schiarantano
Joined Apr 2022
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews27
schiarantano's rating
I love you, now die: The Commonwealth vs. Michelle Carter (2019), directed by Erin Lee Carter, is a riveting two hour documentary which reads like a whodunit mystery about the famous suicide texting trial that scandalized America society and the world.
Carr has woven together many visual elements to create a compelling two-part documentary where teen suicide meets anguish, misery, heartbreak and the courts of legal and public opinion. The documentary is well-crafted making use of diverse angle shots, editing techniques, time lapse footage, first person interviews, third person interviews, archival and social media footage, still photography, superimposed images, and incorporates footage shot over a span of several years to create a compelling and powerful film about an egregious crime. It recounts the suffering and pain of Conrad Roy III, his relationship with Michelle Carter and his family, his previous suicide attempts, the impact of his suicide on his family, the culpability of Michelle Carter and a penetrative examination and analysis of her thoughts, psyche and mental health leading up to and following the suicide of her boyfriend. Did her mental health impinge on her ability to know the difference between right and wrong? How about her level of maturity and her decision making ability as a 17-year-old with a not well developed frontal cortex? Michelle Carter and her immediate family declined to take part in the documentary and present their side of the story; She opted to have her case tried by judge and not by jury, and refused to take the stand in her own defense. Do her actions imply guilt? You be the judge.
Carr has juxtaposed the narrative of the crime through the Massachusetts criminal justice system presenting both sides of the case and the legal arguments mounted by the prosecution and defense team against the backstory of the victim and perpetrator revealed through their text messaging and social media postings which are filled with twists and turns and reveal their toxic, unhealthy relationship.
It's a balanced documentary for the filmmaker explores the crime from the perspective of the victim and the perpetrator, and the irreparable damage and harm it has had on two young lives. Conrad Roy, III lost his life, and Michelle Carter, vilified in the American press and court of public opinion, is a convicted felon and a social pariah.
The documentary includes interviews with a distinguished cast of journalists including Marie Cogan, Jesse Barron, and professionals including Dr. John Suler, author of 'The Psychology of Cyberspace', and Joseph Cataldo, Attorney for Michelle Carter, and members of the public who weigh in and present a multiplicity of takes and viewpoints about the suicide of Conrad Roy, III, and whether Michelle Carter is culpable of the crime of involuntary manslaughter for telling him to get back into the car and to finish the job which frames the documentary in a broader context of the American criminal justice system and American teen life in the digital age.
If anything, I hope this heart-wrenching, emotionally moving documentary about a toxic teen relationship gone bad will spark a dialogue on the risks and dangers of virtual relationships.
Carr has woven together many visual elements to create a compelling two-part documentary where teen suicide meets anguish, misery, heartbreak and the courts of legal and public opinion. The documentary is well-crafted making use of diverse angle shots, editing techniques, time lapse footage, first person interviews, third person interviews, archival and social media footage, still photography, superimposed images, and incorporates footage shot over a span of several years to create a compelling and powerful film about an egregious crime. It recounts the suffering and pain of Conrad Roy III, his relationship with Michelle Carter and his family, his previous suicide attempts, the impact of his suicide on his family, the culpability of Michelle Carter and a penetrative examination and analysis of her thoughts, psyche and mental health leading up to and following the suicide of her boyfriend. Did her mental health impinge on her ability to know the difference between right and wrong? How about her level of maturity and her decision making ability as a 17-year-old with a not well developed frontal cortex? Michelle Carter and her immediate family declined to take part in the documentary and present their side of the story; She opted to have her case tried by judge and not by jury, and refused to take the stand in her own defense. Do her actions imply guilt? You be the judge.
Carr has juxtaposed the narrative of the crime through the Massachusetts criminal justice system presenting both sides of the case and the legal arguments mounted by the prosecution and defense team against the backstory of the victim and perpetrator revealed through their text messaging and social media postings which are filled with twists and turns and reveal their toxic, unhealthy relationship.
It's a balanced documentary for the filmmaker explores the crime from the perspective of the victim and the perpetrator, and the irreparable damage and harm it has had on two young lives. Conrad Roy, III lost his life, and Michelle Carter, vilified in the American press and court of public opinion, is a convicted felon and a social pariah.
The documentary includes interviews with a distinguished cast of journalists including Marie Cogan, Jesse Barron, and professionals including Dr. John Suler, author of 'The Psychology of Cyberspace', and Joseph Cataldo, Attorney for Michelle Carter, and members of the public who weigh in and present a multiplicity of takes and viewpoints about the suicide of Conrad Roy, III, and whether Michelle Carter is culpable of the crime of involuntary manslaughter for telling him to get back into the car and to finish the job which frames the documentary in a broader context of the American criminal justice system and American teen life in the digital age.
If anything, I hope this heart-wrenching, emotionally moving documentary about a toxic teen relationship gone bad will spark a dialogue on the risks and dangers of virtual relationships.
Inga Can Hear (2018), directed by Kaspars Goba, is a character driven documentary about a 15-year-old Latvian teenager living in a rural community straddling two worlds, the hearing and hearing impaired. Born to deaf parents, Inga has become their advocate from an early age tackling any problems and issues they face. The film is in Latvian, Latvian Sign Language and sub-titled in English.
The documentary juxtaposes the narrative of a young teenager finding her identity outside the boundaries of her immediate family who yearns for a secondary education against the complexity of her relationship with her parents and to a lesser extent her two siblings who are also deaf.
The film begins with out of focus, hand held camera shots of an intoxicated Inga in her pajamas and slippers walking on a snow covered road late at night which speaks to her dark side. When asked where she lives, she points to her house. The film cuts to a shot of a house and then to a close up of a first person interview with Inga sitting on the couch introducing herself revealing an intelligent, charming, and articulate teenager. She speaks of her close relationship to her father who is supportive of her who is revealed sitting on the conch beside her petting the family cat. There is a cut away of the bookshelf displaying family photos showing pictures of Inga with her family providing a visual clue to her backstory. The camera lingers for a moment on a lovely photo of Inga as a young girl holding a monkey. The film gradually reveals the mother sitting on a chair beside Inga. They converse in Latvian Sign Language and Inga explains in Latvian while signing with her mother that her parents never planned to have her and that they were surprised to learn when she was an infant that she could hear.
The documentary follows Inga's life as she prepares to graduate from middle school, to preparing for and gaining acceptance into high school, her move away from home, navigating her first term in high school, dealing with her immediate family, her acting out, and the aftermath. It's a poignant documentary revealing the ups and downs of the turbulent life of a young teen trying to break free and facing issues of identity. One of the most powerful scenes in the documentary is Inga revealing her motivation in making the film. Her heartfelt words for advocating for the deaf are emotionally moving. Another powerful scene in the film is her coming out. The documentary resonated with me on many levels. We can all relate to Inga and her experiences as a young person wanting to spread their wings, exploring their sexuality, and forging a life outside the boundaries of their immediate family.
The director has woven together many visual elements to create an intimate portrait of Inga. Close ups and medium angle shots are interspersed with wide angle shots and the film incorporates day and night and interior and exterior footage and with footage shot over an extended period of time at various locations. I liked how Goba situated the story in a rural setting and within the confines of Inga's home, her schools, her classrooms, her dorm and her mother's apartment giving the film a context. I also liked the use of Latvian Rap music which adds another layer of depth.
Inga Can Hear is more than a labor of love. It is a film about a young person coming of age, and coming out and that explores the meaning of filial bonds and familial relationships.
The documentary juxtaposes the narrative of a young teenager finding her identity outside the boundaries of her immediate family who yearns for a secondary education against the complexity of her relationship with her parents and to a lesser extent her two siblings who are also deaf.
The film begins with out of focus, hand held camera shots of an intoxicated Inga in her pajamas and slippers walking on a snow covered road late at night which speaks to her dark side. When asked where she lives, she points to her house. The film cuts to a shot of a house and then to a close up of a first person interview with Inga sitting on the couch introducing herself revealing an intelligent, charming, and articulate teenager. She speaks of her close relationship to her father who is supportive of her who is revealed sitting on the conch beside her petting the family cat. There is a cut away of the bookshelf displaying family photos showing pictures of Inga with her family providing a visual clue to her backstory. The camera lingers for a moment on a lovely photo of Inga as a young girl holding a monkey. The film gradually reveals the mother sitting on a chair beside Inga. They converse in Latvian Sign Language and Inga explains in Latvian while signing with her mother that her parents never planned to have her and that they were surprised to learn when she was an infant that she could hear.
The documentary follows Inga's life as she prepares to graduate from middle school, to preparing for and gaining acceptance into high school, her move away from home, navigating her first term in high school, dealing with her immediate family, her acting out, and the aftermath. It's a poignant documentary revealing the ups and downs of the turbulent life of a young teen trying to break free and facing issues of identity. One of the most powerful scenes in the documentary is Inga revealing her motivation in making the film. Her heartfelt words for advocating for the deaf are emotionally moving. Another powerful scene in the film is her coming out. The documentary resonated with me on many levels. We can all relate to Inga and her experiences as a young person wanting to spread their wings, exploring their sexuality, and forging a life outside the boundaries of their immediate family.
The director has woven together many visual elements to create an intimate portrait of Inga. Close ups and medium angle shots are interspersed with wide angle shots and the film incorporates day and night and interior and exterior footage and with footage shot over an extended period of time at various locations. I liked how Goba situated the story in a rural setting and within the confines of Inga's home, her schools, her classrooms, her dorm and her mother's apartment giving the film a context. I also liked the use of Latvian Rap music which adds another layer of depth.
Inga Can Hear is more than a labor of love. It is a film about a young person coming of age, and coming out and that explores the meaning of filial bonds and familial relationships.
Motel, directed and photographed by Jesse McCracken, is the story of an unusual motel called the Continental Inn located in Niagara Falls, Ontario whose business model is addressing a pressing social issue, providing affordable housing to people who need it.
When you come to think of it, how can it compete for tourist dollars when a plethora of upscale hotels like the Sheraton on the Falls, the Marriott Fallsview or the Embassy Suites by Hilton located down the road and which offer a plethora of amenities and services. It can't. Motel is about the people who manage the motel, Brian, the night manager who lives at the motel and who was a former journalist, and Linda, the day manager, who have put their heart and soul into their work caring for the well-being of the residents, and for the residents who call it home. The hard luck stories of the residents are told against a backdrop of an iconic city whose breathtaking views of the falls were immortalized in the film Niagara, a 1950s Hollywood film noir, and when motels like the Continental Inn had their heyday.
McCracken weaves together many visual elements to create an intriguing film where tourism meets misery set against the glitz and gaudiness of the city and the iconic falls. The film opens with a wide angle night shot of a spry elderly man, Brian, holding a flashlight making a security check of the motel grounds. It dissolves into a kaleidoscope of flashing coloured lights followed by fireworks and, than cuts to an image of Brian facing away from the camera looking up at the fireworks. Close ups and medium angle shots of Brian, Linda and the residents are interspersed with wide angle shots of the motel, the falls and the city. The film is narrated by Brian, Linda and the residents. The film incorporates footage shot over several seasons, shot at different times of the day and at night, and includes time lapses which give the film a richness and complexity. Some of the most powerful images in the film are scenes of the staff and residents sitting alone in their room.
I liked Motel for it is, in essence, a film about second chances not only for the residents who call it home and the staff who manage it but for the motel itself. McCracken has succeeded in creating an intimate portrait of the motel, its staff, and residents craving out an existence and sense of place against the backdrop of an iconic city.
When you come to think of it, how can it compete for tourist dollars when a plethora of upscale hotels like the Sheraton on the Falls, the Marriott Fallsview or the Embassy Suites by Hilton located down the road and which offer a plethora of amenities and services. It can't. Motel is about the people who manage the motel, Brian, the night manager who lives at the motel and who was a former journalist, and Linda, the day manager, who have put their heart and soul into their work caring for the well-being of the residents, and for the residents who call it home. The hard luck stories of the residents are told against a backdrop of an iconic city whose breathtaking views of the falls were immortalized in the film Niagara, a 1950s Hollywood film noir, and when motels like the Continental Inn had their heyday.
McCracken weaves together many visual elements to create an intriguing film where tourism meets misery set against the glitz and gaudiness of the city and the iconic falls. The film opens with a wide angle night shot of a spry elderly man, Brian, holding a flashlight making a security check of the motel grounds. It dissolves into a kaleidoscope of flashing coloured lights followed by fireworks and, than cuts to an image of Brian facing away from the camera looking up at the fireworks. Close ups and medium angle shots of Brian, Linda and the residents are interspersed with wide angle shots of the motel, the falls and the city. The film is narrated by Brian, Linda and the residents. The film incorporates footage shot over several seasons, shot at different times of the day and at night, and includes time lapses which give the film a richness and complexity. Some of the most powerful images in the film are scenes of the staff and residents sitting alone in their room.
I liked Motel for it is, in essence, a film about second chances not only for the residents who call it home and the staff who manage it but for the motel itself. McCracken has succeeded in creating an intimate portrait of the motel, its staff, and residents craving out an existence and sense of place against the backdrop of an iconic city.