Killing Time-Thomas

In Killing Time by John Holloway and Ronald M. Gauthier, John Thompson is wrongfully convicted with the murder of Ray Luizza and an attempted carjacking. The book is based on a true story that takes place in New Orleans in 1984. From the start of the investigation, Thompson claims he’s innocent.

I myself had a hard time believing Thompson’s innocence. People came forth with tips and claiming to have seen Thompson commit the murder. They described the murder in great detail and it makes it difficult to tell whether or not they’re telling the truth.

Michael Banks and Gordon Cooney decide to try and take on Johnson’s case. They try to find errors in previous trials, but their efforts prove to be futile. They eventually find that evidence was mishandled in one of the previous cases and Johnson goes free.

The book effectively portrays the city. I found myself recognizing some of the places they described. The murder actually takes place on Baronne, a few blocks from where I work.

The Character development was weak, but the goal of the book was to tell what happened and not really to go into depth about the characters. However, I think the authors did a good job of making the reader feel sympathy for Johnson.

It seemed that the people working on the case were more interested in putting someone away rather than finding the right person to put away. The tips and evidence weren’t really investigated as well as they should’ve been. Everything seemed rushed. If the people working on the case had handled it with diligence, I don’t think Johnson would’ve ended up on death row.

Sanders Blade Runner

Ridley Scott’s 1982 film, Blade Runner, maintains a plotline in which the “blade runners” are out to “retire” the replicants, or the genetically created humanoids of the Nexus 6 Corporation, led by Tyrell. The film places Rick Deckard in charge of the mission to retire several known replicants, or “androids” on earth, before they find a way to extend their lifespan. His job in the film is to consider the androids completely unhuman, or as W.A. Senior says in his article, “Blade Runner and Cyberpunk Visions of Humanity,” they are, “genefically engineered beings designed for special tasks and purposes deemed too difficult, demeaning, or dangerous for normal humans.” Deckard is not to have any respect for the androids—they are outcasts and not welcome on earth. As senior says, his job is to limit both their choices and their lives. The twist, however, is that Deckard has a deep concerns about the question of where humankind leaves off or begins. Senior says that, “Replicants were built to be human in almost every way, yet they are denied human status, like many of the others who cannot qualify for off-world placement, in a technologically racist society that views them as disposable slaves.” We become aware in the film that Deckard holds a slightly different opinion than his boss, Bryant, who has given him the mission to retire the androids. We find out that Bryant has a history of being racist. Deckard, while remaining on his mission and following through with several retirements, does however question how much difference there really is between the replicants and humans. This is obvious in his love affair with Rachel, a replicant who does not believe she is. As Senior describes it, “The beginning of Deckard's affair with Rachel demonstrates both her urgent passion and his own need for love and comfort…Moreover, the situations, behaviors, reactions, and needs of the replicants parallel or exceed in intensity those of the few humans in the film.” Deckard and the replicants share similar attributes- all characters with personal strengths and weaknesses. The film deals with the replicants in an interesting way—labeling them as outcasts or illegal prisoners of earth. However, a different view is offered— one that places the replicants and humans on a more equal level. This is done through Deckard’s character, and is highlighted intensely through his relationship with Rachel. The end of the film, with Rachel and Deckard leaving off together, depicts this theme even further.

Cooper Casablanca

Casablanca takes place during the Vichy regime in France during WW2. This was the part of France that was living peacefully under a German controlled government in southern France. The movie does a good job at keeping the political bias out of the film and does its best not to alienate its audience.
Rick has been trying to stay aloof from the war, choosing not to pick a side, which represents America at this time. Every other character in the movie is somehow involved with the war.
The dominant in this scene is Rick. Even though he is not in the center of the screen, everyone is looking at him, drawing the viewers eye to him as well. Also his posture shows that he is dictating something to everyone else.
There is a high amount of lighting in the scene, especially on their upper bodies. By casting them in so much light shows that we are suppose to think of them as the good guys.
The camera angle is social because it captures these four in conversation but leaves the rest of the cantina out of frame.
Everyone in the frame is dressed in white reinforcing that we are suppose to view them as good.
It is an open frame showing that they are in public and at a restaurant.
Character proximity is social yet for Rick and Renault they are standing more personal to show that they are unsure about whether to join Lazlo's side.

Cooper Music Blog

I missed the day we discussed our favorite music so the our class missed out on the greatness of this band. They are called Down. Down's first album was released during the 1995 and put their genre of Sludge Metal on the map. Formed in New Orleans, the band is made up of various members from the area who play in other bands who get together to play in the legendary Down. The well-known main singer Phil Anselmo, and the bassist Rex Brown, were both members of the band Pantera, before it broke apart.
Throughout high school I was in love with the explosiveness of death metal and the fast strumming of thrash guitars, but then I came to school in the South and a whole new world was open to me. I was introduced to Down and sludge metal. The slow yet very definitive riff, face melting guitar solos, and clear vocals quickly put this music at the top of my list. I've never been able to listen to pop music, or whats on the radio because that music simply isn't good. Anybody can take an auto-tuner and make a Kesha song.
Metal on the other hand is a whole different world.

Moises, Blade Runner

Blade Runner is a film that blurs the lines of moral relativism within humanity. In the film, we have a genetically engineered group of beings known as replicants. These replicants look and seem just like humans, but they possess superior strength and knowledge. Because of killings by a group of replicants, they eventually became banned on Earth and deemed outcasts. But who is the real outcast here? Is it the replicant, who is seemingly carrying out its life plan the only way it knows how (like a human), or is it the Tyrell Corporation that created the replicants in the first place. To me, Blade Runner is attempting to convey the evils that corporations stand for, and how worse they could eventually get. Today, corporations are slowly getting to the point of the Tyrell Corporation, which creates beings that are "more human than humans". That means that a single corporation is altering humanity, leaving them in charge. I'm pretty sure most can agree when I say I don't like the idea of a corporation altering the way we know humanity.

It's interesting to point out some folklore that has developed since the release of Blade Runner. Many companies whose logos were displayed as product placements in the film went on to experience great economic downfall. RCA, Atari, Regional Bell, Pan-Am, and Coca-Cola all had some kind of setback after the release of the film. It seems that Ridley Scott, knowingly or not, not only got his point across, but also put it into action.

Moises, Casablanca

Casablanca is a film that stayed neutral despite being filled with political undertones. Almost everything about the movie focused on the war and politics, but the filmmakers did an outstanding job at making sure Casablanca would not alienate or insult its audience. A lot of that has to do with the time of its release. In the early 1940s the film industry was growing, and Casablanca was merely another studio film intended to make money. Sure, it was a great one that would have a lasting legacy, but Warner Brothers wasn't trying to shape anyone's political views. Had there been political controversy in the film, it most likely wouldn't have had as much exposure. But who knows, maybe some controversy would have made Casablanca even more of a masterpiece.

In the closing scene of Casablanca, Rick and Renault disappear into a cloud of fog, which is symbolic of the political haziness of this film.



The dominant in this frame is the fog, and the subsidiary is the two men. The first thing we notice in this frame is the overall haziness. This creates a mystery as to what the future holds. The proxemics are public, as we are watching them walk off and left as bystanders in the situation that just took place. The lighting is very dim, with the exception of in front of the two men, where you can see a glow shining upon them. This shows that there could be a bright future waiting for the two men, hence the line "Louis, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship."

Worthy - Casablanca

Casablanca is an ode to a romance between disgruntled bar owner Rick and his old flame Ilsa. Known for its stand out script, memorable lines (ex: “I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship”) and all star cast and crew, this film continues to make a deep impression on Americans. The film has also raised many questions about the intentions behind the plot. Many ask themselves if this story was an allegory to World War II or simply a romance captured on film. After watching this film and conducting some research of my own I have come to the conclusion that this film definitely has political commentary pertaining to America’s involvement in World War II. These are my reasons:

1) The timeline is sufficient for this claim – Casablanca originally premiered in November 1942 and was screened nationwide in January 1943. Pearl Harbor was bombed in December 1941. This gap allowed screen writers the perfect amount of time to create a complex, yet entertaining story that would display political expediency.

2) Rick was highly indifferent to the politics that surrounded him at the opening of the movie. After hearing about Victor Lazlo – who had just escaped a concentration camp – he explicitly stated his indifference. “I have no sympathy for the fox and understand the point of view of the hound too,” he said. He also stated at one point that politics was not his business, rather, it was running a saloon. His change of heart is a clear illustration of the change in opinions of Americans at the time; transitioning from disregard for the war to a Rosie The Riveter hyped society. The general consensus on the war for Americans prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor was neutrality. This transition was due in large part to America’s dependence on propaganda – such as news reels, flyers and movies – to help form their opinions.

3) Rick’s character development suggests admiration and support of the Allies. He establishes an alliance with Captain Louis Renault – once pro-Vichy turned advocate of free France – who openly shows his allegiance when covering for him at the air field. Together, their friendship symbolizes anti-Nazi views.

4) In allowing Ilsa to leave, Rick symbolically commits to the fight against Nazis, Fascism and all other representations of the Axis powers, casting love aside for the “greater good.”

Like many allegories of its day, Casablanca is a film that cleverly disguised its political commentary. It not only gained critical acclaim, but like a snake in the grass managed to impress certain values upon its viewers.