Speak Up: Comments

Comment on "The Best Man: Questions for Consideration"

Fri, 21 Dec 2012 21:03:00 -0500

It was very interesting to watch this movie before the recent election race for the U.S. Presidency. An interesting comparison can be drawn between the political bashing ads of the current election campaigns compared to the research that both candidate finds on their opponent in The Best Man. I am not sure how deep the bashing of candidates would actually have gone in past elections. I think this was a slight foreshadowing of the current bashing that occurs in the presidential races.

Another interesting point is the title. Are either of the candidates the best man? Based on the end of the movie, I believe this was the best way to relay that neither of the two primary candidates were the best man. I think Russel shows his deep understanding of honesty by deferring the candidacy. If he did not have a deep care of the country, he would have tried to take the presidency for his own even though he may have been "mental." Here Russel uses both honesty and intelligence to make sure the country ends up in the best hands possible.

- Natalie Masters

Comment on "The Nun's Story: Questions for Reflection"

Fri, 21 Dec 2012 19:50:11 -0500

I do not think there is any way a person can be perfect. I would consider the definition of perfection to be without any flaws. To be human is to have flaws. There have been many individuals throughout human history who have made significant impacts on our world. According to the Christians, even Christ does not believe that he was perfect. This is why the idea of forgiveness is so important to the Christian faith. I cannot even truly describe what I think a perfect human being is… The closest thing I would say would be someone who lives their life in the service of others. I still do not think the word perfect applies. I also believe that humans should not try to achieve perfection. To me perfection seems to be a self-fulfilling idea, instead of achieving perfection for yourself, there are other things you could be working towards.

- Natalie Masters

Comment on "The Lives of Others: Questions for Reflection"

Fri, 21 Dec 2012 11:21:04 -0500

Something I find most interesting about this film is the dehumanization of people. We see this from the very beginning of the film. In the opening scene of the film I find it interesting that the man being interrogated is being treated as a number, just another people that this man has to see in his day. He even refers to him as his prison number. The man interrogating him shows absolutely no emotion.

The cuts between the interrogation and the lecture are quite startling. Again, the man interrogating him shows no emotion, while it is clear that the man being interrogated is breaking down. The setting of the later interrogation is dark and dismal. It is clear that this man has been interrogated for quite some time and his mind is beginning to crumble. While this is all happening, the interrogator remains cold and robotic.

Though this man seems cold and almost inhuman, it is apparent that he knows exactly what he is doing and keeping his cold demeanor is part of that process. I find it interesting that everybody in the lecture is unmoving and cold.

However later in the film the interrogator, Wiesler, reveals a softer more caring side of himself, while still maintaining his appearance. This film plays with the idea of good and evil. Who is really good and who is really evil? Can you be one or is everybody a little bit of both? I don't know if I would use the word evil, maybe bad instead, but I feel that everybody, not just the characters in The Lives of Others has good and bad in them, whether they show it or not. This film shows the good and bad of people in the different aspects of their lives, and how they try to keep them separate. But naturally, when things get messy those two are going to collide.

- ALEXANDRA LEE SCHNEIDER

Comment on "The Third Man: Questions for Reflection"

Fri, 21 Dec 2012 10:55:18 -0500

I would like to start off by talking about the music used in this film. I have not seen many classic films other than what I have seen for this course. This music in this film stands out to me. It is generally used between scenes to create a smoother segue. Having recently watched Citizen Kane, it is natural for me to compare the two. After I watched Citizen Kane I felt that the acting and cutaways were something that I found pretty peculiar and I wanted to discuss them further. The cutaways were abrupt and almost awkward.

However in The Third Man, even though it is just eight years later, I find it much more modern. There is background music to set the tone and the music in between scenes makes for cleaner cutaways and segues. I views more like a modern film—the format and the general idea of smoothness.

I also found the acting to be very entertaining, and less distracting than I found in Citizen Kane. The characters seem to be more comfortable in front of a camera, whereas when I was watching Citizen Kane, I felt that the actors would have been much more comfortable on stage. That is understandable considering the year and the on-screen experience of most of the actors. The Third man has many more close ups and the communication between characters is much more conversational and natural. I think that my biggest problem with Citizen Kane is that I was distracted by the boisterous speech and overacting. I believe it took away from the storyline that I truly enjoyed. Although I did not find the subject matter and story as interesting as I found Citizen Kane, I found it easier to follow and more relaxing to watch.

- ALEXANDRA LEE SCHNEIDER

Comment on "Citizen Kane: Questions for Reflection"

Thu, 20 Dec 2012 23:43:49 -0500

Though I have become accustomed to classic films throughout this semester, I find the acting in Citizen Kane quite different from the others. That is not to say that the acting is sub par, or not even that do not like it. There is something very theatrical about it, as if this were being performed on stage. I believe that if I saw a stage production of Citizen Kane with the same actors, it would much more enjoyable. The more intimate scenes feel forced. The actors voices are very pronounced, boisterous, and the tone is very even for the most part. There also does not seem to be natural pauses. Everything is fast paced, quick draw, and witty. Since I enjoy film and television so much, I often watch behind the scenes footage. Much of this film reminds me of rushed table reads.

It seems to me that many of the actors in this film are not comfortable with the cameras focusing on their faces. Many times throughout the film there were scenes where two to four men would be having a fast-paced conversation which usually ended abruptly. There was not a smooth segue but rather the camera would pan in on a character, who often looked uncomfortable and sometimes even shaky and then cut to the next scene.

Another instance that reminded me of stage theater was the dinner scene with music and dancing. It literally seemed like a choreographed musical number. That's not to say I didn't enjoy it—I did. I found it to be really fun, interesting, and unexpected. It brought light to an otherwise very serious and complex film.

- ALEXANDRA LEE SCHNEIDER

Comment on "The Nun's Story: Questions for Reflection"

Thu, 20 Dec 2012 23:14:17 -0500

No person can be perfect and if someone tried to be, how could we define this? Complex and different cultures and religions obviously disallow a concrete definition of what perfect is. To exemplify this, we can think about the fact that some people believe that it is okay to murder others for religious reasons. In the convent, we can see that the nuns are always pressing people to be perfect, which is absolutely maddening. It is simply in human nature to sin, therefore perfection isn't real and the movie even creates a negative outlook towards perfection, associating it with something that creates distress and unhappiness.

- MIKAILA JEANINE RODGERS

Comment on "The Lives of Others: Questions for Reflection"

Thu, 20 Dec 2012 23:06:05 -0500

Yes, art can have the ability to make us better people. It provides an outlet from the existential terrors of existence. It allows us to express our deepest thoughts and emotions. However, I believe that it may be in human nature to sin and to do bad things, therefore art may only change us under extreme circumstances.
This can be exemplified in the scene when Dreymann plays "Sonata for a Good Man" when we see a change in Wiesler and this change leads him to contribute to the lives of others. But does he change because of art? One can argue that his real character merely was revealed. He was always a good person but his character was corrupted by his work.
I also believe that love, like art, can change people.

- MIKAILA JEANINE RODGERS

Comment on "Two for the Road: Questions for Reflection"

Thu, 20 Dec 2012 22:31:45 -0500

I love the structure of Two For the Road. The timeline shifts were difficult to follow at first because I was uncertain of the years the film was jumping to. However, it became an easy adjustment. It was not the the jumping between times either, but also the comparison between the two traveling alone and them traveling with Howie and Kathy. There is a scene just about in the middle of the film that is sped up. It represents the hectic nature of traveling with others and trying to keep to another persons' schedule. Not long after that the group splits off, as if that last hectic moment was too much. After they abandon Howie and Cathy, Mark says to Joanna that they will only ever travel alone.

However the time shifts in the movie play an important role here. Not long after Mark makes that loving statement he is shown cheating on Joanna. The shifts then become more frequent and quicker, showing their child, then back to their first trip together, and then back to them with their daughter. The shifts from young love to tense parents These cutaways bring a depressing and pessimistic mood to the film. For the first half of the movie, the scenes where they are young and in love are refreshing and hopeful, however the movie takes a dark turn. Those short scenes no longer feel desirable but rather naive.

Though the flashbacks and time shifts in the film bring a dismal tone to the film, the way the film is edited to pretty remarkable. The way the scenes are connected by location but separated by time is very interesting. In some cases it seems that they are actually colliding with their past and future.

- ALEXANDRA LEE SCHNEIDER

Comment on "Thirteen Conversations About One Thing: Questions for Reflection"

Thu, 20 Dec 2012 21:08:06 -0500

Towards the beginning of the film, Walker says “It can never go back to the way it was.” Though this took place in a physics class, this statement stuck out to me. As he said this he wrote “irreversible” on the board in large letters and underlined it. Knowing what I know about the rest of the film, this did prove to be important. I believe that the one thing, or maybe just the theme of the film is the irreversibility. I do not mean this in the pessimistic sense. I believe that in this movie the idea of irreversibility simply means that things cannot be exactly how how they were, but they can change.

It is quite obvious that Gene's character is the shining example of schadenfreude. Before he calls Smiley into his office to fire him, he makes it quite clear that he will take pleasure in letting him go. He notes that he finally wants to wipe that smile off his face. After he let's him go, Gene seems incredibly disappointed the Smiley was able to look on the bright side of the situation. This does not sit well with me because for some reason I sympathize with Gene's character. Perhaps it is because it is just such a great performance by Alan Arkin that distracts us from his cruel intended actions.

Another aspect I found interesting that a lot of people touched on was the idea of the six degrees of separation in the film. I first realized the connection between the characters when I first saw Troy and Walker in the car together. However, when I became more familiar with the characters and their names I realized all the smaller connections and how their stories connect and affect each other.

- ALEXANDRA LEE SCHNEIDER

Comment on "The Nun's Story: Questions for Reflection"

Thu, 20 Dec 2012 18:53:44 -0500

The line “You can cheat us, but you cannot cheat yourself or God” to be incredibly powerful. Another nun who is preparing to leave and abandon the cloth says this to Sister Luke. The other woman reveals that she would be cheating if she remained. Though Sister Luke does not say much to try to convince her other wise, or really say anything in response at all, her face speaks volumes. Her face reads worrisome and questionable. I believe that the fact that this other woman is able to admit that she would be cheating herself and God made Sister Luke realize that perhaps she is not being completely honest with herself.

Shortly after, she is asked if she would be able to fail her examination to prove her humility. The music is dramatic and there is apparent shock on Sister Luke's face. The inner workings of the mother house are slowly being revealed. They are, in a way, corrupt. Often, I feel that the nun's with seniority pressure the new nuns to get what is best for senior nuns. I am not even sure if I got the intended message of the film, but it seems that in many instances, there is corruption masked as “sacrifice” or “humility.” The first example of this being that even though Sister Luke's examination was the fourth best out of eighty, she is sent to work in the mental institution. I believe that she was being punished for not accepting the offer of failing her examination. I admire her personal strength and strong footing.

- ALEXANDRA LEE SCHNEIDER

Comment on "The Crying Game: Questions for Reflection"

Thu, 20 Dec 2012 17:59:16 -0500

Even in the last twenty minutes of the film, I feel that Fergus (Jimmy) and Dil really do care for each other. Even when she has him tied up, keeping him from his mission. However, there is a tension between them throughout the film. When they first meet in the hair salon there is a odd exchange, but a visible connection. Later in the bar it is apparent that Fergus is fixated on Dil, and she enjoys toying with him. Her outgoing personality and strong appearance are matched by Fergus' quiet and mysterious demeanor.

Before I watch a film I usually do a little research on the actors and storyline, but I did not in this case. I am glad I didn't because I would have most likely ruined a lot of the surprises and shock of the story, leaving me without the suspense that is intended. If I had to label this film as one genre I would have to pick suspense, but it is much more than that. It is a political thriller and a romance as well. Though I found the entire film to be incredibly exciting and captivating, the relationship between Fergus and Dil is so dynamic and interesting.

I believe that when Fergus and Dil initially met, he was blinded by the idea of her, as Jody's girlfriend. There was a mystery to her and Fergus could not see what we as the audience could objectively see. It is the main reason I am glad I did not research the actors in the film prior to viewing it. When I first was Dil I did question her appearance, and I wondered why she was chosen as Jody's girlfriend. She is attractive, but her masculinity was quite apparent at first glance. I brushed this idea off, thinking I was being too critical of casting. It wasn't until they were getting intimate and she revealed her true self that this idea popped into my head again. I'm glad I put that in the back of my mind because it let me share the perspective of Fergus.

- ALEXANDRA LEE SCHNEIDER

Comment on "Thirteen Conversations About One Thing: Questions for Reflection"

Thu, 20 Dec 2012 17:47:17 -0500

I loved Alan Arkin's performance in this, and I think this was a nice primer to seeing The Lives of Others. I think the film taking place in NYC is beautiful in both it's predictability and it's romanticism. NYC is the setting for an infinite amount of films, and this film pays homage to that by taking a stab on the "one man's life touches so man others" principle. I was not surprised at all to see a film like this in such a city. We are so desensitized to those around us, and this is a kind of film that bursts that bubble we create (also similar to Six Degrees of Separation!).
I agree that the one thing is "happiness."
Focusing on Alan Arkin (because I love him), his character Gene is the perfect example of the schadenfreude trope. His own depression causes him to become frustrated with the happiness of others, so much so that he tries to cause harm to another in order to knock him down a peg. Gene's journey through the film is all the more enjoyable when you know that he comes from suffering. How tragic a picture is it that he often wonders if he had waved at his wife, he might have saved his marriage? This film forces you to consider the consequences of your actions, however small. And when Gene recommends the man he fired for another job, and then waves to that woman on the subway? That's poetry. That's the kind of magic that only happens in New York City.

- KATHERINE ELIZABETH MURT

Comment on "The Nun's Story: Questions for Reflection"

Thu, 20 Dec 2012 17:36:58 -0500

I think the way this film portrays the quest for perfection serves as a condemnation of perfection itself. In watching Sister Luke's struggle against her nature to become what she sees as perfect, I do not see how achieving perfection will make you happy.

In all of my elementary school religious education, I was never taught to strive to be "perfect." Strive to be better, yes, and to strive to be the best you can be, but never held to an impossible standard like perfection. As is shown in the film, the pressures of reaching an unreachable standard result in nothing more than frustrated unhappiness.

The idea that Sister Luke must shed her memories and personality to achieve perfection makes logical sense, as you have lived your life steeped in imperfections. In order to progress, you must leave all of that behind. However, I believe that is an impossible task. You cannot uncondition yourself, and those that do uncondition themselves from their past are often the victims of brainwash or cult activity. Perfection, religious or otherwise, is impractical. We as humans have lived thousands of years wallowing in imperfect selves, and no one has made it out as a perfect person...for good reason.

- KATHERINE ELIZABETH MURT

Comment on "The Lives of Others: Questions for Reflection"

Thu, 20 Dec 2012 17:24:39 -0500

What a freaking film. I loved it. I was familiar with it from my German class days (I knew it as Das Leben der Andern) but I had never watched it. I was really blown away. One of the finest examples of a change in heart on film that I have ever seen.

This film reminded me so much of The Crying Game's discussion of natures and what it means to be who you truly are. Wiesler, from the outset, is a scorpion. He preys on fear, collects people's weakness, and lives his life on a schedule of intimidation. How is it that he can change so drastically? I am always battling in my mind back and forth as to whether people can really change...more often than not, I believe that people do not change. But this film makes me want to reconsider that idea so badly. When Dreymann plays "Sonata for a Good Man," I cried. I cried because Wiesler cried. To me, it was almost like a song that was written to match Wiesler's soul...a mechanism to unlock who he truly is inside. A key. That is so beautiful. And it is not only a change we see in him, but a change that saves a life. A change that changes lives.

I also loved the scene where Dreymann asks the minister why his house wasn't bugged, to which the minister smugly replies that it had been the whole time, and they knew everything that had happened. What a pretentious bastard...he knows nothing. Dreymann's confusion is amazing cinema. You feel such love and appreciation for Wiesler, a man who has been a horrible monster for much of his life. And then the bit at the end with the typewriter ink smeared onto the report...my heart stopped. I really just loved this film, and it's made me think a lot about change.

- KATHERINE ELIZABETH MURT

Comment on "The Third Man: Questions for Reflection"

Thu, 20 Dec 2012 17:11:49 -0500

I would like to further address the idea of proximity and distance in regards to this film. Firstly, that Forster quote is really provocative, and has had me thinking for a while. In thinking of proximity, I really liked how the film showed the betraying of a friend before and after you have seen them...the film really did this by only showing one side. Holly immediately contacts authorities after seeing Harry in the doorway...this was shocking to me. If I had to betray a friend, I certainly couldn't do so after looking them in the eye. The same can be said about proximity to violence or poverty...they are much harder to continue to ignore when they are staring you in the face.

I really enjoy that Lisa selected this film to parallel the events that happened on campus, especially to highlight the Sandusky and Paterno dynamic. Lisa was my professor at the time the scandal broke. The Forster quote in conjunction with this film makes the task of introspection really, really hard. I cannot say what I would do when asked to betray a friend. I would like to hope that I wouldn't. But I cannot say for sure, and hope to never have to. This film forces you to ask these questions. And if you think about it, when Holly kills Harry and it is something that Harry wants, did Holly really betray him, or has he performed the most selfless act of friendship?

This film is so many more questions than it is answers. I feel perturbed now thinking about it, moreso than I did when I first saw it. And that is probably a good thing, right? The best films are the ones that impact us long after leaving the theatre.

- KATHERINE ELIZABETH MURT

Comment on "Citizen Kane: Questions for Reflection"

Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:53:46 -0500

I cannot say enough about Citizen Kane in this post, so I'll just pick one thing that blew my mind and talk about that.

Out of all of the scenes, no other scene matches how amazing it was to see an elderly Kane walking in front of a double mirror to find himself infinitely multiplied. As an old man who is defeated from years of loveless marriage, false happiness, political mishaps, and a complete departure from his ethical compass in his media empire, Kane is cast infinitely in all directions as he stares dejectedly at his aging reflection staring back at him. This structural element communicated the duplicity of Kane’s entire existence and the millions of personalities and roads that have transpired from these indiscretions. As an old man, he no longer knows who the true Charles Kane is—that man has long since been diluted by the very man himself. This gorgeous scene communicates all of this without a single world. All it takes is Kane’s glance at his reflection to see how far he has come and how much has changed in his life. When I saw this scene, I literally gasped because I thought it was so cool. Welles' use of this technique says so much about Kane without saying anything at all. He is not one man with a happy ending. He is frayed in infinite directions, doomed to reconcile with himself the shortcomings he could never admit.

On his deathbed he utters "Rosebud." A word that could mean literally anything--a memory of his childhood, the happiest moment of his life, a symbol of his distempered youth...the word Rosebud could mean everything, and yet, nothing...just like Kane's existence itself.

- KATHERINE ELIZABETH MURT

Comment on "Two for the Road: Questions for Reflection"

Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:43:44 -0500

I loved this movie. Absolutely loved it. I had never seen it before we watched it in class, and I found it incredibly lovely and charming. I really enjoy the male/female dynamic in Mark and Joanna's realtionship, namely, that Joanna starts out as a take-no-shit kind of woman. I love the early scene when she avoids getting sick and invites herself along for the journey when she first meets Mark, annoying the other girl who had her eyes on him (and serendipitously falls ill, as well!)

I like the comparison to Adam and Eve, because so much of what we see in their early relationship is paradise. They are incredibly happy and in love, and even though Mark can be a jerk, you are endeared to them anyway. As time marches on, we see a distance form between the two...a distance that seems all but irreparable. The film definitely portrays Mark as the one who is hard to live with, much more so than Joanna, and I think this is done to credit Joanna's resiliency. When she strays from Mark and considers leaving him after all he has done to her, you can't help but be in love with the fact that she comes running back to him. Some may see this as idiotic, but I see it as a proof of her wisdom that the love she shares with Mark will prevail. Mark is not always able to see this, but I believe that Joanna can and does see it, even when she acts cold and indifferent.

That is why I love the line when Mark says, "If there's one thing I hate, it's an indispensable woman." Joanna is truly indispensable, and this is communicated so clearly, especially in the final scene when she pulls out Mark's passport. This film is as charming as they come, and is an awesome love story.

- KATHERINE ELIZABETH MURT

Comment on "Sunset Blvd.: Questions for Reflection"

Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:23:23 -0500

It is apparent that each of the characters in Sunset Boulevard is complex. My main focus obviously being on Norma, Joe, and Max. However, it isn't their strange personalities and actions that I find so interesting, rather it is the mystery behind each of them. Each character evolves and shifts their mysterious way throughout the film. For example, when we first meet Joe he seems like a typical man who is down on his luck. Escaping repossession and experiencing rejection at work are surely unfortunate, but it is not uncommon or strange.

But then we meet Norma, who throughout the film surprises us in new ways. However, I find her to be most mysterious and strange in her first scenes. Although assuming Joe is an undertaker for her recently deceased chimpanzee is not the strangest thing we see from Norma, it is the first impression. That together with her appearance, her emotions, the extravagant house, and her butler Max, our first impression is quite haunting. Throughout the film, when things get even stranger and Norma reveals herself to be even more erratic, I was not terribly surprised. I think part of the excitement and enjoyment of this film was watching Norma, Joe, and their dynamic shift, change, and crumble in on itself.

It would have been easy enough for Joe to simply leave in the night or just not return after sneaking out, but something was keeping him at Norma's estate. Initially, it was Norma's hospitality and the sheer fact that Joe did not have anywhere to go and no money to get there. However, when Norma began showering him with lavish gifts there was a shift in Joe. Not only did he feel obligated to stay but I feel that he truly did like this change. I feel that he was weighing his options and considering the consequences of indulging Norma, probably not thinking ahead towards the inevitable escalation.

Though Norma is fragile and unstable, she knows how to manipulate Joe into getting what she wants. She knows that she can get a little further each time she asks something of him and that there is no room to move backwards. So each time Joe indulges her, he becomes a little bit more stuck. Joe moves from the guesthouse into the main house, he accepts her gifts, he helps her write her screen play, and they are even intimate. Norma may seem weak but I believe she is very smart and clever in how she essentially traps Joe in her life. Joe stays after New Years because he feels that he is committed. If he left, Norma would undoubtedly suffered a horrendous breakdown and most likely try to commit suicide again. In this way I think that Joe has good intentions, but it is those intentions that inevitably lead to his death.

- ALEXANDRA LEE SCHNEIDER

Comment on "Europa, Europa: Fragen zum Nachdenken"

Thu, 20 Dec 2012 15:44:15 -0500

I want to start off by saying that I am a huge fan of Holocaust films. I have seen many film and read almost anything I can get my hands on. I even used to study with Jewish studies minor at the previous university. This film, along with The Pianist, are two of my favorite films of all time. I think that is because we as a culture love to sympathize with a character in hiding. As a person who has had little hardship in my life, I think that I find these stories so extreme and adventurous that other films with less action and suspense do not, in a way, seem to measure up.

Though I love both The Pianist and Europa Europa, the two films are very different for a variety of obvious reasons. In The Pianist, Szpilman spends most of the film either working in a Jewish Labor camp or in hiding after bombings. I kept this film in mind during Europa Europa because of Solly's fascination with the Jewish ghetto's. In The Pianist, the setting in amazingly devastating. The images that are shown are upsetting and very powerful. There are many powerful images in Europa Europa as well however, the reactions we as an audience see are mainly from the soldiers, and not from the victims. Although both films show the aspects of devastation and victory, the point of view skews our opinion in a way. This also makes us relate to the characters in a different way. We root for their survival in different ways. I personally was running different scenarios through my head for each character getting caught, and I found that even though they were both in hiding, my expectations were different.

- ALEXANDRA LEE SCHNEIDER

Comment on "Sunset Blvd.: Questions for Reflection"

Thu, 20 Dec 2012 15:28:38 -0500

This film portrays the self-obsession that Hollywood stars can achieve. You cannot entirely blame Norma for her self-obsession. Everyone feeds into to, the butler, her old fans, and even Joe at the beginning of his stay. The fans are the reason that Hollywood stars can develop a shelf obsession. If Norma realized that she was not as well loved as she thought, the entire plot may have never played out. Applying this to Hollywood in general, you cannot blame the “stars” when they mess up. They are in the center of many people’s attention on the cover of gossip magazines because we put them there. The public obsession with celebrities disgusts me. The people in this world who deserve the attention are the ones who are trying to fix it. There are countless people working hours in labs towards the cures for currently deathly illnesses. All their recognition comes from within their own community while everyone know who stared in the latest James Bond film. Sunset Boulevard is a unique interpretation of exactly what could happen to the people that we idolize so much. We encourage their self-loving and eventually it drove Norma to insanity.
Once you find out the truth about the situation, I do think life is merciful to Norma. As we can see no one but Joe actually stands up to her. They do not want to cause her pain or hurt by revealing she lost her popularity. The director she consults will not even tell her the only reason he called was to get a car like hers for the film. The butler keeps everything hidden from her knowledge. This is merciful because she does not have to deal with the depression of losing the lime light. She does not even notice that the only people who are at their party are the people she hired to be there. She is pathetic, but does not even know it.

- Natalie Masters