"Well this is it. We're gonna die today. I've never even kissed anyone before, have you?"

Elephant
2003; USA; 81 min.

Director: Gus Van Sant
Screenplay: Gus Van Sant
Music: Felix Andrew (sound mixer)

Cast:
Alex - Alex Frost
Eric - Eric Deulen
John McFarland - John Robinson
Elias - Elias McConnell
Jordan - Jordan Taylor
Carrie - Carrie Finklea
Nicole - Nicole George
Brittany - Brittany Mountain
Acadia - Alicia Miles
Kristen Hicks - Michelle
Benny - Bennie Dixon
Nathan - Nathan Tyson

*SPOILER ALERT: I'm definitely going to spoil some of the plot in my post, so just be warned...
Let me clear something up before I start blogging: When I say that I love this movie, I mean the way in which it is shot (no pun intended, honestly!). I'm not some sadistic person who is amused by school violence. On the contrary, the topic is always something that I find extremely upsetting. That being said, I absolutely loved "Elephant." I thought that the personalities of the characters were real, and not overexaggerated and stereotyped. The cinematography was stunning. The way that Van Sant follows around the students gives you a direct view of their perspective - literally! I thought that the imagery with the clouds in both the establishing and final shots was brilliant. The non-linear structure of the film was extremely interesting and made the viewer think. The way that the stories connect and how the same moment is re-played is probably one of them most innovative ideas I've seen in film. The film suggests that everyone is connected, yet at the same time, disconnected. While these stories are interwoven, everyone is quite absorbed in their own lives. It's even apparent when the film around the character you are following is blurred - the characters seem to be oblivious to others' problems. That's where the title of the film comes in.

One of my favorite books, The Last Lecture, by Randy Pausch, describes the "elephant in the room" concept. While he was not the first to coin the well-known idea, it was in Pausch's book that I heard of it. Pausch, a late professor at Carnegie Mellon, refers to his pancreatic cancer as the "elephant in the room." When he gave his "last lecture" at Carnegie Mellon, he gave out stuffed animals at the end, one of them being an elephant. Pausch started his lecture by talking about the "elephant" and that his cancer was not going to hold him back. The "elephant in the room" is something that is so obvious, but people blatantly ignore. I think that "Elephant" is a thoughtful, intelligent title for this film. The isolation that both Alex (Alex Frost) and Eric (Eric Deulen) face is extremely obvious from the second time we see them in the film, when one of the boys is being pelted with spitballs during class. Alex and Eric aren't the only "elephants." The whole idea of school shooting is an "elephant" in our society. People don't want to think about it, because they know that it won't personally affect them. Unfortunately and sadly, it has happened (i.e. the horrific events at Columbine). Many people don't deal with this "elephant," and ignore it completely.

With my new "film eyes," I began to watch "Elephant" completely determined to spot hidden film elements. Much of what I wrote down is probably over-analysis, but I feel compelled to share my ideas (and some little details that I have noticed in the film) on my blog, which people may or may not read...

- The name of the high school is Watt High School. Could Watt possibly relate to the unit of power, watts? The plot is ultimately, when the boys are faced with the principal, a fight against power.

- Most of the visual imagery is composed of lines and linear objects.

- At one point in the film, there is a green carpet. In the beginning of the film, the sky is green. Do these opposing spaces mean that the world has literally turned "upside down"?

- I noticed that when Elias (Elias McConnell) is taking photos, John (John Robinson) taps his hip. I originally thought that this forshadowed John being shot in the hip. I was wrong.

- The lamp post top in the establishing shot is shaped in a backwards "E," while the light almost looks like an "A." Does this have any relation to Eric and Alex?

- When Nathan (Nathan Tyson) is moving across the field, he steps over many lines. He goes between the people playing frisbee and the field line. My original thought was that Nathan was the killer because he was crossing these boundaries. I was wrong.

- In one scene, Michelle's tag is sticking out of her sweater. Why? Is she just unkempt like that? Is it intentional?

- The director alludes to the Nazi's by showing a segment of what Alex and Eric are watching on TV.

- The chemical developing container that Elias flips up and down sounds like a gun. I thought he was the killer. I was wrong.

- The film uses pathetic fallacy when it depicts the thunderstorm and darkening clouds before the shooting.

- One of the blonde girls in the "popular trio" is cut out of one of the frames while she is talking. Does this mean she will be "out of the picture" and shot later? My foreshadowing was correct, but I think it is merely coincidence.

- One of the brunette girls says, "I'm not gonna' kill you." I found this line interesting because I thought it may foreshadow the fact that someone else might kill her [the girl she is talking to]. I was correct, however, I don't know if this was a real moment of foreshadowing.

- The blonde boy (I'm not sure if it was Alex or Eric; I'm still unsure about who's who.) is lying in his bed with his hands crossed over his head in an "x" shape. I thought that this might foreshadow him being handcuffed and potentially arrested. I was wrong. Van Sant doesn't offer any consequences for the boys' actions.

- Allusion to Macbeth: "So foul and fair a day I have not seen." - Alex

- Why does Michelle's outfit match her boss' at the library the day that she is shot?

- Does the Gay Straight Alliance meeting scene forshadow the kiss that Alex and Eric share in the shower scene?

- Film Goof: When we first see the boys (Alex and Eric) in their camo gear, the weather outside is cloudy, but the ground is dry. When we see the boys later on during the re-play of the same scene from their perspective (as opposed to John's earlier) the ground is wet.

That concludes my intense film moments analysis. I know most of it is probably a stretch, but who knows? Maybe all of my ideas will pay off and I'll get a "Baby Daz" for originality! ;-)

The plot reminded me exactly of the novel, Nineteen Minutes, by Jodi Picoult. Picoult is one of my favorite authors, and usually tells her stories from the point of view of numerous characters. Picoult jumps back and forth between characters by having each chapter be written by a different character. This is almost identical to the intertitles that we see in "Elephant." Nineteen Minutes has the same non-linear structure as "Elephant," and is also pertaining to a school shooting. Nineteen Minutes was published in 2008, while "Elephant" was released in 2003. Suspicious... I almost want to e-mail Picoult to see if she has seen "Elephant." The two works bear an uncanny resemblance.

From the beginning of the film on, I feel like Van Sant wants you to think that each new character is the killer. First, when we're introduced to John, I though he was definitely the killer. His family life, including his drunk dad, supported my thoughts. Then, I thought that it was Nathan, the "jock," because (SPOILER ALERT FOR NINETEEN MINUTES) in Picoult's novel, it's that same character type who does the shooting. The plot in Nineteen Minutes also suggests that Carrie could be the killer. When we meet Michelle, I was definite that it was her. There was obviously something going on with her (like when she wouldn't wear shorts in gym). I thought she probably had a body image issue, like anorexia or bulimia. Also, Michelle was a loner. Elias also seemed like he could be the killer. However, after all of the build-up, it's obvious that Alex and Eric are the killers when you meet them. The idea of two boys executing the premeditated killing spree is congruous with the events that occured at Columbine High School.

When most people were criticizing "Elephant" in my class, their main complaint was the slow pace of the film. "Too much walking," was a common complaint. I feel that the pace was appropriate for it's purpose. As a favorite teacher of mine once said, "Form Follows Function!" The slow pace really made you feel that you were a part of the boring school day. You could truly feel like you were there, which made the movie quite horrifying. The slow pace also allows for the plot to build. I think that the director wants to try and build a relationship between the viewers and each of the characters so that the ending and eventual death of the characters is that much more horrific and personal. Van Sant doesn't really suggest motivations for the killers. The director does offer the following as ideas: Nazi following, violent video games, bullying, and unsupervision.

I know this is an extremely long entry, but I definitely had a lot to say about probably the shortest full-length film we've watched in class. If you've made it this far in reading, feel free to comment... my blog is like Michelle, very lonely. (Just kidding... but honestly, you've already taken the time to read my crazy ideas, so why not?!) As I stated in the beginning of this entry, I loved this film, and think that it appropriately deals with an upsetting, horrific subject matter. I would warn viewers before they watch the film that the content is disturbing and some of the language is vulgar; but if you can get past that, Van Sant's genius camerawork triumphs and shines in this film.

iRate: 5/5 perspectives
Trailer: http://www.imdb.com/video/screenplay/vi1000538393/