I went shopping for movies last week. The first thing I picked up was "Spirited Away". It was on sale, so it was a no-brainer. After I had picked that up, I saw something that caught my attention: "Innocence" by Lucile Hadzihalilovic. the cover of the movie was full of snippets from praising reviews. I haven't heard of it before, but it seemed interesting. So I decided to risk it, and bought it. Yesterday me and the Mrs. watched it.
First things first: The Mrs. didn't like it. It was "too weird" and "boring". And I can understand why she feels like that. But there is something in the movie....
I'm not going to spoil the movie, so I'll just provide a general idea of the movie: It tells of a group of about 8-12 old girls who live in a strange boarding-school. New girls arrive to the school in coffins via underground tunnel. There's no apparent exit from the school, apart from those tunnels. Every year new girls arrive at the school (in coffins), and the elder girls leave the school to go "outside".
The girls live in five separate houses. Apparently the ages of the girls are one year apart from each other. Every day at 9pm the eldest girl of the group leaves to go somewhere, but she's always back before morning. During the day, the girls play and study dancing and biology. They can't leave the grounds of the boarding-school. They can't see their families.
Sounds simple enough? Not really. We are never told what's really going on. We are presented with questions, but we are never given any answers. Everything is open for intrepetation, and there are lots of details to intrepet. In a way, the movie presents a series of events to the viewer, and encourages the viewer to draw their own conclusions.
The movie is very beautiful. There's scene after scene of beautiful cinematography, and the movie lingers on those scenes, allowing the viewer to really take it all in. The dialogue is quite minimal, the viewer is encouraged to watch, instead of listen.
Is it a good movie? Well, that's hard to say. I can see why someone might feel disappointed. The movie is very atypical. It doesn't explain anything, it doesn't give answers to anything. After watching the movie, the viewer is left thinking "what the hell just happened? What's going on? What does it all mean?". While some people might feel disappointed, since we are grown accustomed to Hollywood-movies that are so obvious that the viewer doesn't have to think at all, there are those who can really appreciate this movie. I noticed that after the movie I spent quite a bit of time thinking about what I just saw. And by "thinking" I don't mean "whoa, those special effects were cool!", but rather "what does it mean?". It's quite rare to see a movie like this these days.
If you want brainless entertainment, steer clear of this movie. If you want an "easy" movie, steer clear of this movie. If you want a movie that challenges you to think and draw your own conclusions, this is the movie for you.
Holy crap!
Finland just won the Eurovision song-contest. With record-breaking points apparently.
Un-fucking-believable!
Un-fucking-believable!
Four
The Doctor recommended this, so I'll have a shot:
Four jobs I have had in my life:
1. A "jack-of-all-trades" for the county of Ilmajoki
2. Computer-assembler
3. IT-support specialist
4. IT-professional
Four movies I would have watched over and over:
1. The Shawshank Redemption
2. BladeRunner
3. Le Fabuleux destin d'Amélie Poulain
4. Matrix
Four places I have lived:
1. Koskenkorva
2. Helsinki Metropolitan Area
3. Kerava
4. Järvenpää
Four TV shows I love to watch:
1. Star Trek: The Next Generation
2. Lost
3. Babylon 5
4. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
Did I mention I'm a nerd?
Four places I have been on vacation:
1. Sweden
2. Mallorca, Spain
3. Estonia
4. Ummmm, Finland?
Four websites I visit almost daily:
1. arstechnica.com
2. slashdot.org
3. theinquirer.net
4. www.hs.fi
Four of my favourite foods:
1. Pizza (in all shapes and sizes)
2. BBQ
3. "Chinese"
4. Lasagna
Predictable? yes.
Four things I want to do before the end of the year:
1. I would like to learn a new skill
2. I would like to repay my student-loan in full
3. I would like to get a new and interesting job
4. I would like to buy a new car (like I wanted to do last year, and year before that....)
Four jobs I have had in my life:
1. A "jack-of-all-trades" for the county of Ilmajoki
2. Computer-assembler
3. IT-support specialist
4. IT-professional
Four movies I would have watched over and over:
1. The Shawshank Redemption
2. BladeRunner
3. Le Fabuleux destin d'Amélie Poulain
4. Matrix
Four places I have lived:
1. Koskenkorva
2. Helsinki Metropolitan Area
3. Kerava
4. Järvenpää
Four TV shows I love to watch:
1. Star Trek: The Next Generation
2. Lost
3. Babylon 5
4. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
Did I mention I'm a nerd?
Four places I have been on vacation:
1. Sweden
2. Mallorca, Spain
3. Estonia
4. Ummmm, Finland?
Four websites I visit almost daily:
1. arstechnica.com
2. slashdot.org
3. theinquirer.net
4. www.hs.fi
Four of my favourite foods:
1. Pizza (in all shapes and sizes)
2. BBQ
3. "Chinese"
4. Lasagna
Predictable? yes.
Four things I want to do before the end of the year:
1. I would like to learn a new skill
2. I would like to repay my student-loan in full
3. I would like to get a new and interesting job
4. I would like to buy a new car (like I wanted to do last year, and year before that....)
It's not racism, dammit!
OK, this thing is one of my pet-peeves: people not knowing what "racism" means. First things first: what IS racism? Racism is discrimination based on race and/or ethnic background of the individual. And racism is bad, mmmmkay?
Simple enough, yes? I think so. And we still have people calling some things "racism" that clearly are not. An example. So Googles "Summer of Code" is off-limits to citizens of Iran, North-Korea and other countries that US Administration thinks is "supporting terrorism". Roozbeh then asks " Please tell me how this is not racism?" (I would, but there's no way to comment on your blog-entries Roozbeh!). Simple: the discrimination is not happening because of race or ethnic background, it's based on nationality. South-Koreans can take part in SoC, yet they are of same race as their brothers north of the border are, who can not take part. Iranians are not discriminated because of their race or ethnic background, they are discriminated because of their governments (true or perceived) policies.
Now, feel free to disagree with the policy of Google (which IIRC is mandated by the government). But DON'T start calling it "racism"!
This is a rather mild example of this "neo-speak". Quite often I see people who live "alternative" lifestyle (vegans, hip-hoppers etc.) talk about "racism" when they are subjected to prejudice because of their lifestyle. Prejudices are bad (yet we all have them them, in one way or the other), and racism is a form of prejudice. But not all prejudices are racism! And that fact seems to be beyond the grasp of many people!
Hey white boy! Just because your white roommate said some nasty comments about your taste of music does not mean that you were subjected to "racist taunts"! Racism is a serious problem, and I get annoyed when people dilute the term by calling all prejudices "racism". Just because someone dislikes some type of music, does not mean that the person is a "racist".
So get your terminology straight, dammit! End rant.
Simple enough, yes? I think so. And we still have people calling some things "racism" that clearly are not. An example. So Googles "Summer of Code" is off-limits to citizens of Iran, North-Korea and other countries that US Administration thinks is "supporting terrorism". Roozbeh then asks " Please tell me how this is not racism?" (I would, but there's no way to comment on your blog-entries Roozbeh!). Simple: the discrimination is not happening because of race or ethnic background, it's based on nationality. South-Koreans can take part in SoC, yet they are of same race as their brothers north of the border are, who can not take part. Iranians are not discriminated because of their race or ethnic background, they are discriminated because of their governments (true or perceived) policies.
Now, feel free to disagree with the policy of Google (which IIRC is mandated by the government). But DON'T start calling it "racism"!
This is a rather mild example of this "neo-speak". Quite often I see people who live "alternative" lifestyle (vegans, hip-hoppers etc.) talk about "racism" when they are subjected to prejudice because of their lifestyle. Prejudices are bad (yet we all have them them, in one way or the other), and racism is a form of prejudice. But not all prejudices are racism! And that fact seems to be beyond the grasp of many people!
Hey white boy! Just because your white roommate said some nasty comments about your taste of music does not mean that you were subjected to "racist taunts"! Racism is a serious problem, and I get annoyed when people dilute the term by calling all prejudices "racism". Just because someone dislikes some type of music, does not mean that the person is a "racist".
So get your terminology straight, dammit! End rant.
