Letters to Editors

237

Letters to editors
By Eagle Staff

Boyhood: A Second Opinion

 To the Editor:

There was I time when, like John Keusenkothen, I heralded Boyhood as one of the best films of the

year. This was a misguided gut reaction, fueled by the same nostalgia John mentioned in his review.

After some analysis, I now hold that though it may be a significant achievement in filmmaking, as a

film, it is an unfocused mess. John states that there is no real “plot” to the film, and instead its

purpose is character development.

Upon a second viewing, I tried to map out Mason’s character progression and quickly realized that he

had no logical development. With each jump in time, he becomes a completely different character.

While I would agree that kids change radically as they grow up, there is usually a clear path that can

be followed. They are molded by people, events, and their surroundings. Boyhood isn’t concerned

with what has made these characters who they are, rather it is only concerned that they are different.

Did I really need to sit through a three hour film to know that people change? What was Boyhood

trying to achieve besides public accolades for its twelve year production? It seems that Richard

Linklater didn’t care about the actual film he was making, he only cared about its production. Many

of the scenes feel meaningless to the overall narrative.

They could be cut out entirely because they do nothing to further Mason’s character at all. Boyhood

can best be described as a handful of scene haphazardly thrown together over twelve years. I am

impressed by the dedication Richard Linklater and his cast showed in the filming of Boyhood, but I

can’t say that the final product makes for a good movie. As a technical achievement, sure, but not as a

character-driven narrative.

Montgomery Cloud
Senior

#SurvivorLeagueProbs

 To the Editor:

As an avid football viewer, I can definitely say that there is no way that the survivor league at St.

Thomas is anywhere near fair or sportsman like.

First off, the commissioner of the league has the power to edit his picks without the knowing of all the

other participants. Furthermore there is no consistency with the so called survivors. Even the biggest

experts in football win one year and loose the other. For instance, Mr. Simon, the savant of STH

survivor league, lost week two with solid picks of the Bears and the (0-6) Raiders. Even the

commissioner of corruption lost.

It is now that I call for a special sub committee to be created from our Student government to

investigate these vicious scandals across the board.

Raymond Snodgrass
Senior

 

SHARE

NO COMMENTS