Love Actually

"Whenever I get gloomy with the state of the world, I think about the arrivals gate at Heathrow airport. General opinion makes out that we live in a world of hatred and greed - but I don't see that - seems to me that love is everywhere. Often it's not particularly dignified or newsworthy, but it's always there: fathers and sons, mothers and daughters, husbands and wives, boyfriends, girlfriends, old friends. When the planes hit the Twin Towers, none of the phone calls from people on board were messages of hate or revenge; they were all messages of love. If you look for it, I've got a sneaky feeling you'll find that love, actually, is all around.”
- Hugh Grant

The opening line of “Love Actually” is powerful, and so true. Often, we see so many negative things in today’s world that we simply forget to look around and realize how much happiness, comfort, and love there is all around us. Directed by Richard Curtis, “Love Actually” is actually my favorite movie. While most people select a classic as their “number one” film, I’m hooked on “Love Actually” and continue to watch this film over and over and laugh, cry, smile, and get goose bumps.

Curtis is credited with films such as “Bridget Jones’s Diary” & “Notting Hill.” “Love Actually” was nominated for two Golden Globes and won the title of “Best British Film” at the UK’s Empire Awards. The film features Hugh Grant, Liam Neeson, Colin Firth, Laura Linney, Emma Thompson, Alan Rickman, Keira Knightley, Rowan Atkinson and Bill Nighy to only name a few!

Released in time for the Christmas season is 2003, the stories of different couples unfold and intertwine throughout the film. I think I love it so much because all of the different stories seem very close to reality. The film examines some relationships that are working and some that are not working. Curtis does an excellent job developing each character and explaining their story.

“Love Actually” isn’t your typical “romantic comedy” as some might think. The story appeals to both men and women and isn’t just “happy-sappy” the entire time. Young couples, older
couples, and single friends face death, love affairs, and happy endings.

The film is set primarily in England and follows the lives of the new Prime Minister and bachelor (Hugh Grant), a writer, a married couple facing hard times, a man who has just lost his wife, a little boy finding himself in love for the first time, a newly married couple, young single men hoping to find love, etc. etc. etc.

No matter what you're situation in life, especially regarding relationships, you will connect with a character in this film. You need to see it for yourself and I promise you won’t be disappointed.

collide, run into, smash into, bump into…CRASH

In my opinion, “Crash” is indeed worthy of its 2004 Academy Award for Best Motion Picture of the Year. Director/writer of “Crash,” Paul Haggis, is no stranger to fame and also wrote the screenplay for Best Picture Winner “Million Dollar Baby” the previous year. Additionally, Haggis’ résumé includes writing for the film, “Letters from Iwo Jima,” and revising the screenplay for “Casino Royale.”

Movies are powerful vehicles for transmitting messages to the masses and “Crash” sends a message that everyone can benefit from. Most people will walk away from the film with more knowledge of how they judge others and will become more aware of racial prejudices that still occur in today’s world. “Crash” looks at racism from the perspective of many characters, each playing a unique and vital role in the film.

- A district attorney and his unhappy wife
- Two police detectives who are also lovers
- A police officer with a sick father
- A young police officer with a racist partner
- Two young black men who are car thieves
- A Mexican-American locksmith
- A Chinese man and his wife
- A Persian man without a strong English vocabulary
- A black TV director and his wife
…and the list goes on.

Throughout the film, the characters crash into each other on a multitude of levels. The story, set in Los Angeles, begins with a car crash and flashes back to the characters’ lives on the previous day. Their lives are intertwined and many of the characters are misjudged because of their racial/ethnic background. Because of stereotypes and racism, problems and events arise as the plot unfolds.

The district attorney’s wife (played by Sandra Bullock) realizes that she is unhappy, and this may be the source of her prejudice and distrust toward others. The Mexican American locksmith is continually mistaken as a gang member, while he is simply trying to provide for his family. In one scene, he is changing the locks at the district attorney’s home when Bullock says:

“I would like the locks changed again in the morning. And you might mention that we'd appreciate it if next time they didn't send a gang member...Yes, the guy with the shaved head, the pants around his ass, the prison tattoo...I am telling you. Your amigo in there is gonna sell our key to one of his homies.”

This is just one example of the incidences that occur in the film. There are many twists, but Haggis does an excellent job keeping the story realistic. Each of the characters is “relatable,” and it is heart-renching to watch some of them continue down their current path. The overall ending isn’t entirely “happily ever after,” but neither is the real world. I would give this film an A+ for its easy-to-understand language, its powerful imagery, and thought-provoking story.

My Name is...What? My Name Is...Who?

Does the name Philo T. Farnsworth ring a bell? Before we watched the documentary, Big Dreams, Small Screen, I had never heard of Farnsworth. Considering he invented television, you would think that I would have at least recognized his name because we are a generation that has grown up watching television programs. However, there is a reason I don’t recognize his name…

Farnsworth’s interest in television began when he found science and radio magazines in the attic of his home in Idaho. By age 14, he already had a blueprint for an electronic TV system. So why do we associate the name, Vladimir Zworykin, with the invention of television and not the name of a small town genius?

Zworykin was backed by RCA and therefore had power over Farnsworth. Farnsworth rejected an offer of $100,000 from RCA for his entire company, but in the end, RCA still ended up with the credit. RCA unveiled their TV at the 1939 New York World’s Fair and Franklin D. Roosevelt even gave the first speech about television. Farnsworth had unveiled his television 5 years earlier, but was somehow forgotten. Why? This is definitely a case of David and Goliath: only the little guy didn’t win.

The idea of domination/subordination can help explain Farnsworth’s story. Paula S. Rothenberg states on page 112 of “Race, Class, and Gender in the United States,” that “the dominant group usually holds all of the open power and authority and determines the ways in which power may be acceptably used.”

In this case, RCA was the dominant group. RCA wrongly used their power to send Zworykin to Farnsworth’s lab to steal the blueprints of his television tube. RCA had power because they were a large company and had money to finance research. Originally, Farnsworth went to the bank and borrowed $25,000 because he promised to have a picture within one year; however, RCA had many more resources. It’s unfair that RCA was able to maintain power over Farnsworth, but they were able to do so because they were such a well known company. Unfortunately, it makes sense that people would trust a radio giant rather than one unknown man.

Farnsworth eventually won the patent battle and was paid loyalties, but “RCA got credit for developing and presenting television,” according to the documentary “Big Dreams, Small Screen.” Farnsworth deserved to have the credit, but was powerless against the RCA giant.