Jessie Savini
Experiential paper
Old Town Ventimiglia
On the Friday of our three day weekend, I was feeling adventurous. With no classes or responsibilities for the next three days, Europe was my canvas to do, go, or see whatever my heart desired. So I decided to go to Italy. I grabbed Michelle and Melissa, and off we went to the little town of Ventimiglia. This turned out to be one of the best decisions I made during my time in France. The day was nothing less than perfect, with the best part being the two hours we spent exploring Old Town Ventimiglia.
After wandering around for a few hours in what I now know is the new part of town, we ended up meeting a nice Italian woman named Maria. When we asked her about the history of the town and the nearby fortress overlooking the ocean, she told us that “every old European city has an Old Town. They all have an old church, and some will also have a castle nearby – and most are surrounded by some sort of wall which was built to keep pirates out.” Maria then told us that we needed to get away from the tourist scene in the new part of town to have an authentic Italian experience, and she was more than happy to share the secrets of her town with us. After telling us how to reach old town, she said goodbye and we went on our way.
And so we started the trek to Old Town. Over the bridge, under the tunnel, up the hill. How did she say to get there, again? Did we pass it? I could see the steeple of the church, but could not find out how to get there. About to give up, we decided to take a side street that we passed earlier to see where it led us. This “street” could not really even be considered a street – barely big enough for a motorcycle to have driven through, it was a steep uneven cobblestone road. Skeptical that we would ever find what we were looking for and not knowing if the dimly lit path would take us anywhere, I was about ready to turn around. It is a good thing we did not give up, because after a few more minutes we rounded a corner in our path and saw a scene which looked like something from a movie. We had found Old Town. And it was already what I expected and more.
Here we were: Old Town Ventimiglia. I heard children laughing in the distance, I saw clothes hanging to dry from windows above me, and I smelled bread baking in a small bakery nearby. Kids were playing soccer in the small piazza in the heart of town, while their mothers watched on from the steps of the church. I almost sensed that I was imposing on someone’s hidden secret that no one was supposed to know about. I felt like I was tiptoeing around someone backyard, a place that I did not belong. But no one seemed to mind. While we got a few questioning stares, most of the people gave us friendly smiles that seemed to understand our appreciation and respect for their town.
We explored the little town for hours. We went down little side streets, trying to get lost on purpose to see where it would take us. The sights, smells, and sounds were like nothing I had ever heard before. The town was remarkably beautiful in its own dilapidated way – the church, buildings, and shops each seemed to tell the stories of the history of town. I could smell delicious food cooking from the open windows of apartments above me. I could picture the homemade lasagna, gnocchi, and spaghetti that belonged to those scents. I could hear the friendly conversations as neighbors passed each other on the street – recognizing that everyone in town had probably known each other since childhood. I could only wonder what these people would think about me if they came to my neighborhood and saw how I lived.
Old Town was full of character and personality: there were kids playing soccer in the town square under the bell tower, there were old men sitting outside talking and looking like they were straight from a movie, and the women were gossiping and yelling from their windows to the other women. The views were also gorgeous; at the top of the hill that Old Town is perched upon we were able to see the whole town and the ocean coastline for miles.
As I sat at the top of the town and tried to take in everything I had seen, I began to understand why people would want to live there. Maria had told us earlier that the families of most people in Ventimiglia had been living there for generations, but I was not able to comprehend why people would stay in this tiny town until I witnessed the way of life in Old Town. I realized why the people of Ventimiglia would want to live the same repetitive life that their ancestors had laid out years and years before: it was the simple things in life that drew them back time and time again. Life seemed to move slower, and I felt as though I had traveled back in time about fifty years. The pace of life appeared much more leisurely in Ventimiglia, and people really seemed to savor each and every moment. It is an oasis of harmony. A little slice of heaven in a fast-paced and frantic world.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Another Year
Jessie Savini
Review 6
Another Year: 2010. Director: Mike Leigh. Screenwriter: Mike Leigh. Producer: Georgina Lowe. Cast: Jim Broadbent, Lesley Manville, Ruth Sheen, Oliver Maltman, Imelda Staunton. Running time: 130 minues.
Another Year left me feeling satisfied. Satisfied only that the film was not titled Another Decade, Another Century, or even Another Two Years. Because one year was more than enough and anything more that that would have been absolutely unbearable. It is not that the acting is bad, it is not that there is a terrible storyline, nor is it poor production quality. But it made my skin itch and I was more than elated when those beautiful credits started to role. The story was downright depressing; Mary (Lesley Manville), is an annoying fifty-something year old trying to get in the pants of her best friend’s thirty old son because she has no one to love her. Gerri (Ruth Sheen), the best friend, puts up with all of Mary’s crazy antics for reasons unbeknownst to her husband Tom (Jim Broadbent), or anyone who watches the movie, really. The film goes on to explore the troubles of Gerri and Tom’s friends, and show how each and every friend has their own misfortunes.
The film revolves around the lives of Gerri and Tom for a full year, with the year divided into four subsections by each season. Though Gerri and Tom are happily married, the film more or less is focused on their unhappy friends, and how their friends’ misfortunes affect them in different ways. First, there is the previously mentioned Mary, who drowns her sorrows in alcohol and constantly shows up Gerri and Tom’s house whether invited or not. Though at the beginning of the movie Gerri feels sympathy for Mary, the mood changes by the end of the movie when Gerri realizes the toll Mary has taken a toll on all of her other relationships. Then, there is Tom’s brother (David Bradley) who stays with the couple while mourning the death of his wife. Though Gerri and Tom offer their home as a place to stay so he is not lonely, there is nothing they can do or say to comfort this inconsolable man. Lastly, there is Tom’s childhood friend Ken (Parker Wight), who is a fatter, meaner, and sloppier male version of Gerri’s friend Mary. He is distraught over his pending divorce, and has resolved to be an unhappy and lonely man for the rest of his life. There is also the angry nephew, who did not seem to offer anything to the story except yet another unhappy personality.
These miserable characters are people whom I would not like to come in contact with, on or off screen. While watching the movies, I felt irritated, depressed, and miserable. Each and every character bothered me; Gerri bothered me because she willingly put up with Mary’s depressing misfortunes involving the lack of love in her life, an expensive car that would never work, and the garden that she could just never get to grow. Mary was the friend who always had something negative to say, and she brought the mood of the movie right down with her. Tom bothered me because he was not able to help his brother cope with the loss of his wife, but instead just let him have a place to sleep at night. He also annoyed me because he did not bother to even try to get help for his friend Ken, obviously a raging alcoholic whose life has no real direction.
All in all, this movie was a melancholy British version of the television show Desperate Housewives. Instead of living on the cookie-cutter Wisteria Lane, this group lived on Miserable Avenue. Instead of gossiping about who was sleeping with whom, they gossiped about who had the worst life out of everyone. Instead of getting together to talk over afternoon tea, they got together to drown their sorrows in bad alcohol. They are an unhappy group of friends, with very few positive things to say.
Along with being thankful that the movie was over, I left the movie feeling depressed. I was sad for Mary, and I was sad about the fact that I could be Mary in thirty years. Anyone could end up being Mary or Ken. Not a happy thought or ending to a movie. It was not fun to leave the movie at 10:40 in the morning (for some reason I went to the 8:30 screening) feeling so moody and sad. I understand the point of the film is to expose the realistically sad lives that many people lead, but this will not fare well at a box office. Movies are an easy way to escape reality, but this movie is reminiscent of the depressing lives that many people live, which is never an enjoyable thing to watch.
Review 6
Another Year: 2010. Director: Mike Leigh. Screenwriter: Mike Leigh. Producer: Georgina Lowe. Cast: Jim Broadbent, Lesley Manville, Ruth Sheen, Oliver Maltman, Imelda Staunton. Running time: 130 minues.
Another Year left me feeling satisfied. Satisfied only that the film was not titled Another Decade, Another Century, or even Another Two Years. Because one year was more than enough and anything more that that would have been absolutely unbearable. It is not that the acting is bad, it is not that there is a terrible storyline, nor is it poor production quality. But it made my skin itch and I was more than elated when those beautiful credits started to role. The story was downright depressing; Mary (Lesley Manville), is an annoying fifty-something year old trying to get in the pants of her best friend’s thirty old son because she has no one to love her. Gerri (Ruth Sheen), the best friend, puts up with all of Mary’s crazy antics for reasons unbeknownst to her husband Tom (Jim Broadbent), or anyone who watches the movie, really. The film goes on to explore the troubles of Gerri and Tom’s friends, and show how each and every friend has their own misfortunes.
The film revolves around the lives of Gerri and Tom for a full year, with the year divided into four subsections by each season. Though Gerri and Tom are happily married, the film more or less is focused on their unhappy friends, and how their friends’ misfortunes affect them in different ways. First, there is the previously mentioned Mary, who drowns her sorrows in alcohol and constantly shows up Gerri and Tom’s house whether invited or not. Though at the beginning of the movie Gerri feels sympathy for Mary, the mood changes by the end of the movie when Gerri realizes the toll Mary has taken a toll on all of her other relationships. Then, there is Tom’s brother (David Bradley) who stays with the couple while mourning the death of his wife. Though Gerri and Tom offer their home as a place to stay so he is not lonely, there is nothing they can do or say to comfort this inconsolable man. Lastly, there is Tom’s childhood friend Ken (Parker Wight), who is a fatter, meaner, and sloppier male version of Gerri’s friend Mary. He is distraught over his pending divorce, and has resolved to be an unhappy and lonely man for the rest of his life. There is also the angry nephew, who did not seem to offer anything to the story except yet another unhappy personality.
These miserable characters are people whom I would not like to come in contact with, on or off screen. While watching the movies, I felt irritated, depressed, and miserable. Each and every character bothered me; Gerri bothered me because she willingly put up with Mary’s depressing misfortunes involving the lack of love in her life, an expensive car that would never work, and the garden that she could just never get to grow. Mary was the friend who always had something negative to say, and she brought the mood of the movie right down with her. Tom bothered me because he was not able to help his brother cope with the loss of his wife, but instead just let him have a place to sleep at night. He also annoyed me because he did not bother to even try to get help for his friend Ken, obviously a raging alcoholic whose life has no real direction.
All in all, this movie was a melancholy British version of the television show Desperate Housewives. Instead of living on the cookie-cutter Wisteria Lane, this group lived on Miserable Avenue. Instead of gossiping about who was sleeping with whom, they gossiped about who had the worst life out of everyone. Instead of getting together to talk over afternoon tea, they got together to drown their sorrows in bad alcohol. They are an unhappy group of friends, with very few positive things to say.
Along with being thankful that the movie was over, I left the movie feeling depressed. I was sad for Mary, and I was sad about the fact that I could be Mary in thirty years. Anyone could end up being Mary or Ken. Not a happy thought or ending to a movie. It was not fun to leave the movie at 10:40 in the morning (for some reason I went to the 8:30 screening) feeling so moody and sad. I understand the point of the film is to expose the realistically sad lives that many people lead, but this will not fare well at a box office. Movies are an easy way to escape reality, but this movie is reminiscent of the depressing lives that many people live, which is never an enjoyable thing to watch.
Chongquing Blues
Jessie Savini
Review 5
Chongquing Blues: 2010. Genre: Drama. Director: Wang Xiaoshuai. Screenwriter: Yang Yishu. Producers: Hsu Bing-His, Zhang Hao. Cast: Wang Xueqi, Fan Bingbing, Quin Hao, Zi Yi, Li Feier. Running time: 110 minutes.
Lin Quanhai (Wang Xueqi) is a father who wishes to get acquainted with his son, Bo, whom he has not seen in many years. He wants to know his son’s girlfriend, friends, and everyone else in his life. Oddly enough, his son is no longer alive. He is searching to get to know the soul of his dead son, who was killed by the police after stabbing two people and holding a woman hostage at a shopping mall. At the beginning of the movie, Lin begins his journey to discover who his son was, figure out why he committed these violent acts, and determine whether his lack of parenting ultimately contributed to the death of his son.
To uncover the secrecy of Bo’s violent incident, he visits everyone who came in contact with him during his final moments: a young girl working at the cosmetic counter in the mall, a security guard, a doctor whom he held hostage, and the police man who shot him. He talks to each person in length about the events on the day Bo was killed in order to piece the puzzle together. Each person is able to give their side of the story and provide details of the event surrounding his son’s death, but the person with the most insight is the doctor. Since Bo held her hostage for several hours, she was able to talk in great length with the boy and uncover the truth behind his situation: he was mad at his girlfriend for breaking up with him, distressed over a fight with his best friend, and upset with his father for never loving him. She said that Bo was sorry for stabbing the cosmetic clerk and security guard, and that he instantly felt remorse for what he had done. The doctor also told Lin that the boy missed him, and talked about him in great detail during the hours she was held hostage. At the end of their conversation, the doctor commented that Bo would never have hurt her, and it was unjust that the police shot him to death.
During much of the movie, the camera tracks Lin from behind as he tries to clear his conscience and solve the mystery Bo created. All of the sporadic scenes with shots from behind represent the guilt that follows him as a result of being a deadbeat and distant father. They represent the heartbreaking emotions he rarely shows, and his guilty conscience of not being there for his son. Throughout the movie, these scenes become fewer and fewer because Lin begins to come to terms with his guilt and his second-hand involvement in Bo’s death.
Set on the Chongquing River, the location of the film contributes to the dark, gloomy, and mysterious feeling the film depicts. The river literally and figuratively represents the winding journey that the father has before him to come to terms with the death of a son. It signifies a way to escape from his former family (including Bo) and his present family, since all rivers lead to the sea where he works as a captain on a boat. It symbolizes the water of the ocean that his son loved so dearly, because he thought it could bring him closer to his distant father. This symbolism of water contributes to the film by further advancing the deep, dark, and twisted thematic elements of the story.
The movie is gloomy and melancholy. Every character is still in a state of disarray over the shocking death of this young boy. But it is not depressing. It does not leave the audience feeling disheartened over the events the story holds, but rather content that the father was able to reconnect with his son, though on poor terms. He was able to know his son, see his son (through a series of blurry photographs and a video), and solve the ever burning question as to why the incident at the mall occurred. He is able to figure out that though he is not entirely at fault for Bo’s death, his lack of parenting did unfortunately play a role in his downfall. He will also now be able to use what he learned about his son to be a great father to Bo Junior, Bo’s half-brother.
Every element of the film connected by the end to create a story that was bigger than itself. It was not only about a father seeking to uncover the truth about a son. It was about friendship, love, and guilt. It exposes generational differences, levels of the social class system, and corruption in the police force. Each and every element in the film combines to create a piece of art worth the recognition it has received.
Review 5
Chongquing Blues: 2010. Genre: Drama. Director: Wang Xiaoshuai. Screenwriter: Yang Yishu. Producers: Hsu Bing-His, Zhang Hao. Cast: Wang Xueqi, Fan Bingbing, Quin Hao, Zi Yi, Li Feier. Running time: 110 minutes.
Lin Quanhai (Wang Xueqi) is a father who wishes to get acquainted with his son, Bo, whom he has not seen in many years. He wants to know his son’s girlfriend, friends, and everyone else in his life. Oddly enough, his son is no longer alive. He is searching to get to know the soul of his dead son, who was killed by the police after stabbing two people and holding a woman hostage at a shopping mall. At the beginning of the movie, Lin begins his journey to discover who his son was, figure out why he committed these violent acts, and determine whether his lack of parenting ultimately contributed to the death of his son.
To uncover the secrecy of Bo’s violent incident, he visits everyone who came in contact with him during his final moments: a young girl working at the cosmetic counter in the mall, a security guard, a doctor whom he held hostage, and the police man who shot him. He talks to each person in length about the events on the day Bo was killed in order to piece the puzzle together. Each person is able to give their side of the story and provide details of the event surrounding his son’s death, but the person with the most insight is the doctor. Since Bo held her hostage for several hours, she was able to talk in great length with the boy and uncover the truth behind his situation: he was mad at his girlfriend for breaking up with him, distressed over a fight with his best friend, and upset with his father for never loving him. She said that Bo was sorry for stabbing the cosmetic clerk and security guard, and that he instantly felt remorse for what he had done. The doctor also told Lin that the boy missed him, and talked about him in great detail during the hours she was held hostage. At the end of their conversation, the doctor commented that Bo would never have hurt her, and it was unjust that the police shot him to death.
During much of the movie, the camera tracks Lin from behind as he tries to clear his conscience and solve the mystery Bo created. All of the sporadic scenes with shots from behind represent the guilt that follows him as a result of being a deadbeat and distant father. They represent the heartbreaking emotions he rarely shows, and his guilty conscience of not being there for his son. Throughout the movie, these scenes become fewer and fewer because Lin begins to come to terms with his guilt and his second-hand involvement in Bo’s death.
Set on the Chongquing River, the location of the film contributes to the dark, gloomy, and mysterious feeling the film depicts. The river literally and figuratively represents the winding journey that the father has before him to come to terms with the death of a son. It signifies a way to escape from his former family (including Bo) and his present family, since all rivers lead to the sea where he works as a captain on a boat. It symbolizes the water of the ocean that his son loved so dearly, because he thought it could bring him closer to his distant father. This symbolism of water contributes to the film by further advancing the deep, dark, and twisted thematic elements of the story.
The movie is gloomy and melancholy. Every character is still in a state of disarray over the shocking death of this young boy. But it is not depressing. It does not leave the audience feeling disheartened over the events the story holds, but rather content that the father was able to reconnect with his son, though on poor terms. He was able to know his son, see his son (through a series of blurry photographs and a video), and solve the ever burning question as to why the incident at the mall occurred. He is able to figure out that though he is not entirely at fault for Bo’s death, his lack of parenting did unfortunately play a role in his downfall. He will also now be able to use what he learned about his son to be a great father to Bo Junior, Bo’s half-brother.
Every element of the film connected by the end to create a story that was bigger than itself. It was not only about a father seeking to uncover the truth about a son. It was about friendship, love, and guilt. It exposes generational differences, levels of the social class system, and corruption in the police force. Each and every element in the film combines to create a piece of art worth the recognition it has received.
Blue Valentine
Jessie Savini
Review 4
Blue Valentine: 2010. Genre: Drama. Director: Derek Cianfrance. Cast: Ryan Gosling, Michelle Williams, Mike Vogel. Running time: 120 minutes.
To love is to live and to live is to love, though the love may not last forever. As in the case with many modern love stories, Blue Valentine tells the story of love lost over time with little hope of reconciliation. The film illustrates the story of a couple falling in love as teenagers, and the same couple drifting apart later in their marriage. The fact that the movie is set in both past and present contrasts the severe differences in the relationship over time. The film is heartbreaking, but it is real; people fall in and out of love every day. People grow apart, get divorced, and move on. Love is one of the greatest joys in life, but it can also be one of the most painful experiences a person can endure.
One part of the film is a sweet love story, while the other is painful and dramatic. It tugs at raw emotions for anyone who has ever been in love, or who has ever wanted to be in love. The movie is a roller coaster ride of extreme feelings, going from happy to sad intermittently. The movie begins with the failing relationship in present day, but eventually backtracks to explain how the couple met and fell in love. The flashbacks of their happy past are placed sporadically throughout the movie, and are used to explain how the marriage came to be unhappy and unconstructive.
Not only is the story beautiful, but it is beautifully filmed. Each scene in the movie has a purpose and contributes to the success of the film. Every scene also accomplishes the goal of showing that love can be kind and gentle, but it can also be cruel and spiteful. The director does an exemplary job at illustrating that while Dean (Ryan Gosling) may be a good husband to Cindy (Michelle Williams), the conditions the family lives in are not ideal. Dean works as a painter and does make much money. He is seen so frequently with a cigarette hanging from his mouth and a beer in his hand that I can almost smell the smoke of the cigarette and the alcohol on his breath. His destructive antics frustrate Cindy, who comments during the film that he should get another job that he likes so that he “does not have to start drinking at eight in the morning to get through the day”. He rebuttals this by telling her that “the reason he likes the job is because he can start drinking at eight in the morning”.
Ryan Gosling’s performance in the movie is stellar; he is convincing, real, and emotional. My favorite scenes in the movie are when he interacts with his young daughter – I could tell how much he loved the child and how he never wanted to let her go, even though the child is not biologically his. Michelle Williams, the main actress, is very compelling in her role as a frustrated wife, mother, and nurse. She gained fifteen pounds to film the “present day” scenes, so it truly did seem as though time had elapsed. Both actors usually star in box office hits, so it was interesting to see them work on an independent film with a small budget.
The ambition and determination of the director, Derek Cianfrance, is exceptionally impressive. The film was a twelve year process with over sixty drafts of the script written before settling on the final version. He fought to keep the cast and crew that he wanted; while most other directors would simply replace one of the main actors, Cianfrance completely moved the set of the film to accommodate one of the actors. He also made the main actors, Michelle Williams and Ryan Gosling, live in a small house together for a month on the same budget that the characters would have had in their lives. This situation helped the actors get into the roles of their characters, and definitely contributed the believability and authenticity of the movie. The director’s drive for a successful, artistic version of a stereotypical love story is undeniably accomplished in this film.
The movie does not tell what is going to happen to the couple because ending of their story is left unclear. Are they going to get divorced, have affairs, or reconcile? The audience is left to wonder for themselves, to make their own ending. It is up to every individual to decide what will become of the once feverishly happy couple. A romantic myself, I want to imagine that they got back together and were able to reconcile their lost love. I want to believe the couple was able to work through their problems to have a stronger relationship than ever before, though I know that is not entirely realistic. But it does not even matter if it is realistic or not, because I can be the director in my mind and finish the film however I want.
Review 4
Blue Valentine: 2010. Genre: Drama. Director: Derek Cianfrance. Cast: Ryan Gosling, Michelle Williams, Mike Vogel. Running time: 120 minutes.
To love is to live and to live is to love, though the love may not last forever. As in the case with many modern love stories, Blue Valentine tells the story of love lost over time with little hope of reconciliation. The film illustrates the story of a couple falling in love as teenagers, and the same couple drifting apart later in their marriage. The fact that the movie is set in both past and present contrasts the severe differences in the relationship over time. The film is heartbreaking, but it is real; people fall in and out of love every day. People grow apart, get divorced, and move on. Love is one of the greatest joys in life, but it can also be one of the most painful experiences a person can endure.
One part of the film is a sweet love story, while the other is painful and dramatic. It tugs at raw emotions for anyone who has ever been in love, or who has ever wanted to be in love. The movie is a roller coaster ride of extreme feelings, going from happy to sad intermittently. The movie begins with the failing relationship in present day, but eventually backtracks to explain how the couple met and fell in love. The flashbacks of their happy past are placed sporadically throughout the movie, and are used to explain how the marriage came to be unhappy and unconstructive.
Not only is the story beautiful, but it is beautifully filmed. Each scene in the movie has a purpose and contributes to the success of the film. Every scene also accomplishes the goal of showing that love can be kind and gentle, but it can also be cruel and spiteful. The director does an exemplary job at illustrating that while Dean (Ryan Gosling) may be a good husband to Cindy (Michelle Williams), the conditions the family lives in are not ideal. Dean works as a painter and does make much money. He is seen so frequently with a cigarette hanging from his mouth and a beer in his hand that I can almost smell the smoke of the cigarette and the alcohol on his breath. His destructive antics frustrate Cindy, who comments during the film that he should get another job that he likes so that he “does not have to start drinking at eight in the morning to get through the day”. He rebuttals this by telling her that “the reason he likes the job is because he can start drinking at eight in the morning”.
Ryan Gosling’s performance in the movie is stellar; he is convincing, real, and emotional. My favorite scenes in the movie are when he interacts with his young daughter – I could tell how much he loved the child and how he never wanted to let her go, even though the child is not biologically his. Michelle Williams, the main actress, is very compelling in her role as a frustrated wife, mother, and nurse. She gained fifteen pounds to film the “present day” scenes, so it truly did seem as though time had elapsed. Both actors usually star in box office hits, so it was interesting to see them work on an independent film with a small budget.
The ambition and determination of the director, Derek Cianfrance, is exceptionally impressive. The film was a twelve year process with over sixty drafts of the script written before settling on the final version. He fought to keep the cast and crew that he wanted; while most other directors would simply replace one of the main actors, Cianfrance completely moved the set of the film to accommodate one of the actors. He also made the main actors, Michelle Williams and Ryan Gosling, live in a small house together for a month on the same budget that the characters would have had in their lives. This situation helped the actors get into the roles of their characters, and definitely contributed the believability and authenticity of the movie. The director’s drive for a successful, artistic version of a stereotypical love story is undeniably accomplished in this film.
The movie does not tell what is going to happen to the couple because ending of their story is left unclear. Are they going to get divorced, have affairs, or reconcile? The audience is left to wonder for themselves, to make their own ending. It is up to every individual to decide what will become of the once feverishly happy couple. A romantic myself, I want to imagine that they got back together and were able to reconcile their lost love. I want to believe the couple was able to work through their problems to have a stronger relationship than ever before, though I know that is not entirely realistic. But it does not even matter if it is realistic or not, because I can be the director in my mind and finish the film however I want.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
