tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10942578.post113609235480552036..comments2023-08-26T10:38:54.949-05:00Comments on Epiphany: A Distant ThunderThomas A. Szyszkiewiczhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06603573536882807043noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10942578.post-35518788591364470212007-02-10T18:05:00.000-06:002007-02-10T18:05:00.000-06:00You are right that the film is rough around the ed...You are right that the film is rough around the edges. For instance, the lead didn't (and I'm not sure that she could) convince me that she was "a pro-choice gal."<BR/><BR/>However, I applaud them mightily for their attempt. And even though, like you, I'm not a fan of the horror genre (in fact, I hate it passionately), I thought that this was more than appropriate for the subject matter. Abortion is a horror and it should be presented in a way that shows that horror.<BR/><BR/>As for the plot, you're right that it makes little sense. But abortion makes even less sense. That's why I said that the film messes with your head, and why it is making people face reality.<BR/><BR/>Here are the questions that run through my mind -- Is Ann alive or dead? How is she interacting with all those other people? Why is her mother watching that video over and over again?<BR/><BR/>In a way, there's a certain sense of "It's a Wonderful Life" here, only as if it was played out in real life, not in the tame and more easily understood way that Frank Capra made it. That's no criticism of that film, by the way. Capra was showing in a rational way how irrational suicide is, and that's great.<BR/><BR/>But it seems to me that the Thunder producers are showing the bifurcated world that abortion is -- destroying what is and therefore destroying also the future of humanity -- and exploring how that might effect real life.<BR/><BR/>In C.S. Lewis' Prince Caspian, Alsan tells Lucy that she can never know what might have been, only what is and what was. He's right, of course. But we are always trying to figure out what might have been and Thunder, it seems to me, is trying to find out what might have been with one person's life had she been allowed to live.Thomas A. Szyszkiewiczhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06603573536882807043noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10942578.post-1170703279808223182007-02-05T13:21:00.000-06:002007-02-05T13:21:00.000-06:00Please note, however, its detriments: Poor acting,...Please note, however, its detriments: <BR/><BR/>Poor acting, especially on the part of its lead, left me, an actress myself, wholly unconvinced.<BR/><BR/>Poor writing slipped in sensationalism where is was wholly unneeded, especially during Audrey's testimony ("her angelic little face").<BR/><BR/>A plot which, at the end of the day, made little sense. The twist was a good idea, but Ann's identity and the reality of the whole situation were undermined in a film that is meant to make the viewer face reality.<BR/><BR/>I hate horror/thriller flicks. I hate them because they scare the tar out of me and prevent me from sleeping. The effects were so bad I had no problem blowing them off.<BR/><BR/>Not that the film was impure in intent. They pose a very interesting question. But I would be far more convinced had it been based on a real-life case. Its the same as when pro-choicers talk about rape when in fact rape accounts for less than one percent of abortions. They spent too much time on "three inches" and not enough time on partial-birth abortion itself.<BR/><BR/>Mind you, I'm rabidly pro-life. The reason I watched the film was to preview it for the student-run pro-life group I co-head at my school. We're having an educational meeting. This just didn't seem worth the 35 minutes to me.<BR/><BR/>Please correct me, argue with me, convince me. I'd like to showcase its virtues.Cara T.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07590293775324977064noreply@blogger.com