April Showers

This shouldn't be a 'bad' movie.

There was nice production value for a no name project. The acting was what I expected from an indie project of said nice production value; a little bit above high school drama club, but just a shade below B-list actors. The concept of gaining insight into the aftermath of school shooting intrigued me; especially if that insight is coming from a survivor. The story was...a melodramatic Lifetime movie at best, but that's not necessarily a negative thing, considering this is a debut project.

Like I said, this shouldn't be a 'bad' movie.

Where does it go wrong?

Religious subtext.

Why make a movie that's meant to give people insight if you're going to exclude half your audience with blatant Christian overtones?

What is the theme here? That one can only comprehend tragedy through piety? There's no reason this film should take any standpoint that isn't subjective; but then again, within reason, there should have been an objective viewpoint. And that's why this movie with a lot of promise behind it will remain encased in a small clique of individuals who are either tied to the project or agree exactly in line with its ideology and simplistic lens, rather than reach out to the masses as it should.

Based on his real life experience of surviving the Columbine High School Massacre, writer and director, Andrew Robinson comes up with a retelling, titled "April Showers" which promises to deliver something that will make us all think. I applaud Andrew for achieving something that must have been very hard to do. To relive these terrible events in an effort to outline how some of these survivors coped and how some didn't through such a troubling time , was a courageous thing to do. with solid Cinematography and passable acting, the film really should have delivered what it was striving for, but unfortunately, due to some real problems, it falls quite hard. To start with, for a film of this nature to work, we really have to connect with the characters. Unfortunately, the film prevents us from getting acquainted with the people involved, through lack of story development. The Massacre happens in the first five minutes of the film, so we are thrust into the deep end before knowing anything. So instead of the emotional strain that the viewer should be feeling, we can separate ourselves from them. I compare it to hearing something on the news, which takes place over the other side of the world. Yes its shocking, but there isn't as much impact for us, as opposed to having a relative or friend in the actual tragedy. This film didn't allow us to really care what was going on, which makes the second half of the film rather boring, as we try our best to connect with those grieving, but just can't. My other problem is that the main focus of the film, the relationship between Sean and April, takes the gloss away from the only really interesting character, one that is going through post traumatic stress. There is just no allowance for any chemistry between the romance of the lead two, and like the majority of the film, it just feels like its eating away the run time, as opposed to actually building a solid platform of emotion. If the film was done in way that we have development and then the tragedy, I feel it could have worked. But as a result of impatience and maybe a lack of experience, the director chose a different path that ultimately hurts it and prevents it from being a memorable experience. Ordinary at best, but a courageous move from the director.

Andrew Robinson's "April Showers" is like Oliver Stone's "World Trade Center." We relive a day that stunned the world. We look for triumph over tragedy at the most intimate level.

It is an intense film. The MPAA found its content disturbing. I disagree. What they meant was that it unlocks the deepest feelings of innocence lost.

The softest targets, we all are. Protectors unprotected. The hero inside ignored. The survivor looking over the dead. The dead looking over those still standing.

The history of the world in fewer days than God took to create it.

And who is left to create charity, hope, and faith?

The answer comes from a director with a sure hand, in real life a young playwright at Columbine High School 10 years ago whose next leading lady was to be a student named Rachel Joy Scott.

Saw this film at the premiere in L.A. It was much more than I was expecting. It is a very emotional story and it is realistically done. Its treatment of school violence is very important for the youth of America and, for that matter, the world's youth to see. I hope the U.S. rating of "R" can be changed or it will prevent young people from seeing it or could stop some theaters from screening it. It definitely should be seen by everyone, but especially teenagers.

The fact that it centers around the victims and the survivors of the tragedy and not the mind or motives of the perpetrator, makes it even more engrossing. I cannot think of another film on this subject that treats school violence in this moving and most accessible manner.

I decided to watch this movie only because i was sort of doing a research on School shootings these days. However, starting from the very first moment, this movie depicts intense situations in a man's life where the brain definitely doesn't work, a time when you have to make a quick decision as if you want to run for your life or stay back to save others, you will see people doing both of these.

And then, how would it feel to lose the loved one, whom you couldn't even tell that you love her, when such an intense feeling of extreme love is abolished not by separation, not by successful rivals, but by death! An easy way to test your emotional factor, if it didn't make you cry even once, you certainly lack emotions..