Auditioning

You may be reading this because you want to better educate yourself with facts about the life of the starving artist, or you may be reading this because you're bored. Either way, this post will certainly achieve your goal (look at you go!) because this post is all about auditioning--no, not tips on how to stand out during auditions (if anyone needs to learn those, it's me), but auditions according to the actor for those of you who have never stepped into one.

First off, auditions are scary. Auditions are as scary as Willem Defoe getting his car rear-ended. Think of an interview...but you have to sing. No matter how many times you do it, it's nerve-racking. You bare your soul to a man or woman you've never met and--here's the worst part--get told no. Over. And over. And over again. No. No. No. There's a reason people call acting the job of rejection. Going to an audition is like going to a break-up. Sometimes, you already know how it's going to turn out, but you show up anyway and do your best to prove that you're right for the show and that you love the show more than anyone else. Then, the director tells you that you're "just not right for the show." Sometimes, the director doesn't even give a reason; more often than not, a soft "thank you" lets you know that you're not what they're looking for--but that in itself should be a consolation.

You didn't fail (unless you literally failed (yes, I am speaking from experience)). Every director has their own interpretation of the show, and when you're auditioning, you're not fighting against other actors--you're fighting against the director's vision of the character. Who fits the model in his head best? From there's it's just piecing together parts of a puzzle. True, sometimes it is hard to remember this when someone slightly better than you gets up to sing, but the thing I have learned to do in this situation is...smile. Even if it's fake, it looks better than a menacing glare; then, even better, the more you fake smile, the more it becomes real. Soon enough, you'll actually be happy that the person is doing well, and it makes you more confident for your own audition. Look at that. I guess I did have some tips to offer.

But back to the rejection. I get into about one-fourth of the shows I audition for. The good thing is that this gives me a lot of experience, but it's still extremely hard. For me, every part I audition for is the part I've never wanted more in my life. Sure, I may like some more than others, but when I walk into an audition for a certain part, I have never wanted that part so badly. And to get shot down without another thought? Heartbreaking. Auditioning never gets easier, and the heartbreak never gets less painful.

When people ask Matt Damon if they should go into acting, he tells them "no" because he understands that if that person will change their mind based on one "no", how will they be able to withstand a thousand? Think of it this way: the job of an actor is auditioning and getting the role is just a perk. It's a job of rejection, and if you plan to go into this job, you should be prepared for some major heartbreak and "no's". I've even been told that getting a degree in theatre is useless cause the job rate after college is so low. I just laugh. I'm used to the condescending "good for you," and the empty smile and nod. They try to "help me," but I just laugh.

Cause obviously they don't understand that rejection fuels me.

Movie Review: Warrior

Warrior (2011) - Directed by Gavin O'Conner, Written by Gavin O'Conner and others
A troubled, alcoholic former boxer trying to prove himself. A father trying to save his family. A reformed father caught in between his two sons. A nation-wide martial arts tournament where this already torn-apart family will be stretched even further.

Obviously, I'm just reviewing, giving my extremely expert opinion, as I watch these movies, not when they come out (thank you, Netflix). Warrior is a heart-wrenching story of redemption that is very hard to watch. Well...maybe not for a girl, but every guy I know that has seen it has cried. It's definitely a story for guys. It's got enough action to tide a macho man over and enough sentimental moments to reenergize an emotional man. It's got brother moments and father/son moments so unless you're a girl or have a heart of stone, you will cry. If anything, watch this story for the great message of redemption, especially because it doesn't have a traditional happy ending. Instead, it has a sort of hopeful but unexplained ending that satisfies the viewer but still leaves the rest, the conclusion, to their imagination.

Tom Hardy (Tommy Conlon) was as perfect as always and brought me to tears as did Nick Nolte (Paddy Conlon).  Joel Edgerton (Brendan Conlon) was good as well, especially in the final scene where the two brothers fight each other. No, that was not a spoiler--with a plot like this, it's obvious that the two brothers are going to be the final two contestants. Who doesn't see that coming?

The writing was great, though sappy at moments, but it was quite obvious that Gavin O'Conner and the writers had a lot of trouble writing the final scene. Warrior is the kind of movie that could have ended many ways, but the writers found much strife picking only one. I understand their pain, but it was quite obvious in the last five minutes, as though the entire movie was stalling and waiting for them to make up their mind. It did add to the suspense of the climax however.

Okay, so it's not the greatest movie, but if you want a good cry, go for it. Just don't watch it alone like I did. Then you have no one to hug. And that's something worth crying over.

Luke: Part I

My brother is four years older than I am, but anyone will tell you that our ages are switched. I'm the older, and he's the younger (even though he's 23 now); this is the way it's always been. The reason for this mix-up is because of his imagination. He is still a kid at heart. At times, I even wish I had his imagination (if he ever wanted to, he'd be a brilliant actor).

As young homeschooled children who finished their homework before mom would wake up, we would play the most fascinating fantasies either in the backyard or in the house. Sometimes it was Star Wars, sometimes it was the Lord of the Rings, sometimes it was something completely original. It didn't quite matter. We would see a part of a movie and make it better during playtime. For me, Luke was the narrator and creator of all these stories in which I would be the main character. He's a graphic design artist who loves writing, and I'm an actor who loves writing as well, but ten years ago, he would be creating a fantastic world with all sorts of obstacles for me to tackle. It seems nothing has changed.

However, when I was in the process of growing up, I didn't always want to play. Luke would have none of this. Every time was play time. Before I knew what was happening, my homework had been thrown aside, and I was being chased by a modern Viking horde with hockey sticks (I'll never understand, but they were incredibly terrifying). Somehow he could always get me in a good mood.

One time in particular, Luke and I were home alone, and the power went out. I suppose I was about 14 and Luke 18, but we called our dad anyway to let him know what was going on. "Whatever you do, don't open the fridge more than once," he said. Made sense--all the cold air would get out, and everything inside would be ruined. We finished our school about an hour later, and as I passed by the kitchen, Luke nonchalantly opened the fridge and said, "I'm gonna eat." He immediately and simultaneously gasped and shrieked, and I ran to see what was wrong. When I remembered what Dad had said about the fridge, Luke was attempting to pull random objects out of the fridge.

"We have to eat it all!" he shrieked again.

I quickly slammed the fridge shut, and Luke moaned aloud, obviously dissatisfied with my quick thinking. His thinking was to grab everything out of the fridge and eat all of it before it went rotten, but he had only pulled out mustard.

"Great," he said sardonically, "Now we can only eat mustard for lunch."
"We can open the fridge again, we just have to be quick," I said, "And we have to know what we want."
"I don't know what I want."
"Well, do you want a sandwich or--"
"No, Matthew! I won't be able to know what I want unless I can look at it. I need to open the fridge and look at everything."
"What? No. That'll take too long. Look, if you want a sandwich, then I know we need meat, cheese--here. Let's make a list of all the things we need so that, when we open the fridge, we can quickly get it."
"A list? Are you kidding? No, I just need to open the fridge--"
"Luke, just tell me what you want!"
"I don't know what I want!"
"Well, if we write down the possibilities, then you can decide--"
"I'll see the possibilities when I open the fridge. Just let me browse!"
"That'll take too long!"
"This is taking too long!"
"We need to keep everything fresh!"
"We're a little past that now, Matthew!"
"Holding the fridge open won't help!"
"I don't want to eat mustard!"
"You don't have to eat mustard! Unless you want a sandwich, then it's one of the items on the list!"
"What list?!"
"The list for the fridge!"
"I'm not making a list!"
"I'm making the list! And we're putting mustard on it!"
"I don't want to eat mustard!"
"You won't have to eat mustard!"
"But it's on the list!"
"We haven't made the list yet!"
"Because we haven't opened the fridge to see what's inside!"
"We're not opening the fridge!"
"I don't want to eat mustard!"
"You're not going to eat mustard!"
"Then let me open the fridge!"

By now, I was protecting the closed doors of the refrigerator with my entire body as our nonsense argument continued. Eventually, Luke stood still for a couple seconds, the wheels ever so obviously turning in his head as he finally and ominously said,
"All right. Let's make a list."

I immediately began to spout information about the list as I followed Luke to the old toy closet in the game-room. He ducked his head inside, and I heard him begin to riffle through old costumes and weapons on the other side.

"What are you doing? Are we going to dress up and pretend to do a contract between nations or something? Why are we getting stuff for the list--"

Luke turned around with a rope in his hands, and the next thing I knew, I was bound and gagged in a dark room. About this time, I wonder what would have happened if Mom was home. I stayed in this room for about ten minutes until I eventually broke free. Luke had already eaten, and I was able to make my list. However, with the times of me opening the fridge to get what I needed then opening it again to put it back (2) and the times of Luke's browsing (which I later discovered were 5), the fridge was not opened once like my father had asked but seven times.

We never told him.

Closing a Show

I don't think non-theatre people will ever understand the heartbreak of ending a show. Sure we may be a little eccentric and overdramatic, but we experience pain just like you. So let me explain the process of closing a show for all you normal people out there.

On one level, ending a show is like ending a vacation with your friends. Some of them you'll see at school, some you'll see in another show, but some you won't see for a long time. Over the process of rehearsal and performance, the cast forms an incredible bond, and it's suddenly broken without another thought as soon as the curtain descends. Your friends--your family is suddenly whisked away from you, and you feel terribly alone. So when you see cast members crying in the lobby after a show is over, it isn't because they thought they screwed their solo up--they don't want the show to end.

On another level, ending a show is like shutting off a part of your life. You become so invested in the story each night, and the character you create is so real that sometimes it seeps over into your real life. But when the show is closed, the character vanishes, and a part of you vanishes too. You made room for that character to live inside you, and now that it's gone, you feel empty. Empty and alone.

The solution? Immediately jumping into another show, creating another character, and forming another family. Sure you miss the other show, but if the first show was a breakup then this show is a rebound that happens before the depression can set in. You may think that this heartbreak that the actor goes through sounds too dramatic and not even worth it, but let me tell you--few things measure to the joy of stepping out from behind the curtain, into the lights, and in front of a packed audience. This is why we actors put ourselves through this depression in between shows. To put it simply, it's worth it. Just like eating an entire monster-sized Freebirds' burrito is worth it no matter how many times the stomachaches make you want to die. The joy outweighs the heartbreak. It's worth it.

Because the closing of one show means the opening of another.

Movie Review: Noah

Noah (2014) - Directed by Darren Aronofsky, Written by Darren Aronofsky and Ari Handel
A single man is chosen by the Creator through dreams to restart life itself as the wicked world is cleansed by an apocalyptic flood.

I was very surprised by this movie. Honestly, I don't know what I was expecting when I walked into the theatre. Maybe an action movie that completely threw away the Old Testament Bible story. Maybe a thought-provoking epic that showed how cruel God is. Maybe a combination of the two. But what I received was not what I was expecting at all. Once you get past the idea of angels as rock monsters, you can really become invested in the story.

This movie showed not that God is cruel, but that we are wicked. True, a great many things were added (some extremely cheesy), but this movie was just an interpretation. What's more, it was an atheist's interpretation. Darren Aronofsky saw the story of Noah as what it is--an epic story of rebirth. Believe it or not, I liked his portrayal of God because it applies to our world today. God wasn't portrayed as a man in flowing robes with a Morgan Freeman voice but as a breath of wind between the leaves, the storms of water raining down upon the world, and as the shining rainbow in the sky. He was always present, but the characters weren't always aware. I also liked the theology of the angels helping him build the ark.

What I loved most was just when you think the movie is about redemption and portraying the wickedness of man (which was absolutely accomplished), you find out it's about mercy. Yes, an entire nation fell and thousands perished, but a few amount survived. The movie showed that they were wicked too and deserved to die, yet they were given mercy. The Garden of Eden had been ravaged by man, but man was going to be given a second chance because Noah had been given a choice. Adam and Eve's choice ruined mankind, and Noah's saved them from extinction. A beautiful theme.

The cinematography was also beautiful, and the visual effects were stunning. Ray Winstone was my favorite of the movie with his performance of Tubal-Cain, but the movie had many talented actors. If you can stand rock monsters, embellishments, and interpretations of the Old Testament, then I think you should see it. If anything, at least go to open your mind to an atheist's view on an epic story of God's great mercy.

Why We Watch Bad Movies

Sometimes, it's just about feeling superior, and poorly made movies do just that. I know that, given the choice, I personally would pick Birdemic over Lincoln because Birdemic will make me feel better about myself. With the former, I know what to expect--there aren't any surprises in store for me. I won't have to think, and I won't have to analyze; all I have to do is sit back and make fun of every little piece of the movie. I can watch the ill-trained actors and very quickly begin to feel better about myself. This is a major factor as to why I watch bad movies. The other is...it's just easier.

Good movies take a lot of work, and sometimes they can depress me. I'll sit and watch an amazing actor and think less of myself. It's very hard not to beat myself up when I'm watching Daniel Day-Lewis or Ralph Fiennes who seem to be perfect on the other side of that screen. When I'm watching good movies, it'll hurt a little too much because I just want to jump up into the TV with the actors and become a character alongside them. The dream is an arms-length away, and yet, it's impossible for me to jump into that screen. That's why it hurts. It's so close, but I just can't reach it.

I do adore watching good movies, but sometimes bad movies are just easier. I think that's why we watch them. They make us feel better about ourselves.

And isn't that what entertainment is all about? Making us feel better about ourselves?

Movie Review: The Grand Budapest Hotel

The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014) - written and directed by Wes Anderson
A narration inside a narration inside a narration inside a narration about the adventures of M. Gustave H. and his lobby boy/protégé Zero as they run a legendary hotel between the wars in a forgotten country while simultaneously finding themselves caught up in the middle of a conspiracy.

I might as well just name this post: true movie comedies. If I were to say movie comedy to you, you'd probably think of a movie like Mean Girls, Bridesmaids, or the Hangover, but the Grand Budapest Hotel defined for me what a true movie comedy should be. It set the bar extremely high, and I expect all other comedies to rise to its level of excellence. There are some key differences between a comedic movie and a true movie comedy, and the Grand Budapest Hotel showed all of these.

First, it wasn't petty. There weren't ten sex scenes or hundreds of "F" words, but instead, Wes Anderson found a sort of moderation that worked for the style of the movie. It wasn't something I felt sick watching, and almost all of the language that was present was used in a way at which I could not help but laugh. Meaningless curse words are petty, but strategically placed curse words can be very funny if used correctly.

Second, there was much more at play and involved with the comedy than just the writing. Anyone can write a couple clever jokes, and sometimes movies are based solely around some clever writers...but comedies should deserve more. One of the main things that stuck out to me was the cinematography. The fisheye lens, the still, stiff-neck shots, and their length all made it feel like its own genre. Along with some of the shots, the beautiful color schemes made this "forgotten country" seem otherworldly. I must admit I do love it when movies are set in a world we know but bear hints of a different world altogether. I couldn't help but laugh at some of the shots, color schemes, and costumes in general because they were so intricate. Not many comedies take this much time to perfect work on aspects of the film that only few will notice. It wasn't just clever in writing, but all the aspects of film came together to tell this outrageous story. Even the lighting made me laugh at moments.

Third, the actors knew what they were doing. If there is anything that annoys me more than comedy actors, it's probably malls closing at six in Texas. There is a drastic difference between an actor who is trying to be funny and one who is completely immersed in the story. One is doing something over-the-top to get you to laugh while the other is doing what the character would do. Usually, we find comedy in other peoples' misfortunes (USA #1) so we as an audience can especially notice when an actor is trying to be funny in a sad situation or when an actor is actually present in this situation. The same even goes with stand-up comedians. One will make jokes and listen for the level of the laugh while the other will tell a funny story and get so caught up in it along with the audience.
Thankfully, the cast of this movie were actors who knew what they were doing. God bless you, Ralph Fiennes. If there is anyone that should be cast in a comedy role, it's men who do Shakespeare because you can be sure that they know timing down to a tee. And comedy is all about timing. He was a brilliant lead who completely believed every word he said along with an eccentric cast of actors including Willem Dafoe, Adrien Brody, Mathieu Amalric, Edward Norton etc. Each of these actors were so serious about the situation that it came off as hilarious (as it was intended). That's comedy.

The actual raw written comedy (as handled by the actors) was so vast that it surprised me. Usually a movie is labeled as a slapstick, a parody, or an advanced comedy, but this movie seemed to appeal to everyone. A cat's being thrown out a window one second (slapstick), then a joke is made in the background that some will only catch if they see it a second time (advanced). It wasn't just one style of comedy. When I saw it, at least every person in the theatre was laughing at one time or another because of their specific humor tastes. This movie appealed to all of them.

So, to sum up, this unique movie had all types of comedy that stretched into even the cinematography, lightning, and costumes, the actors were brilliant, it was good-quality, not petty, and had its own specific style. So I say you should definitely go see it, preferably with a friend so you can laugh harder.

"But why should I listen to you? You're just a college kid."
You're the one who's reading this blog.

Lord of the Flies V.S. Hunger Games

**Be warned. If you have not read these books, there may or may not be spoilers--who can say?**

First off, I would like to state that I was a big fan of both--until I put them together and analyzed them. So to start, I will list off the good and bad things about the books separately to show that I am an almost fair person. Prepare yourself for a long and nerdy book post, and let's begin with Mr. William Golding.

Lord of the Flies - Pros:

 1) The Obscure Setting: At times, the characters hint at a war occurring between the Communists and England along with other unclear history facts that could very well mean that this book not only takes place on an uncharted island but in the future. After all, an aerial battle happens at night in one of the chapters, and a dead pilot parachutes down to the island. Sounds like war to me. I think this shows the subtle hints of man's savage nature and even adds to the confusion of being stranded on the island. Not only is the reader stranded on the island with the characters, but they feel like they're stranded in time. There's nothing as annoying as a book handing every answer to the reader on a silver platter when the characters haven't figured it out yet. Let the reader take the same journey; that's why they're reading the book.

2) The Novel Plot: No, this is not a pun. I literally mean a new idea that hadn't been written about at the time. A group of kids stranded on an island, forced to become adults dealing with man's inherent, evil nature? Brilliant. To write about a world without adults but show how it's the same world as adults? Novel. One-third of the way through the book, the kids are no longer referred to as children or kids but as "savages" because they have painted their faces and fashioned weapons. Halfway through, even the reader forgets they are kids because of their behavior patterns. They become more and more like adults until an actual adult is finally shown at the end, and the characters are savages no more but kids. They were about to kill the main character, but the adult sees it all as "just a game." Heartbreaking.

3) The Narration: For some, this would be a major con. William Golding writes in a very straightforward, matter-of-fact tone and style that some may find extremely boring. Instead of describing a grotesque scene, sometimes you don't even realize a child has died until you think about what you've just read; as opposed to a narration whose goriness doesn't really let you think about the act of murder but makes you numb to death, William Golding writes life like it is: when you die, you die. There is no need to embellish it. There is no need to write anything gory and action-filled about a child's death--when a group of children murder another child, I think that's about enough for my heartstrings. This narration makes you think about death and realize how disturbing it is. Instead of death happening in the first five seconds, it happens near the end, giving you time to build up your emotions and be heartbroken.

4) The Theme: Man has inherent, wicked desires. This theme is strong and hits home. This book shows the natural intent of humans once the restraints of society have vanished. If children can murder each other without remorse, what can men do without the restraints of society? Quite a thinker and quite a heartbreaker. Again, the transition of the children to savages then back to children is stunning and seamless. William Golding certainly made his point even more clear by using children as his platform to catch the attention of his readers. We see adults murdering each other all the time so he reached us in a fresh way. Death is death, but with children, we actually realize that it is death. Suddenly, we're not so numb anymore.

Cons:

1) The Narration: "What? But I thought you just said this was a pro? You're losing me, Matthew." True, I am a fan of William Golding's matter-of-fact style, but sometimes, it can get a little overbearing. In the scenes where no symbolism or theme is occurring, the drone pattern of his diction can get tiresome. When I first read the book, I found myself skimming several passages and having to read the pages again. The problem with getting into this habit is skimming important sections later on--after all, you don't realize they're important thematically when you're skimming. For some, this seemingly action-less book can be a chore to get through.

2) The Subject Matter: The book as a whole is very dark. While I did not realize it at the time, it gave me some nightmares because I was too young the first time I read it. I love the dark aspect of the book, but not many people will want to pick up a book about children murdering other children. While it was okay in book form, it did not work well as a movie. I tried watching the Lord of the Flies movie, but I only got through ten seconds. There's a stark difference between reading children being stranded on an island and hearing them cry out for their mommy. I knew what would be coming an hour later in the movie, and I wouldn't be able to handle it. If the book made my heart race and tears fill to my eyes, what could the movie do to my sleep schedule? Unless some struggling director out there wants to get famous by making a dark indy version of the book, then it can never become a movie.
However, I would like to be proved wrong.

The Hunger Games Trilogy - Pros:

1) The Storyline: It's a riveting story, and I like it in trilogy form. It's got some very memorable character and an amazing plot. A sadistic game where children are forced to compete for their lives for the pleasure of a corrupted Capital? It's Lord of the Flies with a little political satire--what could be better? Just when you think the book is about Katniss and Peeta surviving the Hunger Games, you realize it's about them unwittingly outsmarting the Capital and starting a revolution. You think the climax is the end of the Hunger Games, but Katniss soon finds out that her greatest challenge yet to come is facing President Snow (my favorite twist in a book was right here--the physical climax wasn't the real climax at all). In Catching Fire, Katniss finds herself again in the Hunger Games, but the real problem is the conspiracy of which she's finding herself in the middle. Mockingjay (my favorite of the series) finally delves into the rebellion against the Capital, the moment to which the entire trilogy has been leading (took long enough). Again, the greatest climax is the split-second decision to stop her friends from making the same mistake that the heads of the Capital made many years ago. In a twist, she kills the president of the rebellion to end the Hunger Games forever. Pretty exciting, I say.

2) The Theme: War never changes and neither does human nature. Sound familiar? Thought so. Like I said, the leaders of the rebellion were about to start the vicious Hunger Games all over again, showing how human nature had done a complete 180 turn. War never changes and neither does human nature. It's a powerful point, and it's shown not only through the event of the Hunger Games but through the ever-present political satire (something that was entirely left out of the movie). If there is anything that reveals the true vicious nature of humankind, it's politics. Politics is nothing but a façade, and the trilogy showed this both on the good and the bad side.

3) The Narration: As a young man, it was quite nice to get a look inside a girl's mind. Not only was the narration 1st person, but it was present tense. If a book is written in 1st person, past tense, the reader knows that the character survived the book; however, in present tense, Katniss could have very easily died at any moment. Juxtaposed with my sense of impending doom was the solid character narration throughout the entire trilogy. I enjoyed the fresh perspective of a character narrator as opposed to an omniscient and unbiased one. Her narration was her limited knowledge--the readers knew only what she knew and found out what she knew exactly when she did. The reader felt a bond with Katniss. I applaud Suzanne Collins for this.

4) The Characters: Suzanne Collins did very well creating memorable characters. She pulled a J.R.R. Tolkien with some of their names being odd and some normal (Aragorn/Haymitch and Sam/Gale), but overall each of these characters were unique. My favorite was the change in Peeta in Mockingjay which made the reader no longer feel as though they had a safe place. Their most beloved character could have turned on the good guys at any moment. These characters helped moved the story along and were easily translated into film.

Cons:

1) The Narration: "My, God, Matthew! What is it with you and narration? You like it, you don't like it--why am I even reading this blog?!" Like I said, as a young man, it was quite nice to get a look inside a girl's mind--until it drove me crazy. Yes, Katniss could have very have easily died at any moment (God knows I wanted her to in Mockingjay), but her thoughts would never die. Over the course of the trilogy, Katniss Everdeen does not change. What was the point of the entire trilogy if the main character didn't change? She starts off as an immature brat with a loud narration that I tolerated because I assumed she would grow and ends with her getting what she wanted while still being an immature brat. She may be skilled with a bow, but she sure as heck didn't deserve Peeta. The narration was especially long in the first half of Mockingjay where nothing exciting happened plot-wise. In the other two books, the reader gets used to the fast-paced style and suddenly is bored to death by Katniss' overthinking and boy-crazy hormones. Be prepared to sit through 150 pages of "He loves me, he loves me not, actually I don't like him, whoops I kissed Gale again." Can we get back to the war? This can't be just me being a guy.

2) The Love Story: I went there. Let's be honest, I am a die-hard, hopeless romantic, but this love story took the place of the main story line when it shouldn't have. True, I'm not a fan of kitschy overdone love triangles, but I did like the choice between Peeta and Gale. The problem is that, for a love story, the author has to completely show that the ones that end up together were always meant to be; sometimes, this can translate very obviously, and every person reading the book is then left wondering why so much time was being spent with Gale when she blatantly wouldn't pick him. In fact, why was so much time spent on this triangle at all? So much political satire and theme was lost in the pages that were being filled up with useless Katniss love thoughts, love decisions, and love over-thinking. If the love thing had been a subplot, the books could have really achieved some thought-provoking themes. Instead, I was waiting for Katniss and Peeta to finally get together so my ulcers could heal. Unfortunately, this is the only thing the people in Hollywood picked up when they got the rights to the books (Disclosure: I have not seen the Catching Fire movie. I am speaking from the experience of the first). The political satire was gone and the themes dwindled to make room for...
Team Peeta VS Team Gale.
Because we wanted another Twilight.


Now that the Lord of the Flies and the Hunger Games have been (thoroughly) evaluated, let's put them together and see what we get.

Both show the wickedness of mankind via children murdering each other (possibly in the future), but one makes the reader feel the weight of this theme much more than the other. The central plot of the Lord of the Flies was the savagery of the children while the central plot of the Hunger Games was muddied in between boy-problems, evil human nature, and rebellion against the government. The latter is an action series that does exactly what it's designed to do but doesn't quite make you think, while the former is an intellectual book that finds your heartstrings and severs them.
The problem, as I see it, is that Suzanne Collins couldn't decide between writing a teen action series or an adult thought-provoker, so she did both, causing each side falter to make room for the other. Lord of the Flies is very clear about what it is; it is not for young ages. In Hunger Games, at the times when I was expecting love triangle, there were bursts political satire, and vice versa. Lord of the Flies takes the entire book to get to a child's death, and that wait is heartbreaking. The Hunger Games on the other hand, makes the reader numb to the killing. It happens so fast and is glossed over so the reader doesn't think twice. When a child gets killed in the Hunger Games, I don't gasp--it doesn't disturb me. Children murdering children should be disturbing, and this just wasn't achieved. I should be disturbed.
This is especially true in the movie versions: one was a teen action movie that achieved this goal but didn't make me think about the death, and the other was something I could not even watch because I could already feel the tears looming. If the Hunger Games was supposed to teach about the brutality of war (as explained in the end pages of Mockingjay about how Peeta and Katniss would never heal) then why didn't it impact me? It just boils down to simple facts: Lord of the Flies got my heart racing, made me tear up, made me think, and gave me nightmares while the Hunger Games was an enjoyable series that got my heart racing.

For this reason, I will recommend the Lord of the Flies over the Hunger Games any day. If you actually want to learn about the savage nature of man, the Hunger Games is not the way to do it (unless you want the abridged version). Okay, so I'm a die hard Lord of the Flies fan, but even this book has its cons. If you can get through the more tedious sections, I would absolutely recommend it. Take this entire post as a book suggestion. Pick up a book that will not only entertain you but make you think.

Unless you adore steamy love triangles, teenage girl narration, and rebelling against authority.
Then boy do I have a suggestion for you.

10 Rules Nobody Follows

If you subconsciously frowned, shook your head, or breathed in a quick gust of air condescendingly when you read the title, then this post is not for you. Instead, this post is for those of us who respect the law...as much as we can. We don't steal from the government or light fire to abandoned warehouses, but we do go against the rules here and there. Whether they're laws or not, here are ten nationally assumed rules that nobody follows.

1: The "This Is Not a Step" Step

 

Who hasn't done this? It only makes sense to use the top step as a step. It has the support of both sides of the ladders, it's higher, and sometimes it's wider than the rest of the steps. Why make a bigger step where feet can actually fit just so the space can be filled up with the words, "This is not a step!" Then why was it made as the most convenient step? It's a ladder--isn't it supposed to help you reach tall places? Apparently only if you stay below the second highest step (just to be safe). If you don't have balance enough to stand on the top step, you should stay away from heights of any kind.

 

2: The Unspoken "Don't Stare" Rule

 

 

We've all had that moment when someone has caught us staring. And what do we do? What every human does--pretend it never happened. Possibly even pretend the person exists no longer just to make up for the creepiness of those five seconds. It's habit to stare at something beautiful, but for some reason it's frowned upon in our society. Probably because it's as creepy as creepy gets. I've learned that I tend to stay away from people who stare at me. So unless you want to look like a very talented Steve Buscemi, don't stare at me.

 

3: Wait 30 Minutes After You Eat To Go Swim

 

As a child growing up with a swimming pool in the backyard, I heard this constantly. To me, however, this subtle warning told me that if I swam with a full stomach, I would drown; that somehow, the weight of the meal would be too heavy and pull me below the surface. Turns out, the worst that could happen is that you could get a stomachache and throw up in the pool. Suddenly, a fun pool party turns into a day at the beach. Not that I'm speaking from experience. As adults, we tell children this but don't obey it in the slightest. How much fun it is to be hypocritical!

 

4: The Speed Limit

 







Everyone does it. As society teaches us, we don't obey the rules--we just bend them a little and hope we don't get caught. Have you noticed that the sign reads: "Speed Limit"? It means the law-enforced maximum speed not the minimum speed. If the speed limit is 50, then we travel 50 or over. I guess somewhere along the way, we forgot that it used to mean "don't travel over this speed!" Nowadays, five MPH over is free game. I mean, come on, who gets in the car and thinks, "Gee, I'm going to drive extra slow today just in case!" We all think, "Good lord, I have to do this again? But I just drove yesterday. Why are they going so slow? Don't they know the speed limit is 30? Why are they going 35? I'll just pass them. Let's just see how fast I can reach my destination without getting caught. As long as I'm beside someone who's going slightly faster than me, I'll be good."

Actually our overall driving is pretty terrible. We see yellow lights, and we speed up when they're there to warn us to slow down, we see stop signs, and we only slow down to make sure no one is watching, and when we're supposed to use our blinkers, we just make sure nobody is behind us before we cross. And that "left lane is only for passing" rule? Who does that? The one rule of driving: do as much as you can without getting caught.

On another note, any speed below 65 on a highway is inhumane.

 

5: "February" and "Wednesday"

 

Are we just going to ignore the "r" in February and the entire "dnes" in Wednesday? Why are they pronounced, "Febyouary" and "Winsday"? Let's make hundreds of rules for a language and then disobey them on words that everyone will use. On the other hand, how would one even pronounce the "r" in February without looking as constipated as one attempting to say "rural"? I guess there's a reason we left it out.

 

6: Turn Off Your Cellphones in the Movie Theatre

 

No, it did not say turn the brightness down on your phone, it said turn your phone off. If there's anyone to which we are not going to listen, it's going to be the snarky lady on the giant screen that haughtily tells us to turn our cellphones off. Even if I don't use it, I don't turn it off. How would I know if something dreadfully dire had happened? What if the sun had exploded? I'd want to prepare for that one before I step out of the dark movie theatre and into the scorched outside air. How else am I going to give minute by minute updates about the movie to someone who hasn't seen the movie? I'm not being loud am I? I'm actually being quieter than I would be ordinarily if I was watching the movie. I'm the one who paid ten dollars, I should be the one who gets to decide whether I want to watch the movie or surf Twitter.

 

7: Stand Still on Escalators

 

Is this even a rule? Is it assumed or are there signs? Who stands still? Stairs are too much work and elevators are overcrowded so humanity created a solution. Moving stairs--and yet, it's just not fast enough. Even if I'm not in a hurry, I climb up the moving steps just to get there faster. I'm a fast walker and hate being trapped behind slow people. Just let these long legs move, and someone please program the escalators to go faster.

 

8: Traffic Arrows in Parking Lots

 

If you claim that you always follow these complacent little symbols then you are a liar. Every driver has, at one time or another, abused the parking lot. Sometimes these arrows lead you straight into the maze of a parking lot, and it takes you five minutes to get out. If I'm able to cut across some lines and go against the arrows, arriving at my destination in half the time, I should be able to do that, right? Just be glad I don't do everything society tells me to.

 

9: Shower Before Entering the Pool

 

This rule faded away into the annals of history. Why would I get soaked with water before I get soaked with water? What will that solve? The public pool and/or beach is already filthy so showering before I immerse myself with its muck will do nothing. I'll shower after, sure. Just don't make me shower twice in addition to swimming. I hear too much water can be harmful.

 

10: The Social Media Age Rule

 

Yes, I was under the age limit when Facebook came out and, believe it or not, I didn't get one until after I was the appropriate age. But every one of my friends got one anyway. The rule is that you have to be thirteen, but it's so easy to give a year for your birthday that makes you older. Then, all you have to do is leave out the exact date (month and day) so that people don't get notifications about your birthday and think, "Oh, I love that little--she was born in 1945?" You little twelve year old trickster you.

 

Bonus: Please Wash Your Hands

...look, sometimes the disgustingness of the bathrooms outweighs the social taboo of not washing my hands. In certain places, I wash my hands and come out dirtier. But if there is nothing getting in the way of my cleanliness, then I go for it. This rule is for those of you who don't. You know who you are. Some people don't even have shame--they walk out of the stall and straight through the bathroom door as I'm washing my hands. Some pantomime the motion about a foot away from the running faucet. Hey, A for effort, right? If they went through that much trouble to avoid washing their hands, then you should congratulate them.

Just not with a handshake.



Dreaming the Impossible Since '95

Nobody teaches kids to use their imagination; it's just intuition. Like their first word, "No," or "Mine," and our instinct to lie when we get in trouble, each of us are born with a unique imagination that begins to fade as we grow older. Somewhere along the way, a nameless person must have said that imagination is not for adults and to throw it away as soon as possible. I did no such thing. I know not whether I was born with a bigger imagination or whether I just never let mine go, but my imagination has grown into what it is today. My playtime turned into my dream--an impossible dream of Hollywood.

Now, the word Hollywood brings up many pre-conceived ideals once spoken, and the first is celebrities. Many people voice their wishes on how they want to be in Hollywood so that they can be as famous as the celebrities of our day, while my dream could not be further from this ideal. It all started back when I was a child. I had a (probably unhealthy) obsession with the TV, specifically the Disney Channel. It was amazing to me that kids my age could be famous for doing what I did every day without pay. To them, acting was a job, but to me, it was just playtime.

As I grew older, I found that I could become just like those kids; I could get paid for doing what I loved. I would even do it for free. I wanted to tell stories that thousands of people would hear. I wanted to make people laugh, cry, and think. Some people only wanted to make their way in front of the camera for the fame, but I wanted to step from my world to the next where I was a completely different person while thousands of people were watching every step I took as this person. I wanted to create relatable characters, I wanted to imagine new worlds that had yet to be explored, and I wanted to draw people in with intricate stories. Somewhere along the way, my storytelling turned into a dream for which I was willing to work hard. After all, it was just playtime.

In the present, television has helped me in the way of studying. Practice makes perfect, but there are some things you can learn by watching others. Dancers can learn a lot by watching other professional dancers, singers can learn a lot by listening to other professional singers, and actors can learn a lot by studying other professional actors. After my dream was set, I began my studying, which was much more fun than studying for other professions, I must say. After all, it was just playtime. I watched shows all the way to the end, watching to see if the character had grown effectively throughout the run-time and if the actor had conveyed this change well. I soon became aware of times when I did not believe the actor or conversely, when I forgot that there was an actor behind this relatable character. I studied the difference between actors creating human characters as opposed to actors doing what they thought humans would do. In acting, there had to be absolutely no acting, and I witnessed firsthand when I was able to spot when the person acting did or did not believe the words that were coming out of their mouths. It all came down to their eyes and whether they believed they were that character or not. All of this, I took in by watching television; it had transformed from a fun activity to a rigorous job in which I took full diligence. After all, it was just playtime.

In the end, my imagination had never faded, but my dream had grown bigger. I want to take all I have learned and go straight to Hollywood. I want to share my stories with thousands of people, and I want to do so in front of a camera. I want to change the lives of people I will never meet. There is something about revealing your soul to thousands of people you do not know that appeals to me. There is something about becoming a different person that calls to me. I feel the most myself when I am someone else, and television helped me realize this. You may not hear this very often, but television gave me a dream. I am indebted to it. My job, my art, is hard work, and the road will be even harder along the way--yet I feel strangely prepared.

After all, it is just playtime.