This is one of those films where the trailer gets your expectations way too high for the actual film. When watching the trailer you are expecting just the most epic, heart wrenching masterpiece about a school shooting. Instead the movie is really about a supposed tragic love story that is tragic because of a school shooting. It's almost like the shooting, and the reactions of some of the traumatized kids are afterthoughts to this "love lost" story. Which wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing if you cared for the characters at all. But the 2 main characters, April, and her love interest, whose name I am forgetting right now and who really needs a haircut in the worst way, just aren't likable. You don't really CARE that April is killed in the movie. You don't really care that the greasy hippie is in pain. What I seemed to care more about was the kid whose life was being turned upside down because he happened to be friends with the killer...except that the director spent far too little time on this, significantly more interesting aspect of the film, and instead tried to fulfill the cliché "pretty people in suffering" aspect that you come to expect from movies nowadays. I expected a lot from this movie, and I gave it a 5 mainly because of a really great trailer that gets you very interested in the watching the film, however the film itself is something I wouldn't really recommend watching unless you're an avid movie watcher who enjoys watching everything you can get your hands on.
23 Reviews
I Regret Calling This Film a Masterpiece
ANightToRemember22 June 2009
Warning: Spoilers
This is my second review of this film, and in my previous one I called the film a masterpiece. After reviewing the film a good many times, here's a better conclusion I've come up with.
First, let me say this is not a bad film. It is very far from that - but it certainly has its flaws. A film based of the Columbine High School Massacre isn't exactly at the top of many people's lists of films to see, and I think we can all understand that. Many of us remember that day much like we remember 9/11. Where we first heard the news, who we were with, etc. And with the recent Ft. Hood shootings, we do remember these things. This is the main reason why this film has caused a bit of confusion as to why it would be made. Why would anyone want to capitalize off the deaths of teenagers? April Showers is not that.
The story is of Sean (Kelly Blatz), a senior at Jefferson High School in the last weeks of school. Within the first few minutes, we learn of romance troubles between him and April (Ellen Woglom). This is the first part where the film goes wrong. Not that we have a romantic subplot, but as we learn its a love triangle between Sean, April, and Vicki (Janel Parrish). But wait, who's Vicki? I had to go online just to find out who she was, then to discover most of her parts were cut from the final film. Why? Now we have a love triangle that is only one sided. This causes confusion throughout the entire film; now that Vicki isn't part of it, what is April so ticked about? Why is Sean confused? We don't find out. The only mention of it is with a conversation Sean has with Mr. Blackwell (Tom Arnold), giving us a glimpse.
Then we have our second mistake. Once we meet all our characters for a minutes, the worst possible thing happens - a shooter goes on a rampage throughout the school, killing many fellow students and others. During this shooting, I struggled to remember most of the characters names. Why? Because we only saw them once, and for some less than a minute. Alas, the mistake. Lack of character development, and this carries through the entire film. April Showers is a film where the characters a key, so we need to connect with them. The reason we can't is the film jumps into the action much to soon. When a central character dies, one who we've only seen, not even a line from, how do we feel sad? Sure, the scene is sad, but the impact isn't there. We don't feel like we've lost anyone, its just like watching a sad news story. Since we didn't know who was killed, we don't feel sad for them. This seems to be for most characters in the film. What happens to us, then? We're taken through an awful experience of a film. Not because the film is awful, but because the event is awful. We're taken through nearly two hours of confusion, depressing events, and people fighting with each other. But at least we don't... oh wait, we have. We through a religious message into the film. There isn't an issue with this, unless, like this film, your shoving the message down the throats of the audience. This doesn't exactly help us out any more.
We don't even have anything comedic in the film. Yes, I understand, this is based off a tragedy, but this is a movie. The audience needs a breather, a little laugh would be fine, if not, you end up with what this film came out to be - just plain depressing and even, at times, boring.
But here are some positive sides to this - the direction is solid here, and I'm impressed how well Andrew Robinson did, considering this is only his second film. The film has a very, very impressive score to go with that, one of the better I've heard from an Indie film, certainly in my top 10 scores. The cinematography is what really puts this film together, very impressive award-worthy work.
As for our acting skills. Being an Indie shot in the middle of Nebraska, its, at times, what you expect from certain actors. But our lead actors, let me say, are fantastic. If it wasn't for them, how this film remains watchable would be lost. They should have a bright, bright future here, as most of these people should.
It's a film with no real character development, a confusing plot(s), and no conclusion. That doesn't mean the film isn't watchable - I certainly recommend it, as it will give you a first hand account of a school shooting, and the credits, showing the names of all who died was genius to the film, where it really packs the emotional punch. Don't expect a masterpiece, expect a well done Indie with flaws.
First, let me say this is not a bad film. It is very far from that - but it certainly has its flaws. A film based of the Columbine High School Massacre isn't exactly at the top of many people's lists of films to see, and I think we can all understand that. Many of us remember that day much like we remember 9/11. Where we first heard the news, who we were with, etc. And with the recent Ft. Hood shootings, we do remember these things. This is the main reason why this film has caused a bit of confusion as to why it would be made. Why would anyone want to capitalize off the deaths of teenagers? April Showers is not that.
The story is of Sean (Kelly Blatz), a senior at Jefferson High School in the last weeks of school. Within the first few minutes, we learn of romance troubles between him and April (Ellen Woglom). This is the first part where the film goes wrong. Not that we have a romantic subplot, but as we learn its a love triangle between Sean, April, and Vicki (Janel Parrish). But wait, who's Vicki? I had to go online just to find out who she was, then to discover most of her parts were cut from the final film. Why? Now we have a love triangle that is only one sided. This causes confusion throughout the entire film; now that Vicki isn't part of it, what is April so ticked about? Why is Sean confused? We don't find out. The only mention of it is with a conversation Sean has with Mr. Blackwell (Tom Arnold), giving us a glimpse.
Then we have our second mistake. Once we meet all our characters for a minutes, the worst possible thing happens - a shooter goes on a rampage throughout the school, killing many fellow students and others. During this shooting, I struggled to remember most of the characters names. Why? Because we only saw them once, and for some less than a minute. Alas, the mistake. Lack of character development, and this carries through the entire film. April Showers is a film where the characters a key, so we need to connect with them. The reason we can't is the film jumps into the action much to soon. When a central character dies, one who we've only seen, not even a line from, how do we feel sad? Sure, the scene is sad, but the impact isn't there. We don't feel like we've lost anyone, its just like watching a sad news story. Since we didn't know who was killed, we don't feel sad for them. This seems to be for most characters in the film. What happens to us, then? We're taken through an awful experience of a film. Not because the film is awful, but because the event is awful. We're taken through nearly two hours of confusion, depressing events, and people fighting with each other. But at least we don't... oh wait, we have. We through a religious message into the film. There isn't an issue with this, unless, like this film, your shoving the message down the throats of the audience. This doesn't exactly help us out any more.
We don't even have anything comedic in the film. Yes, I understand, this is based off a tragedy, but this is a movie. The audience needs a breather, a little laugh would be fine, if not, you end up with what this film came out to be - just plain depressing and even, at times, boring.
But here are some positive sides to this - the direction is solid here, and I'm impressed how well Andrew Robinson did, considering this is only his second film. The film has a very, very impressive score to go with that, one of the better I've heard from an Indie film, certainly in my top 10 scores. The cinematography is what really puts this film together, very impressive award-worthy work.
As for our acting skills. Being an Indie shot in the middle of Nebraska, its, at times, what you expect from certain actors. But our lead actors, let me say, are fantastic. If it wasn't for them, how this film remains watchable would be lost. They should have a bright, bright future here, as most of these people should.
It's a film with no real character development, a confusing plot(s), and no conclusion. That doesn't mean the film isn't watchable - I certainly recommend it, as it will give you a first hand account of a school shooting, and the credits, showing the names of all who died was genius to the film, where it really packs the emotional punch. Don't expect a masterpiece, expect a well done Indie with flaws.
A wasted opportunity
a1_andy_1111 August 2009
Warning: Spoilers
When I picked this film out I was expecting to feel some kind of connection with our main character, and to empathise with what happened to him and come away with some kind of minute understanding of what effect the events from that day had on him.
None of the above happened; the film did a terrible job at helping us relate to our main character and his close friends. Even though this film is depicting true events, for the viewer to care and connect with a character there still has to be some kind of character development. This is a key reason as to what made this film so poor. It's like switching on the news and seeing 20 people killed in Iraq. Yes I am sorry for their families and it's a shame it happened, but I don't care because those people are so loosely connected to me.
The acting was average and the score seemed to drone on with little variation. What we are left with is just the events as they happened on the day, which even then were poorly told. There was no tension or fear when the shooting began, and I didn't feel the kind of frenzy I imagine you would get in a situation like that when you don't know what is going on.
Then once the shooting had taken place the film spent an hour and 10 minutes showing people crying. I love films, and I get immersed in a good film - if it is sad I will generally cry. I did not feel a thing watching this film.
1/10
None of the above happened; the film did a terrible job at helping us relate to our main character and his close friends. Even though this film is depicting true events, for the viewer to care and connect with a character there still has to be some kind of character development. This is a key reason as to what made this film so poor. It's like switching on the news and seeing 20 people killed in Iraq. Yes I am sorry for their families and it's a shame it happened, but I don't care because those people are so loosely connected to me.
The acting was average and the score seemed to drone on with little variation. What we are left with is just the events as they happened on the day, which even then were poorly told. There was no tension or fear when the shooting began, and I didn't feel the kind of frenzy I imagine you would get in a situation like that when you don't know what is going on.
Then once the shooting had taken place the film spent an hour and 10 minutes showing people crying. I love films, and I get immersed in a good film - if it is sad I will generally cry. I did not feel a thing watching this film.
1/10
Not a "Chick-Flick", but Instead... a Very "Human-Flick" True Story!
Tony-Kiss-Castillo21 November 2023
Based on actual events, April Showers draws us into the center of a tornado funnel cloud of events, by offering us a rather unique perspective...that of one of the survivors of violence unhinged.
Mass shootings at U. S. schools, like it or not, form a malignant presence on our cultural landscape. This film, if nothing else, accentuates the following inescapable truth: A shared episode of on campus mindless violence will divide the lives of all those present into "Before and After".
April Showers, obviously, is a labor of love. It was produced, written and directed by survivors. This simple reality makes the film incomparably original in a number of ways, but is simultaneously the source of April's one big flaw.
Let's focus on the positive elements first. Unlike any other movie I have seen about school shootings, almost all the violence is off-camera. No endless loop slow-mo's of exploding blood packets here! Also, never before have I seen a portrayal of those left behind in the wake of a tragedy like this, in such total shock as to be not only speechless, but practically paralyzed, days after the event. These excruciatingly awkward bouts of on-screen silence contribute to making April painful to watch at times. Sometimes very In-Your-Face aggressive about driving home a point, but just when you're ready to throw in the towel and say, "Enough already!" the Director manages to back off. You must be patient with this movie.
About halfway through, I was almost ready to give up on it. When all was said and done, it was an extremely satisfying experience. 2 hours after viewing, I decided it was most definitely a good movie. It could have been a really great one! The big flaw I mentioned earlier: April needed more character development before pulling the proverbial rug out from under the viewer's feet. The film provided a lot more development later on, though. Perhaps the Director's intention was to add to our sense of bewilderment and confusion, but it was almost a deal-breaker for me.
One other disappointment: Tom Arnold and Illeana Douglas had less than 10 minutes on-screen time between the 2 of them!
7.5*, rounded down to 7*.
ENJOY! / DISFRUTELA!
Mass shootings at U. S. schools, like it or not, form a malignant presence on our cultural landscape. This film, if nothing else, accentuates the following inescapable truth: A shared episode of on campus mindless violence will divide the lives of all those present into "Before and After".
April Showers, obviously, is a labor of love. It was produced, written and directed by survivors. This simple reality makes the film incomparably original in a number of ways, but is simultaneously the source of April's one big flaw.
Let's focus on the positive elements first. Unlike any other movie I have seen about school shootings, almost all the violence is off-camera. No endless loop slow-mo's of exploding blood packets here! Also, never before have I seen a portrayal of those left behind in the wake of a tragedy like this, in such total shock as to be not only speechless, but practically paralyzed, days after the event. These excruciatingly awkward bouts of on-screen silence contribute to making April painful to watch at times. Sometimes very In-Your-Face aggressive about driving home a point, but just when you're ready to throw in the towel and say, "Enough already!" the Director manages to back off. You must be patient with this movie.
About halfway through, I was almost ready to give up on it. When all was said and done, it was an extremely satisfying experience. 2 hours after viewing, I decided it was most definitely a good movie. It could have been a really great one! The big flaw I mentioned earlier: April needed more character development before pulling the proverbial rug out from under the viewer's feet. The film provided a lot more development later on, though. Perhaps the Director's intention was to add to our sense of bewilderment and confusion, but it was almost a deal-breaker for me.
One other disappointment: Tom Arnold and Illeana Douglas had less than 10 minutes on-screen time between the 2 of them!
7.5*, rounded down to 7*.
ENJOY! / DISFRUTELA!
Absolutely pointless
alandaguegreene20 December 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I find it incomprehensible that a movie about such an important subject could end up being so inept, but that's exactly what this is. As other reviewers have said, the shooting takes place early in the film, and then we are treated to slow motion tears for the next hour.
This isn't a film about the shooting itself, that's plain to see. But unfortunately, it's not about anything else, either. The contrived love story is devoid of meaning or motivation, and gives the audience nothing to anticipate or mourn. The main character is completely unlikable as the good- looking, do-nothing romantic, and the object of his affections is equally vacuous.
The film aims to honor anyone who has been subjected to such tragedy, whether they're a victim or a survivor. But the aim is disingenuous. So many details are lifted directly from the Columbine shooting, it's impossible to think of this film as anything but a re-enactment that gets a few obvious details totally wrong.
For a film that faces the senselessness of school violence, look no further than "Elephant": it is understated, poignant, brilliantly performed, and unbearably tragic.
This isn't a film about the shooting itself, that's plain to see. But unfortunately, it's not about anything else, either. The contrived love story is devoid of meaning or motivation, and gives the audience nothing to anticipate or mourn. The main character is completely unlikable as the good- looking, do-nothing romantic, and the object of his affections is equally vacuous.
The film aims to honor anyone who has been subjected to such tragedy, whether they're a victim or a survivor. But the aim is disingenuous. So many details are lifted directly from the Columbine shooting, it's impossible to think of this film as anything but a re-enactment that gets a few obvious details totally wrong.
For a film that faces the senselessness of school violence, look no further than "Elephant": it is understated, poignant, brilliantly performed, and unbearably tragic.
scary and thought-provoking
Spaceygirl18 April 2010
Warning: Spoilers
This is a film about a high school shooting, not so much about the shooting itself as about the survivors. Their emotions, their guilt, anger, grief and finally acceptance. The young actors are brilliant in their respective roles although Indie darling Ileana Douglas is criminally wasted. The script is good, although there are a few plot holes and the scene of the shooting is rushed. It is a small film well told and the weighty subject matter is delicately handled. I am somewhat surprised at the high age-restriction as this is an important film for teens to see showing the devastating destruction that simple bullying can cause.
Prettily-shot crap
LadySylvester10 February 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I don't even know how much I can write about this artsy little film. I went into it only knowing that it was written and directed by a Columbine survivor.
So why did it seem so unrealistic?
The acting, for the most part, was very after-school-TV-special. I can only imagine that most of the "teen" actors were chosen for their ability to cry on command. And Tom Arnold's superb performance is not only crammed into the beginning of the movie, but never thought of again (shame!). In fact, of the at least fifteen people killed in the massacre (look at the number of crosses put up!), April seems to be the only one who "matters" - her funeral at the end is full of clichés ("she lived every day to the fullest" - come on, now) and she's really the only victim mentioned by name at all.
The first half-hour of the movie is chaos. People are running everywhere and there are some gunshots, but where's the shooter? Does anyone care? The dialogue is usually either so inept or so muffled and quiet that I couldn't make out why hordes of kids were running through the woods. And I find it very, very hard to believe that of all the "survivors" in the school, not one of them could identify the shooter. It all seemed like an afterthought.
From what I could gather of the "police investigation," the cops are seen arresting a kid named Ben and asking Sean (our greasy "hero") a few questions about him. Well - surprise, surprise! - Ben's not the shooter. In fact, he was with Sean during the whole ordeal! (This is the problem with changing such a key fact about the case: Columbine shooters Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold took their own lives after the massacre. What do you do with a still-living shooter whom apparently nobody has seen? Well, if you're the characters in this film, you sit around and mope, then spray-paint "KILLER" on the house of some kid rumoured to have something to do with it. Again: come on, now.)
The cinematography is worth mentioning - the whole movie is filmed very artistically. I probably would've liked it more if I'd simply watched it without audio!
I couldn't identify with most of the characters. Why make brooding Sean the hero if all you want to do is film him shirtless, staring out a window on a rainy day? Ooh, he punches a mirror. Aah, he can't form a meaningful connection with a girl. Who cares?
April's not much better. Ooh, look at how pretty and blonde she is! Aah, she even writes in a diary! Too bad she has absolutely no character traits. No positive ones, no negative ones. She's just... there.
Jason was interesting (save for his melodramatic freak-out in the grocery store), and I would've liked to see more of Ben. It broke my heart at the end of the movie to see Ben packing his stuff and leaving... how do you get over being falsely branded a killer? Too bad it's all glossed over in favour of more languorous scenes of Sean moping.
Everything interesting, in fact, is glossed over (like the great performances by Tom Arnold and Ileana Douglas). I can only handle a few minutes' worth of weepy B.S. - with "April Showers," I got an hour and forty-four.
For crime scholars and others interested in knowing more about Columbine and the psychology of school shooters, skip this one and watch a documentary or something instead (I'd recommend "Zero Day," a mockumentary that's chilling, darkly funny, and ultimately heart-wrenching). For young people who think their parents "just don't understand what they're going through" and enjoy long, prettily-shot takes of shirtless guys staring off into infinity, I'd say pick this one up.
So why did it seem so unrealistic?
The acting, for the most part, was very after-school-TV-special. I can only imagine that most of the "teen" actors were chosen for their ability to cry on command. And Tom Arnold's superb performance is not only crammed into the beginning of the movie, but never thought of again (shame!). In fact, of the at least fifteen people killed in the massacre (look at the number of crosses put up!), April seems to be the only one who "matters" - her funeral at the end is full of clichés ("she lived every day to the fullest" - come on, now) and she's really the only victim mentioned by name at all.
The first half-hour of the movie is chaos. People are running everywhere and there are some gunshots, but where's the shooter? Does anyone care? The dialogue is usually either so inept or so muffled and quiet that I couldn't make out why hordes of kids were running through the woods. And I find it very, very hard to believe that of all the "survivors" in the school, not one of them could identify the shooter. It all seemed like an afterthought.
From what I could gather of the "police investigation," the cops are seen arresting a kid named Ben and asking Sean (our greasy "hero") a few questions about him. Well - surprise, surprise! - Ben's not the shooter. In fact, he was with Sean during the whole ordeal! (This is the problem with changing such a key fact about the case: Columbine shooters Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold took their own lives after the massacre. What do you do with a still-living shooter whom apparently nobody has seen? Well, if you're the characters in this film, you sit around and mope, then spray-paint "KILLER" on the house of some kid rumoured to have something to do with it. Again: come on, now.)
The cinematography is worth mentioning - the whole movie is filmed very artistically. I probably would've liked it more if I'd simply watched it without audio!
I couldn't identify with most of the characters. Why make brooding Sean the hero if all you want to do is film him shirtless, staring out a window on a rainy day? Ooh, he punches a mirror. Aah, he can't form a meaningful connection with a girl. Who cares?
April's not much better. Ooh, look at how pretty and blonde she is! Aah, she even writes in a diary! Too bad she has absolutely no character traits. No positive ones, no negative ones. She's just... there.
Jason was interesting (save for his melodramatic freak-out in the grocery store), and I would've liked to see more of Ben. It broke my heart at the end of the movie to see Ben packing his stuff and leaving... how do you get over being falsely branded a killer? Too bad it's all glossed over in favour of more languorous scenes of Sean moping.
Everything interesting, in fact, is glossed over (like the great performances by Tom Arnold and Ileana Douglas). I can only handle a few minutes' worth of weepy B.S. - with "April Showers," I got an hour and forty-four.
For crime scholars and others interested in knowing more about Columbine and the psychology of school shooters, skip this one and watch a documentary or something instead (I'd recommend "Zero Day," a mockumentary that's chilling, darkly funny, and ultimately heart-wrenching). For young people who think their parents "just don't understand what they're going through" and enjoy long, prettily-shot takes of shirtless guys staring off into infinity, I'd say pick this one up.
Important film for all to see, but especially teenagers
emandelcorn-115 April 2009
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.
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.
Where it went wrong...
chrisbeer136 October 2009
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.
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.
Fantastic... but not without its flaws
Erin_Sparkle28 April 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Involves very minor spoilers.
To start off I have to say that I waited for about a year and a half for this film to be released in Australia, so when I came across it accidentally at the video store I work at I almost had a heart attack. I immediately hired it. I was not disappointed.
The first 30-45 minutes set during the actual shooting was completely engaging and tense, it was brutal and totally heart-wrenching. The students actions in the school are varied, there are those who act heroically and some who don't, just like what I imagine it would be like in the real situation.
The film slows down a bit in the second half when we follow the survivors trying to deal with their own issues and tragedies, especially those of Kelly Blatz's Sean (Blatz puts forward an amazing performance) dealing with the death of his friend, April and Daryl Sabara's Jason who tries to deal with being labeled a hero. This part of the film doesn't have as much punch and emotional impact as the first part, but it deals with the characters realistically and sensitively.
I do have some small issues, though. Firstly, April isn't given enough back story, I never really felt like I knew her well enough for her death to make a huge emotional impact. It all came from Sean's reactions. Her relationship with Sean isn't developed enough, either, there are only two or three short scenes with them together so we never really know who she is. I also felt that there were so many others characters that needed a voice. There are some students that have beautifully tragic stories, but are pulled out of the film so quickly (eg. The boy who stays behind to help his teacher, Sean's friend who finds a girl he knows, dead or close to, in the developments). I won't go into the other issues I have with it, you can figure out your own, but these are the main problems I found.
Overall it was a gorgeous, moving film that could never have been made with such meticulous attention to character and detail without a director who had actually lived the experience. Robinson knows what he is writing and he never exploits his characters or uses too many clichés. I highly recommend 'April Showers', but only if you enjoy films that have you close to tears.
To start off I have to say that I waited for about a year and a half for this film to be released in Australia, so when I came across it accidentally at the video store I work at I almost had a heart attack. I immediately hired it. I was not disappointed.
The first 30-45 minutes set during the actual shooting was completely engaging and tense, it was brutal and totally heart-wrenching. The students actions in the school are varied, there are those who act heroically and some who don't, just like what I imagine it would be like in the real situation.
The film slows down a bit in the second half when we follow the survivors trying to deal with their own issues and tragedies, especially those of Kelly Blatz's Sean (Blatz puts forward an amazing performance) dealing with the death of his friend, April and Daryl Sabara's Jason who tries to deal with being labeled a hero. This part of the film doesn't have as much punch and emotional impact as the first part, but it deals with the characters realistically and sensitively.
I do have some small issues, though. Firstly, April isn't given enough back story, I never really felt like I knew her well enough for her death to make a huge emotional impact. It all came from Sean's reactions. Her relationship with Sean isn't developed enough, either, there are only two or three short scenes with them together so we never really know who she is. I also felt that there were so many others characters that needed a voice. There are some students that have beautifully tragic stories, but are pulled out of the film so quickly (eg. The boy who stays behind to help his teacher, Sean's friend who finds a girl he knows, dead or close to, in the developments). I won't go into the other issues I have with it, you can figure out your own, but these are the main problems I found.
Overall it was a gorgeous, moving film that could never have been made with such meticulous attention to character and detail without a director who had actually lived the experience. Robinson knows what he is writing and he never exploits his characters or uses too many clichés. I highly recommend 'April Showers', but only if you enjoy films that have you close to tears.
One long Boring scene
onewave11 August 2009
This movies plays out like one long drawn out sad scene. You never have time to feel anything for the characters because they are too busy being consumed by grief FOR HOURS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. The acting is one step above your average Doritos commercial and the cinematography is film school at best. As for the sound track I think this was the only movies I have ever watched that had one continuous crappy sad song playing throughout. It was like being stuck at a wake with a bunch of kids who just lost their tickets to a Jonus Brothers concert. If you see this DVD at any time RUN RUN or grab it and flush it down the toilet.
Not enough depth to have a true impact.
Moviereviwer19838 July 2012
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.
Starts Well But Sputters And Dies
drpakmanrains28 April 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I really wanted to like this film. I like serious independent films, and am interested in stories about school and problems of teens and growing up. While this was based on the Columbine shooting, after the scenes during the killings, the movie focused on the after effects on a number of the students affected. Unfortunately, the characters were not well developed, the sound was often drowned out by background noise or music, and mostly we just see long sad stares, with minimal dialog. Spoiler alert: The ending credits showing the names of the victims of all school shootings through 2008 was a highlight, but not enough to make the film worth the time. While I shed a tear or two, it should have been much more emotional. "Lifted", in 2010, honors our fallen heroes in a far more effective, entertaining, and emotionally powerful film.
We Are "April Showers"
USNewsDesk25 April 2009
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.
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.
Better than 'Elephant' in some way but not in others
aleusong26 June 2010
Warning: Spoilers
I had a similar experience as reviewer "ANightToRemember" where I first saw this in theaters and thought it was great, but after repeated viewings the film had cringiness here and there.
On the upside, the writing and direction are better than in most school shooting films, I've seen. However, this film commits many of the similar crimes that 'Elephant' does in that it takes a way too artsy approach. I don't believe that school shootings make a good subject when doing an artsy independent film regardless of who's behind it. I would've preferred this had been a bigger budget studio production though many would disagree. Andrew Robinson does a good job with this even though he offers nothing new on the subject of Columbine that we didn't know already. Tons of survivor books have been released over the decade since Columbine and various film interpretations of school shootings in general have been done. This one bears the most similarities however to the real Columbine though not of the same decade.
Another thing I'm not a fan of here are the characters. The only character in the entire film I enjoyed watching was Jason. But I had a hard time getting into Sean as the main lead. For a film directed by a Columbine survivor, he definitely over-exaggerated in various areas or bordered on the unrealistic. I personally thought villainous portrayal of the media was a bit of an overkill. I also never believe that a teacher would butt into a student's love life the way that drama teacher does.
Anyway I don't mind that the film keep its POV on the survivors but it doesn't make it better as film. Different yes, but this film is easily dismissible as another standard school shooting film for the bin.
On the upside, the writing and direction are better than in most school shooting films, I've seen. However, this film commits many of the similar crimes that 'Elephant' does in that it takes a way too artsy approach. I don't believe that school shootings make a good subject when doing an artsy independent film regardless of who's behind it. I would've preferred this had been a bigger budget studio production though many would disagree. Andrew Robinson does a good job with this even though he offers nothing new on the subject of Columbine that we didn't know already. Tons of survivor books have been released over the decade since Columbine and various film interpretations of school shootings in general have been done. This one bears the most similarities however to the real Columbine though not of the same decade.
Another thing I'm not a fan of here are the characters. The only character in the entire film I enjoyed watching was Jason. But I had a hard time getting into Sean as the main lead. For a film directed by a Columbine survivor, he definitely over-exaggerated in various areas or bordered on the unrealistic. I personally thought villainous portrayal of the media was a bit of an overkill. I also never believe that a teacher would butt into a student's love life the way that drama teacher does.
Anyway I don't mind that the film keep its POV on the survivors but it doesn't make it better as film. Different yes, but this film is easily dismissible as another standard school shooting film for the bin.
excellent plain and simple.
xxcourtneyxx-106-57829813 July 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I have to disagree 100% with the people who dislike this movie. I agree that there are some flaws and things that could have been done to make the movie a little bit better. Also before i get going i went into this movie not knowing anything about it or watching the trailer. This movie is beautifully realistic and thats what makes the movie. the movie was meant to show the after math of what happened not spend the whole movie on the shooting itself. I am just so in awe of this movie and its one of the most intense films i have seen in a long time. It's scary at the end how many school shootings there have been. I also think that people need to take this movie for what it is. its not a million dollar movie and it is an independent film. its not meant to be a Hollywood blockbuster and i love that its not. Its an independent movie made by a columbine survivor. Some of the movie is disjointed but that is overshadowed by the message of the film. Very good job.
ugh
shalimar-415 October 2012
Brave of the director to attack this sort of subject and for not glorifying the "bad guy(s)" However that is where the compliments end.
The idiotic shaky camera syndrome just annoys the hell of of many people.. the character development is shallow at best. Acting is well.. as one other review said very "after school special" and I'd have to agree.
The entire film really is a failure in the end since it lacks what is necessary to really tie things together properly.
Oh and before someone gets on the soapbox about "it's the guns" (which is inevitable on this subject. It is not and nor has it ever been. Yes tragedies happen with seriously mentally ill psychos. But this is a classic example of how moronic a "gun free zone" is.
If even some of the teachers had been armed this sort of thing could have been stopped much faster and w/far less loss of life. Same as many other incidents of this nature. No one can predict such an incident.. but we all can certainly prepare to handle such infinitely better.
All of that said.. I as most others feel for the victims of such incidents. Most everyone wishes such things never happen ever. But that is simply not reality.
The most poignant part of this entire effort is the list of those lost to all of us at the end. To those I would say we all should salute them for their sacrifice and/or bravery. But not a tear will I ever shed for those killed that perpetrate such crimes.
The idiotic shaky camera syndrome just annoys the hell of of many people.. the character development is shallow at best. Acting is well.. as one other review said very "after school special" and I'd have to agree.
The entire film really is a failure in the end since it lacks what is necessary to really tie things together properly.
Oh and before someone gets on the soapbox about "it's the guns" (which is inevitable on this subject. It is not and nor has it ever been. Yes tragedies happen with seriously mentally ill psychos. But this is a classic example of how moronic a "gun free zone" is.
If even some of the teachers had been armed this sort of thing could have been stopped much faster and w/far less loss of life. Same as many other incidents of this nature. No one can predict such an incident.. but we all can certainly prepare to handle such infinitely better.
All of that said.. I as most others feel for the victims of such incidents. Most everyone wishes such things never happen ever. But that is simply not reality.
The most poignant part of this entire effort is the list of those lost to all of us at the end. To those I would say we all should salute them for their sacrifice and/or bravery. But not a tear will I ever shed for those killed that perpetrate such crimes.
Many questions, but seemingly no answers
risephoenixrise-118-97746311 August 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Please do not misunderstand me. The tragedies that befell Columbine High, Santana High, and Millard South--which is a local school in my area--are some of the most terrifying histories in my lifetime. The young people that suffer trauma from these events stretch beyond their schools and communities. These school shootings marked the end of an innocence where adolescence was once associated with discover, exploration, and the joy of it all.
A retelling of the events of a school shooting has a challenge to tell the story with purpose. What hurts this film the most is that we are told the ending in the first few minutes. I won't give away what happened (not that you need my help), but we already know what is going to happen. This film mopped itself into a corner because there were no surprises. The viewer would need a darn good reason to keep watching through such a depressing story. I can only assume this film follows the Tarantino-inspired trend, to tell the story out of sequence. That worked for "Pulp Fiction" because there was more than one plot, and each story were distinct. In "April Showers" the characters were all going in the same direction, so it made little sense to tell the story out of sequence.
The actors are relatively unknown, but work hard and play their roles well. Tom Arnold and Ileana Douglas, as superb thespians as they are, did not need to carry these kids. They acted as well as they could under the circumstances.
What's unfortunate is that the film was so focused on the tragedy, it failed to connect us to the characters. By the end of the film, I still didn't learn anything about most of the principal cast. A story's tragedy is only effective when people we know and love suffer. Even the namesake of the film, April, was a wooden character that showed no charisma nor personality to warrant our affection--she was just the pretty blond girl, and that's why we're supposed to care(?) The screenplay did little, if at all, to make me care about the characters.
The single-most effective subplot involves Jason, a socially inept misfit, whom had become traumatized by the shooting. Throughout the film we witness his trauma worsen to levels of insanity. Portrayed by Daryl Sabara, we constantly wonder what the deal is with Jason up until he bears his soul in the climax--the pivotal, heartbreaking moment of the film. His development was paced well and left us wondering what would happen next. Everything Jason reacts to is for a reason, and a very shocking reason at that.
Without giving us time to understand the characters, we were pushed right into the incident. By then it was too late for us to sympathize with the flashbacks. We watched the horror of their lives in danger, and we barely had a chance to know their names. As we continue watching the second act of the film, we are watching the community agonize over the incident. With most dramatic stories, we are hoping for a payoff. Not all payoffs have to be happily ever after, but each character's ending were almost predictable, and we watch the characters suffer with absolutely no hope in sight.
The biggest complaint I have is the editing. Most scenes with music are mixed so high, you cannot hear the dialogue. With a story so somber, the characters are required to speak softly. It's hard to make out the conversation. Sometimes I wonder if music was even necessary for some scenes. A well performed story needs no gimmicks to polish it, and rather than letting it's talent shine, the score distracts from the story.
By the end of "April Showers", you are still asking the same questions. Why on Earth would someone do this? What became of these kids? What can we do to prevent this? How did it happen in the first place? It doesn't answer any single one of those questions. Perhaps there are no answers. We are left to hope and pray that there are no more tragedies like this, ever again.
I am only able to give this 4 stars out of sympathy. This is a subject that remains sore with the creators; they wanted us to know the grief they endured. But without any payoff or closure to the story, we are only given this story to relive the pain. That would be fine for a documentary. Unfortunately for the viewer, we have to consider the entertainment value of a film. Works of fiction need some sort of answer as to why we sympathize with the characters unless it is a horror film. This is not a horror film, and it is not a documentary, so it is hard to understand why we watched. If you choose to watch "April Showers", know that you will be brought to a sad, depressing place where you will experience the fear, the chaos, the heartbreak, and the trauma of these students. The one thing it will not provide is a sense of relief.
A retelling of the events of a school shooting has a challenge to tell the story with purpose. What hurts this film the most is that we are told the ending in the first few minutes. I won't give away what happened (not that you need my help), but we already know what is going to happen. This film mopped itself into a corner because there were no surprises. The viewer would need a darn good reason to keep watching through such a depressing story. I can only assume this film follows the Tarantino-inspired trend, to tell the story out of sequence. That worked for "Pulp Fiction" because there was more than one plot, and each story were distinct. In "April Showers" the characters were all going in the same direction, so it made little sense to tell the story out of sequence.
The actors are relatively unknown, but work hard and play their roles well. Tom Arnold and Ileana Douglas, as superb thespians as they are, did not need to carry these kids. They acted as well as they could under the circumstances.
What's unfortunate is that the film was so focused on the tragedy, it failed to connect us to the characters. By the end of the film, I still didn't learn anything about most of the principal cast. A story's tragedy is only effective when people we know and love suffer. Even the namesake of the film, April, was a wooden character that showed no charisma nor personality to warrant our affection--she was just the pretty blond girl, and that's why we're supposed to care(?) The screenplay did little, if at all, to make me care about the characters.
The single-most effective subplot involves Jason, a socially inept misfit, whom had become traumatized by the shooting. Throughout the film we witness his trauma worsen to levels of insanity. Portrayed by Daryl Sabara, we constantly wonder what the deal is with Jason up until he bears his soul in the climax--the pivotal, heartbreaking moment of the film. His development was paced well and left us wondering what would happen next. Everything Jason reacts to is for a reason, and a very shocking reason at that.
Without giving us time to understand the characters, we were pushed right into the incident. By then it was too late for us to sympathize with the flashbacks. We watched the horror of their lives in danger, and we barely had a chance to know their names. As we continue watching the second act of the film, we are watching the community agonize over the incident. With most dramatic stories, we are hoping for a payoff. Not all payoffs have to be happily ever after, but each character's ending were almost predictable, and we watch the characters suffer with absolutely no hope in sight.
The biggest complaint I have is the editing. Most scenes with music are mixed so high, you cannot hear the dialogue. With a story so somber, the characters are required to speak softly. It's hard to make out the conversation. Sometimes I wonder if music was even necessary for some scenes. A well performed story needs no gimmicks to polish it, and rather than letting it's talent shine, the score distracts from the story.
By the end of "April Showers", you are still asking the same questions. Why on Earth would someone do this? What became of these kids? What can we do to prevent this? How did it happen in the first place? It doesn't answer any single one of those questions. Perhaps there are no answers. We are left to hope and pray that there are no more tragedies like this, ever again.
I am only able to give this 4 stars out of sympathy. This is a subject that remains sore with the creators; they wanted us to know the grief they endured. But without any payoff or closure to the story, we are only given this story to relive the pain. That would be fine for a documentary. Unfortunately for the viewer, we have to consider the entertainment value of a film. Works of fiction need some sort of answer as to why we sympathize with the characters unless it is a horror film. This is not a horror film, and it is not a documentary, so it is hard to understand why we watched. If you choose to watch "April Showers", know that you will be brought to a sad, depressing place where you will experience the fear, the chaos, the heartbreak, and the trauma of these students. The one thing it will not provide is a sense of relief.
If it didn't make you cry, you certainly have something wrong ...
qaiser-habib-khan23 June 2009
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..
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..
A movie about survivors, not killers.
Jeremy Bristol23 February 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I just watched this movie at a screening at the high school where it was filmed. To be honest, I expected some kind of low-budget, Sundance-style film, or worse, a surface level re-enactment of the Columbine tragedy, with pretty faces ready-made for the next High School musical television special. Well, except for the fact that most of the characters are in fact gorgeous, especially the April character, I can now assure you that I was quite wrong.
First of all, April Showers is not a simple fictionalization of the Columbine tragedy; some of the most famous stories have been eliminated or altered, and elements of other shootings, including a video by the killer that is more reminiscent of the Virginia Tech killer's manifesto than the Klybold/Harris homemade movies, creep in here and there. These changes are unnerving both in the way it shakes up your expectations (nobody is shot for saying yes, though religion is an important theme, both for good and bad) as well as the way it gives the proceedings a more universal feel (it helps that Columbine is not mentioned in the obligatory "based-on-facts" header). That said, it still gives an insider's look at the very specific aftermath of Columbine, as the director showed in his open answers in the Q/A session that followed the screening. I can only hope for a commentary track will be included when the inevitable DVD/Blu-Ray comes out.
Secondly, like all good art, it strives to do more than simply relay facts to the audience. At its core, April Showers is a tragic love story--though I hate to compare it to a monster movie, it kind of reminded me of Cloverfield for some reason. I suppose in some ways, the two movies have the same theme--you don't know how long you have together, so make the most of it--except that this movie actually made me believe it.
If I had any concerns about the movie, it would be that while the filmmakers didn't go out of their way to portray the killer as a monster(it's too easy to hate these kinds of killers as it is, and the restraint is refreshing), they also failed to show him as a human being--literally. He is only portrayed in the manifesto video and through security camera footage that is horrifyingly similar to the infamous Columbine footage. I have mixed feelings about this choice. I applaud the filmmakers for not trying to force answers to the country's single, numbly-asked question, "Why?" That may well be the film's greatest strength, that it doesn't cater to our need to make sense of senseless acts. If nothing else comes out of seeing April Showers, I hope it will help me ask the right questions ("if 'bullying' (substitute your own word--video games, rap music, etc.) alone can cause people to kill, then why doesn't it happen more often?"). Still, never seeing the Klybold/Harris surrogate on a normal day leaves the audience only with the collective media memory of the Columbine attack to fall back on in order to fill in the gaps. I suppose I was hoping for the chance to empathize or sympathize with the killer's emotional plight, if only in the same way that I would for Humbert Humbert from Lolita or Jack Nicholson's character from The Shining or even Alex from A Clockwork Orange. Or maybe I've just seen too many Kubrick films. Still, despite the lengths I've gone to in trying to explain my concern, it is still a minor one. Interestingly, two of the survivors almost fulfilled that element for me, though that may have only been because of my mistaken assumptions. Before I saw the film, I had assumed that Daryl Sabara's character was the killer, and in his opening scene, he is being bullied, something that supposedly was one of the triggers for Klybold and Harris' rampage. Another character, a very close friend of the killer, is arrested, and for a while it's unclear why--I half expected that he was another gunman, but he wasn't.
My only other complaint, after only seeing the movie once, was that Sabara's character's story arc seemed a little obvious and/or heavy-handed compared to that of the main character.
All in all, it was a very well made film about survivors, not killers. The cinematography includes some judicious shaky camera work that leads to a rather surreal-looking, jerky running scene--almost like the old silent films when the frames per second wasn't standardized yet and so runs faster on modern equipment. I know that sounds like a complaint, but it's not.
First of all, April Showers is not a simple fictionalization of the Columbine tragedy; some of the most famous stories have been eliminated or altered, and elements of other shootings, including a video by the killer that is more reminiscent of the Virginia Tech killer's manifesto than the Klybold/Harris homemade movies, creep in here and there. These changes are unnerving both in the way it shakes up your expectations (nobody is shot for saying yes, though religion is an important theme, both for good and bad) as well as the way it gives the proceedings a more universal feel (it helps that Columbine is not mentioned in the obligatory "based-on-facts" header). That said, it still gives an insider's look at the very specific aftermath of Columbine, as the director showed in his open answers in the Q/A session that followed the screening. I can only hope for a commentary track will be included when the inevitable DVD/Blu-Ray comes out.
Secondly, like all good art, it strives to do more than simply relay facts to the audience. At its core, April Showers is a tragic love story--though I hate to compare it to a monster movie, it kind of reminded me of Cloverfield for some reason. I suppose in some ways, the two movies have the same theme--you don't know how long you have together, so make the most of it--except that this movie actually made me believe it.
If I had any concerns about the movie, it would be that while the filmmakers didn't go out of their way to portray the killer as a monster(it's too easy to hate these kinds of killers as it is, and the restraint is refreshing), they also failed to show him as a human being--literally. He is only portrayed in the manifesto video and through security camera footage that is horrifyingly similar to the infamous Columbine footage. I have mixed feelings about this choice. I applaud the filmmakers for not trying to force answers to the country's single, numbly-asked question, "Why?" That may well be the film's greatest strength, that it doesn't cater to our need to make sense of senseless acts. If nothing else comes out of seeing April Showers, I hope it will help me ask the right questions ("if 'bullying' (substitute your own word--video games, rap music, etc.) alone can cause people to kill, then why doesn't it happen more often?"). Still, never seeing the Klybold/Harris surrogate on a normal day leaves the audience only with the collective media memory of the Columbine attack to fall back on in order to fill in the gaps. I suppose I was hoping for the chance to empathize or sympathize with the killer's emotional plight, if only in the same way that I would for Humbert Humbert from Lolita or Jack Nicholson's character from The Shining or even Alex from A Clockwork Orange. Or maybe I've just seen too many Kubrick films. Still, despite the lengths I've gone to in trying to explain my concern, it is still a minor one. Interestingly, two of the survivors almost fulfilled that element for me, though that may have only been because of my mistaken assumptions. Before I saw the film, I had assumed that Daryl Sabara's character was the killer, and in his opening scene, he is being bullied, something that supposedly was one of the triggers for Klybold and Harris' rampage. Another character, a very close friend of the killer, is arrested, and for a while it's unclear why--I half expected that he was another gunman, but he wasn't.
My only other complaint, after only seeing the movie once, was that Sabara's character's story arc seemed a little obvious and/or heavy-handed compared to that of the main character.
All in all, it was a very well made film about survivors, not killers. The cinematography includes some judicious shaky camera work that leads to a rather surreal-looking, jerky running scene--almost like the old silent films when the frames per second wasn't standardized yet and so runs faster on modern equipment. I know that sounds like a complaint, but it's not.
disregard those who say this movie is pointless, its powerful
dominiquesmith_131 January 2012
Warning: Spoilers
WATCH IT. ~~~~~ read I'm not going to tell u about the movie. just the emotion. not sure if thats considered a spoil. just finished watching this. I'm 23 years of my name date. for all that said like me, " I wish they would show a school shooting movie, or things like this in a more realistic deeper way."
i said that many times. this movie does that. and i cry on small stuff., yet even my strong willed guy cried, through the whole movie. definitely the ending. if u don't care about people hurting even mentally and just want to see death, find another movie. this is something much deeper and breaks it down for u, day by day. its based on a real life thing.
WATCH IT. see. and get back to me.
i said that many times. this movie does that. and i cry on small stuff., yet even my strong willed guy cried, through the whole movie. definitely the ending. if u don't care about people hurting even mentally and just want to see death, find another movie. this is something much deeper and breaks it down for u, day by day. its based on a real life thing.
WATCH IT. see. and get back to me.
Very good movie
jwingnut124 April 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Saw the movie this afternoon, as it debuted in Omaha, NE. Most of the movie was filmed in the area, and my step-daughter was an extra in the movie.
The movie is pretty much a re-enactment of the Columbine shooting, with names changed, as well as some of the details. For example, the movie has one shooter rather than two. The first forty minutes of the movie deal directly with the shooting, while the remainder of the movie follows a select number of students trying to deal with the tragedy.
This is by no means a feel-good movie. If you're depressed, you shouldn't see it. It's dark, realistic drama. That shouldn't be surprising, since writer-director Andrew Robinson was a survivor of the Columbine tragedy. Before the end credits, they list the victims of every school shooting in the United States, through December 2008. That, right there, kind of sums up what the movie is about. To educate, inform, and make sure the lesson isn't forgotten.
While I liked the movie, my wife said she's rate it 6 stars and her sister didn't like it. But her complaint was that there were no big names. I don't think she sees very many independent films. It will be interesting to see what other reviews say. I highly recommend the movie. It is rated R, and is not a movie for pre-teens. My 10 year-old wants to see it when it comes out in DVD (because her sister is in it), but emotionally, she's too young to handle it.
The movie is pretty much a re-enactment of the Columbine shooting, with names changed, as well as some of the details. For example, the movie has one shooter rather than two. The first forty minutes of the movie deal directly with the shooting, while the remainder of the movie follows a select number of students trying to deal with the tragedy.
This is by no means a feel-good movie. If you're depressed, you shouldn't see it. It's dark, realistic drama. That shouldn't be surprising, since writer-director Andrew Robinson was a survivor of the Columbine tragedy. Before the end credits, they list the victims of every school shooting in the United States, through December 2008. That, right there, kind of sums up what the movie is about. To educate, inform, and make sure the lesson isn't forgotten.
While I liked the movie, my wife said she's rate it 6 stars and her sister didn't like it. But her complaint was that there were no big names. I don't think she sees very many independent films. It will be interesting to see what other reviews say. I highly recommend the movie. It is rated R, and is not a movie for pre-teens. My 10 year-old wants to see it when it comes out in DVD (because her sister is in it), but emotionally, she's too young to handle it.
A very powerful and intense film.....
Irishchatter24 April 2015
Warning: Spoilers
I actually found at the beginning of the film sucks you into the reality of how unsettling it feels to be in someone shoes who lost their loved one in a tragedy. I always knew April and Sean had that spark of love for each other since he first met her at the school. Unfortunately it was short lived....
Seeing poor Jason being traumatized by it all makes you feel really helpless and heartbroken that he wasn't coping with it all. I wouldn't cope either if a tragedy struck but the number 1 thing I would do is get help. He sadly killed himself by drowning himself in his bath..... I swear I was in tears, it was very tragic!
What really made me more upset was before the teacher died, he cried by seeing the picture of his family. I found that very upsetting and heartbreaking.
Finally to finish my review off, I just want to give my condolences to the families and close friends of the victims that left us too soon. May you all rest in peace ♡♡♡
Seeing poor Jason being traumatized by it all makes you feel really helpless and heartbroken that he wasn't coping with it all. I wouldn't cope either if a tragedy struck but the number 1 thing I would do is get help. He sadly killed himself by drowning himself in his bath..... I swear I was in tears, it was very tragic!
What really made me more upset was before the teacher died, he cried by seeing the picture of his family. I found that very upsetting and heartbreaking.
Finally to finish my review off, I just want to give my condolences to the families and close friends of the victims that left us too soon. May you all rest in peace ♡♡♡
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
