"Antichrist" Film Review

     As an (upcoming) film major, I decided one snow day to start delving into the world of Lars Von Trier. Having received word about Antichrist from the reviewer YMS, I decided to give it a shot. Even though I was bracing myself beforehand with regards to the graphic content that many movie reviewers were consistently citing, I ended up enjoying this film quite a bit.

    The film possesses a largely abstract narrative structure, told in several parts. The story begins with a child falling out of a window as his parents make love in the other room. What results is the child's funeral, the guilt of the parents (who are never named), and their desire to recuperate by spending some time off in a cabin in the woods. While there, the mental state of the wife slowly deteriorates as the environment around the couple becomes increasingly paranoid and disturbingly sexual. 

    Now, obviously the film does exhibit some particularly graphic imagery, which makes for a brutal experience for anyone who does not usually delve in horror or arthouse films. Let me add a disclaimer here by stating that you will only enjoy this movie if you can stand most types of bodily mutilation. And I'll tell you, it is mutilation with a capital "M"; I honestly don't think I've seen this level of disturbing violence in a while. 

   But all that aside, there is a lot to admire about the film. The performances by Charlotte Gainsbourg and Willen Dafoe are superb, especially with regards to Gainsbourg's depiction of her character's deteriorating mental state. There is a raw, haunting nature to her performance, which gives the perception of her conflicts being more erotic rather than erratic. (Side note: I'll emphasize "erotic" here because I found this movie strangely easy to masturbate to. Take that information as you will). Dafoe's character provides a decent foil to the female, and makes her appear more aggressive, stronger, powerful, and ultimately deeper. As an audience member, you feel for both of them: the dejected mother with an empty womb, and the disoriented male counterpart who is at the mercy of the female. They both complement and destroy each other with a seductive edge. 

    The cinematography is well-executed with respects to how the coloration and framing both add to the chilling atmosphere and pull us into the diegesis, despite our growing discomfort. Actually, you want the discomfort; it has a strange, pleasant taste to it as the film progresses. (Salty, maybe? I'm not sure…). The world we enter within this film feels cold to the touch, and cuts us down to our bones. Within the vision of Lars Von Trier, Antichrist feels like a fairytale. A brutalized, abstract, borderline-pornographic fairytale, but a fairytale nonetheless. This is, in a sense, my type of art. Dark, seductive, unforgiving, yet elegant. 

   Antichrist is, without a doubt, one of the most refreshing films I have seen in a while, and one that I would certainly view several more times. Be warned, though: it is most definitely not for everyone. 

   Bravo, Lars von Trier. Fucking bra-vo. 

  

Overall rating: 10/10 

    

    

5 Rational, Non-violent Goals For The Pro-Life Movement

     For the most part, I consider myself to be pro-life. Nothing personal, I just think it is inherently wrong to dismember human beings inside the womb; that's just my general opinion. But in recent years, the "por-life/pro-choice"debate has shown itself to be gaining ground, which has resulted in both veritable and completely illogical arguments from both sides.

     Now, when people hear the term "pro-life", they immediately think of the crazies who stand outside Planned Parenthood and scream obscenities and insults at the frightened women who are being shuffled inside. There have even been circumstances where pro-lifers have gotten violent (Anti-abortion violence). Speaking on behalf of us rational people, I do not in any way condone screaming, physical violence, or degradation of innocent people in order to prove your point. (And this goes for either side of this debate, mind you). I understand that the pro-choicers can get just as nasty, considering they have been known to throw feces and scream indecent phrases at events (Pro-choice protestors), but as stated before, the pro-lifers aren't faring any better. For the past few years, I have seen a lot of hypocrisy in the pro-life movement, and I am here to address that. So here are 5 rational, non-violent goals I propose for the pro-life movement: 

1. Stop the violent and degrading protests. Does anyone want to listen to a person who is screaming at them and trying to drag them away? Of course not. So why does this continue to happen? Screaming only communicates the fact that you are attempting to get the message across in an immature manner, and then nobody takes you seriously. Continuing with this type of degradation will only turn people away rather than convince them to choose life. 

2. Don't complain about having to provide free birth control. Yes, I get that this is going to get people mad. But let's be reasonable here: it's either we prevent the pregnancy in the first place, or run the risk of abortion later. Take your pick. You can't force the mother to keep a child she can't afford and then refuse to give her any aid. While I believe that adoption would be a veritable solution to this issue, it isn't always easy for some people to attain. Therefore, we must work to provide aid to impoverished mothers, which can encompass childcare, education, and proper nutrition. 

3. Promote adoption rather than pictures of dead babies. Look, as much as I would love to take the opponent and shove their faces into the truth, doing it in such a shocking and provocative manner is no different than those obscene pro-choice protests. It is better that we attack the argument with facts and reason instead of just going straight for the throat, considering that the latter would just turn people off. I believe we should consider the alternative to abortion (adoption) and encourage it as much as we can. 

4. Get rid of the religious connotations. When you promote the ideas of God and Christianity in conjunction with social issues, it prevents non-Christians or otherwise secular individuals from participating. We want to be inclusive here, which means the religious connotations of the pro-life movement should be dropped, or at least expanded to include atheists, pagans, and so on. This will also diversify the pro-life movement and add new facets to our major arguments rather than promote the idea that all pro-lifers are Christian nutjobs. 

5. Make abortion unthinkable instead of simply unattainable. This is the argument that people will immediately believe makes me a pro-choicer. And the argument is that we can't afford to close abortion clinics at the moment. Let's face the facts here: taking away abortion clinics right now would be like taking away umbrellas during a thunderstorm in an attempt to make rain go away. It is better if we restructure our culture to get abortion to the point where it simply isn't needed anymore, a goal that could be accomplished by following the arguments above. We must come to the agreement that abortion is considered a last-ditch effort for many, since they feel that they have no other options. But by providing other options, we can decrease the number of abortions to the point where it becomes obsolete. 

Midi

Midi by elizabeth-mehling featuring a chan luu bracelet

Vero Moda long sleeve blouse
$21 - veromoda.com

Red coat
$23 - newlook.com

Emporio Armani pants
$280 - armani.com

CHARLES & KEITH black shoes
charleskeith.com

Patricia Nash real leather handbag
macys.com

Chan luu bracelet
$225 - yoox.com

Bullet necklace
vintagefashionjewellery.com

Golden Steampunk Brass Goggles
$18 - bluebanana.com

"Let The Right One In" Film Review

     So I finally got around to watching the Swedish version of one of my favorite movies, Let Me In. It seems like everyone who saw Let The Right One In was praising it as being one of the best films ever made, and therefore I was excited to finally sit down and watch it. And what did I think of it?

   To put it bluntly, I have mixed feelings.

   Now, before everyone sends out the film critic lynch mob, let me start off with what the movie does well. The cinematography is interesting, and unlike Let Me In, it comes off as being more artistic than average misè-en-scene. You can tell that the director was willing to take risks with regards to framing his shots, and this did make the movie stand out. The placement of different elements within the shots provide for some pretty unique sequences, which is why the cinematography in this film is superior to Let Me In. Also, the pacing in this film was well done and it flowed pretty seamlessly, except for only a few parts here and there. In terms of the onscreen chemistry between the two leads, I believe it was decently established and was interesting enough to give the movie some context. 

    But of course, I did have a few minor problems with this film. The biggest one was the absence of the film's tone. While I understand that the bleak and quiet atmosphere was intentional, nothing about it really said "horror film" and I had a hard time seeing Eli as scary. The chemistry between her and Oskar is acceptable, but sometimes it's also overshadowed too greatly by the minor characters who are given a good, yet mostly unnecessary, amount of screentime. Another issue I had was that there was literally no soundtrack in this film except for maybe one or two parts in the whole movie. I mean, it's a horror movie, so music is kind of required for establishing the emotional context. The film seemed to have problems with deciding what exactly it was, and it kind of shows. Even with that aside, some of the lighting was kind of innapropriate in some areas (like, someone is really going to slit someone else's throat in the middle of a brightly-lit area? C'mon…). I did think that it would have helped the cinematography if some of the lighting lent itself to be believable, but luckily the cinematography usually covers up these mistakes and is still able to maintain consistency. 

   In terms of whether or not I prefer this version over Let Me In, I'll have to say that I am still sticking with the American version (yes, I know. Sue me). My reasoning is that the chemistry was more maturely developed, the lighting was consistent with the tone, and the soundtrack helped give the film a coherent identity. 

   All in all, I was slightly disappointed in this film, but it did prove interesting enough to be satisfying in its own way.

   Overall rating: 7/10 

Rush Albums

Rush Albums by elizabeth-mehling on polyvore.com

Why I Decided To Become A Pagan

      (One of my friends is using my blog to come out as pagan. She just didn't know how to do so and figured this would be the best way). 
     I was raised Roman Catholic, and the majority of my family is Roman Catholic (attend church every Sunday, participate in the Midnight Run, attend the local church Youth Group--the whole nine yards). However, even though I was baptized and put through 9 years of Catholic school (which was an unfavorable experience and something I will discuss in a minute), I realized from an early age that the things I was experiencing went beyond Christianity. As a kid, I felt different types of energy moving around me as I would walk through my house or especially near the forest, where I spent a lot of my time making houses for wood spirits or feeling the Earth in motion beneath me. It wasn't long before I began to conceive the concept of "God" as really, for me, being a spirit concerned with universal balance, and this could come in many different forms, from the elements to living creatures to the figures of gods and goddesses. This was, of course, in contrast with the fatherly male figure that Christianity tends to center itself on. My dreams, especially as a young child, were also incredibly intense, and a lot of it reflected things I would actually experience later. But since the Church tends to be a little superstitious about out-of-body experiences, different types of energy (especially when referred to as "magic"), or psychic phenomena, I didn't know what to think.
     Now, when I entered Catholic school, it was, of course, very small. A lot of my classmates were not exactly nice people, since some of them belonged to families that were quite "well off", to put it gently. Everyone was expected to be kept in line, and any weird questions would be atomatically met with something related to God's Word or, "You shouldn't be reading stuff like that," and that settled it. (I particularly recall how my school threw a fit over "The Golden Compass" and wanted to ban it because it somehow promoted anti-Christian views). 
The turning point came when one of my friends committed suicide. Since Catholics consider suicide to be a mortal sin, I heard the term "selfish" or "immature" to describe my friend's actions. This really made me reconsider my faith, since I began to wonder: "What if that had been me? Would the Church just completely ignore whether or not I was in pain, and instead only focus on the apparent sin?" Also, when I got into high school, I began to develop certain feelings towards other girls in my class, but when I brought it up to my family, they waved it off and refused to discuss it. 
     I was seven when I first heard the term Wicca and realized that witches still existed. When I read more into it (privately, of course), I found it to be a positive, nature-based religion that coincided with a lot of what I had perceived and believed ever since I was young. It was only a few years ago that I decided that I had now found my path. I noticed that whenever I read about Wicca, or did simple meditation or raised energy, I no longer had the urge to cut (yes, at the time I was cutting, which was a result of school pressures, lack of interest in my faith, and the culmination of carrying the bad memories from Catholic school.)
    Wicca and paganism has since become a new source of light in my life. I look forward to continuing down this positive path as I learn and practice all that I can. While I am not yet officially a "witch", my goal for this year is to be initiated by next January. Until then, I will keep everyone updated as often as possible. 
   Merry meet and merry part, dear friends! The circle is closed but never broken.

 

Why I Will Never Write A "Nice" Story

     Here's the thing: anyone who has ever seen my drawings or read my writings or seen my videos may have noticed that I tend to lean towards darker subjects, with rape, murder, chaos, abuse, and torture often being key components. When I was a child, people found this amusing. They would smile as I put up drawings of monsters devouring a city, or people fleeing in terror, some of them being squished, trampled, or set ablaze in the process. But as I got older, their smiles began to fade. The drawings became more detailed and colored with vibrant red blood. The poems and stories described characters meeting their demise in graphic detail. The videos became more serious, and unsettling, and even depressing. It was only at this point that someone realized how "problematic" this could be.

     Being a weird and lonely kid, I had since become skilled in finding a refuge within my own head. So I was not really paying attention to people's gossiping and commentary for a long time. Until, of course, my first book came out. And I began to hear, from various people: "Are you going to write a nice story?"

   At first, I wondered if maybe this was a reflection on the quality of the writing itself; as in, "this sucked, when are you going to write something good?" But then I realized that it was a comment on the subject matter, which addressed things such as rape, murder, prejudice, and genocide. None of these things were "nice", I guess. Not really. Few people would say that they are. But in the context of the situation, it came off as being less of an issue of portraying the subject matter itself and more of an issue on how I was the person writing it. 

    It is no secret that any type of female "artist" (writer, painter, poet, dancer, etc.), while possessing a reputation for having the possibility of provocation, still walks a fine line between what is socially acceptable and what is not. When male artists draw, sculpt, and generally portray phalluses and vaginas for the sake of "art", no one bats an eye. Or at least, they just roll their eyes. "Boys will be boys" and all that (which, as I'm sure most of you would agree, is a statement that is bursting with bona-fide BULLSHIT). When people think of women artists, they probably picture a painting of flowers. Or a house. Or a mother with her child. Or perhaps a photo series that portrays the delicate nature of butterflies and robin's eggs. And if a woman dares to venture into the world of provocative erotica, into the realm of pain and suffering and disturbing imagery, then she must be nuts. Or cynical. Or both. In other words, it's not the "right" type of art that we should be producing. To which I say: ARE YOU KIDDING ME???

   It's often interesting that even in the world of art, we still follow a set of rules. Men make this, women make that. Horror and fantasy? Oh, that is much too complicated for a woman to write. Blood and guts only cause you delicate women-folk to faint. Go and type up another romance for housewives, you Jane Austen wannabe. Demonstrate your frustration at centuries of sexual repression by churning out great works of literature like Fifty Shades of Grey and Twilight. Because that is what good "creative" women do, right? 

   Here's the thing: I am not ashamed of anything I write. I put four-letter words between my pages. I have described people of all ages being traumatized and murdered. I add as much seriousness and brutality as the story needs. I will never play it safe, because to do so would be to lose. There is no room in the creative world for people consumed by fear and shackled to the expectations of others around them. And what about those naysayers? Well, if you draw a painting of two robot girls kissing, or write a story about a group of children being murdered, or craft a provocative scene out of clay, then they are all just going to have to fucking deal with it. They can go off and live in their little bubble, and pretend that the world is full of rainbows and sunshine. They can go and create what THEY deem to be "appropriate" art (which they won't do anyway). 

    This is exactly my point. As a fiction writer, I pretty much write bullshit. By that I mean that not a lot of stuff, of course, in my stories is actually real. But the emotions, themes, and struggles most certainly are. So to brush all of the pain aside, to write a story in which nothing significant or bad or terrible or awful ever occurs, to provide a happy and super-dee-dooper story that makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside, would be to disregard the fact that anything terrible ever happens in real life. Books, like other forms of art, offer escapism, but even so, ignoring reality instead of facing it and learning to cope with it will not cause the pain to go away. We need to face our pain, and confront our fears. Does it make us cynical? Absolutely not, and we need to stop believing that it does. To turn away from the past is to deny it ever existed, which will result in grave consequences. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why I cannot afford to write a "nice" story. 

    You can have your cake full of rainbows and sunshine and act like nothing bad is ever going to happen. But for right now, I will take my blood-covered words and rigorously use my pen until smoke comes out of it.