you feel the sentiment of the film lies: among true examination of the human condition, or in the cesspools of vacuous eye candy that pollutes the minds of people on a daily basis?

Perhaps the PR behind the marketing of the film wanted this to sell with the appeal of a YA novels and their film counterparts, but what the film actually is may be one of the more sophisticated and philosophical films I've seen in a while.