American History X and the Nature of Evil

by The "Ex" Patriot

The most surprising thing about American History X is that Edward Norton did not win best actor. His portrayal of a Neo-Nazi, hyper-intelligent punk is as convincing as his performance as a reformed and truly repentant criminal. In fact, if all the film had needed was the talents of the main actor, American History X would have certainly won the Oscar for best picture that year. Unfortunately, the journey of Norton’s character, how he gets from being an innocent, straight A High School student, to a racist murderer, and finally to a repentant young man wishing to return to a place in society is unconvincing to say the least.

The movie does begin with some of the most intense moments on celluloid. Neo-Nazi Derek Vinyard (Norton’s character) is having sex, roughly depicted so that one would think it is an act of anger and hatred rather than love, when is younger brother, Danny (Edward Furlong of Terminator II fame), bursts into the room to warn of the impending danger of African-Americans hanging around outside their home.

We see a barely recognizable Edward Norton rising from the bed, a large tattoo of a swastika emblazoned on his white bony chest. A black hole over his heart. He enjoys disposing of the intruders in a chillingly cruel manner, reminiscent of the ear cutting scene in Reservoir Dogs. Like Reservoir Dogs, we never see the actual acts of violence on film, although the directing is so powerful we believe that we do.

In fact, if the story remained true to its premise and was an analysis of the horrors of the neo-Nazi culture, the racism and the hatred that it engenders, it would have been a much better story. The intelligence of this Neo-Nazi is what makes him truly scary; he even criticizes the redneck, uneducated Ku Klux Klan at one point. His knowledge allows him to gain a group of followers and become a true leader. If this had been the premise of the story, it would have been a truly cutting edge, real-world horror film.

The movie, unfortunately, decides to take another route.

The tale is really one of loss and redemption. Derek is not truly a neo-Nazi, but a man with years of hatred buried within his soul. He spends a relatively short time in prison considering the nature of his crime, and aside from one horrific experience, the days spent there are truly ones of learning and developing an understanding of the world around him. In fact, one of the hardest parts to swallow about the movie is its relatively tame portrayal of life behind bars.

The other problem with the film is that most of the time in prison is narrated by Edward Norton in a story he is telling to his younger brother. Some of the dialogue during this narration is truly embarrassing and comes across as if it was written for a High School drama project. The morals and lessons can be seen a mile away, and rather than the brilliance of the murky morality that surrounds the first part of the film, we are left with a teenager’s sense of black and white, good and evil. The ending which might have been brilliant fifteen years ago, is now clichéd, obvious and takes far too long to reach.

These criticisms aside, most of American History X is highly intelligent, well directed, and acted with passion and dedication. Elliot Gould and Beverly D’Angelo along with Star Trek alumni Avery Brooks and Jennifer Lien are convincing and charismatic. The story, for the most part, is intriguing, and is certainly something that should be seen.

The movie is head and shoulders above ninety five percent of the dreck that Hollywood produces. In fact, if it were not for the last half hour of the movie, American History X would certainly rank up with some of the greatest films ever made about racism, violence, and the true nature of evil.

The Prisoner of Azkaban: a review

by Theenglish

A couple of years back I read the first two Harry Potter books, preferring to have a knowledge of the original stories before seeing the movie adaptations. The Potter saga had already reached its pinnacle. The story of adults and children alike flocking to the bookstores to purchase The Goblet of Fire in record numbers had come and gone. But I still approached the stories with an air of scepticism, the same scepticism I currently hold for The DaVinci Code.

I was pleasantly surprised to find the Potter stories refreshing, unique, and enjoyable. Entering the world of Hogwarts was like journeying into Baum’s Oz, Carroll’s Wonderland, or White’s world of talking pigs and spiders. The best of children’s literature has maintained the capacity to appeal to adults. The author’s of these books don’t patronize children; they don’t speak as a parent or teacher, but as a peer, respecting children as intelligent beings.

Rowling carries on this tradition, weaving an intricate, complex tale that rivals any fantasy creation with the possible exception of Tolkien’s Middle Earth. Hogwarts and the World of Wizards become more detailed with each passing book. Her wordplay is clever, her analogies to the real world sound without being preachy.

By the end of the second instalment, for example, we see that Harry Potter’s arch-nemesis, Lord Voldemort is the wizard representation of Hitler. He wishes to purify the wizarding race by wiping out all those who have impure “muggle” blood, even though he himself comes from impure blood.

The Prisoner of Azkaban shows us that the wizarding world, like the real world, is not as harmonious or benevolent as we’d like to believe. The wizards have crime, and sometimes imprison the innocent unjustly. The good giant Hagrid spends some time in Azkaban toward the end of The Chamber of Secrets. Rowling shows us that the terrors that await in a magical prison are even worse than await us in human prisons.

The Dementors, guards of Azkaban, suck the life force from the prisoners, denying them the pleasures and freedom of thought in addition to keeping them away from the rest of humanity. They are creatures as evil as the prisoners they are there to guard and easily the most disturbing creatures and images of the trilogy thus far.

Even though the novel was published years ago, with the movie being released this month, the analogy to Abu Ghraib prison will be hard to ignore. It is more likely, however, that Rowling is making a criticism of our modern day prison system. The prisons where prisoners from all walks of crime are placed together and often, a man who has done something as simple as rob a few items from a car, will be subjected to the same rape gangs that a violent offender is forced to endure.

From a story perspective, we are given more insight into Harry’s background and his relationship with Voldemort. Professor Snape it turns out has a grudge, not against Harry himself, but against the whole Potter family. Dumbledore seems to have had affection for Harry’s parents as well.

The story is as fast paced as ever. This time it is Harry and Hermione that work together at the end as Ron is subjected to a fate similar to that which left Hermione bedridden in the second volume. The ending, however, is not resolved as nicely as it was in the first two novels and for the first time, we are left we a true sense of dread and expectation for the future of Harry Potter and his friends.

The book is not without its flaws. Really, can anybody but the biggest Potter fans, distinguish between the opening paragraphs of each of the novels? Each beginning has started to run together in almost the same way that Star Trek episodes do. We are given the same stock footage of Privet Drive like we get the same stock footage of the Enterprise flying in front of a field of stars. The novels also have nearly identical structures. A few chapters in the muggle world, off to Hogwarts to meet the new teachers (this time Hagrid has been given a position thanks to Harry clearing his name in the second volume), a few Quidditch matches, a break for Christmas when our characters stick around to stir up more trouble, exam time, and the Grand Finale.

I’m really hoping that Rowling starts to spice up the books and add some variety. Perhaps she already has. I have not yet read the fourth or fifth instalments of the series.

What am I hoping for in the upcoming tales? A bond to grow between Snape and Potter perhaps; further character development for Malfoy (I want to see him turn into a good guy the same way Cordelia Chase was converted in the Buffy series), and most of all, a change to the format.

Rowling is a competent writer, and her characters are real. Hogwarts, for all its magical staircases, wandering ghosts, and talking paintings bears a strong resemblance to the schools we all know. The bond between the characters makes us nostalgic for that bond many of us had with friends before the world made us cynical. The teachers are as varied as those we remember from our own childhoods, complete with quirks, strengths, and compassion.

It is not the wonder of the magic and fantasy that makes the Hogwarts tales popular, but rather the similarity and the familiarity of the settings and characters that brings us back for more.