by Thomas Marinelli ’26 on October 30, 2025

---

A&E - Film & TV

---

I’ve seen many, many horror movies in my time. A lot of them have become what I call “Hollywoodified,” pretty stupid and not very scary. Others, however, truly live up to their reputation and are legitimately terrifying. Recently, in anticipation of Halloween (my favorite holiday), I watched The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974), and I was not disappointed. This movie stands as a classic for a reason. Even for a film made in the 1970s, its gore, cinematography, and realism surpass most horror movies made today, despite having a tight budget. To make things worse (or better), it was loosely based on real-life murderer Ed Gein. For the sake of keeping things newspaper-friendly, I won’t go into detail about his crimes. Nevertheless, Gein, who gained infamy in 1950s Wisconsin, had a ripple effect on the horror movie industry. The new season of Monster (2022) on Netflix explores his story. The show, best known for its first season about Jeffrey Dahmer, dives into how Gein inspired iconic horror villains like Buffalo Bill (The Silence of the Lambs, 1991), Norman Bates (Psycho, 1960), and Leatherface (The Texas Chainsaw Massacre). Out of these three movies, all excellent in their own way, only The Texas Chainsaw Massacre truly scared me, and that’s the reason why everyone should watch it this Halloween.

Like many horror films, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre was shot on a very low budget. It was supposed to be a two-week shoot under the brutal Texas sun, but ended up lasting 33 days, with filming often running up to 16 hours a day. Needless to say, the cast wasn’t having much fun, yet their exhaustion and discomfort only added to the movie’s unsettling atmosphere. Set in rural Texas, the story follows a group of teenagers on a road trip to visit family members, stumbling upon a deranged family of cannibals living on a decaying farm that used to be a slaughterhouse. Director and writer Tobe Hooper was inspired by several things: America’s growing disillusionment and distrust of authority after Watergate and the Vietnam War, as well as the dark fairy tale of Hansel and Gretel, with the teenagers as the lost children and the cannibal family as the witch who traps them. However, perhaps the most iconic spark came when Hooper, stuck in a crowded department store during the Christmas rush, imagined using a chainsaw to “cut” his way through the crowd. It’s strange, sure, but that kind of mind makes for great horror.

What I love most about The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is how beautiful it looks, even in its horror. Hooper makes the Texas sun come alive; the film always seems to take place during golden hour or late afternoon, where even the daylight feels haunted. The set design is both bizarre and perfect: an abandoned slaughterhouse surrounded by the eerie relics of a deranged family, with cameras constantly zooming in on unsettling details scattered throughout the house and landscape. Some might dismiss the film’s gore as outdated, but that couldn’t be further from the truth. Even in the opening shot, the fake corpse looks disturbingly real, and the gritty, documentary-style camera work makes everything feel believable. The film leans more on psychological terror than pure slasher tropes; this isn’t Freddy Krueger killing for fun. Every act of violence in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre feels either obsessive or defensive—never random.

Leatherface, the main antagonist, is quite literally masked with a human face, representing both his hard exterior and his soft, frightened interior, a reflection of America itself at the time through Hooper’s eyes. Despite wielding a chainsaw, Leatherface is essentially a child, terrified of intruders and reacting in the worst possible way, through violence that both “feeds” and satisfies him. From beginning to end, the film is deeply disturbing and unpredictable; no one feels safe, and there’s no time to relax. The teenage characters might be the weakest part of the film—they’re not very relatable and can be annoying—but their fear feels genuine, and that authenticity carries the story. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is one of the few movies that truly scared me. It made me feel unsettled in a way few films do, mainly because it is something that could actually exist. My friends didn’t find it as scary, but that’s because it’s not a jump scare movie; it’s a gruesome, realistic thriller meant to linger in your mind long after it ends.

So this Halloween, gather a group of friends, turn the volume up and the lights down, and tell everyone to shut up and just watch. There’s no way you’ll be disappointed.

by Reese Cassidy ’28 on October 30, 2025

---

A&E - Film & TV

---

Every fall, as the leaves turn and pumpkins appear on porches, Hocus Pocus seems to rise from the grave once again. What began as a forgotten Disney movie in the early ’90s has become a Halloween tradition that fans return to year after year, not for the scares, but for the comfort.

When Hocus Pocus first hit theaters in 1993, it wasn’t the hit Disney had hoped for. Released in the middle of summer, the film earned mixed reviews and modest box office numbers. Yet over the years, something magical happened. The movie found new life through television reruns and then later streaming platforms, transforming from just another fantasy comedy into a beloved Halloween tradition.

More than 30 years later, Hocus Pocus has become a cultural ritual. Every October, families and fans rewatch it, quote it, and dress up as the Sanderson Sisters. Its staying power isn’t just about witches, spells, or black cats; it’s about the way it captures the feeling of Halloween itself: playful, nostalgic, and comforting.

The story behind its success is almost as surprising as the movie’s plot. In the early 2000s, Disney Channel and ABC Family (now Freeform) began airing the film every October. A new generation of kids discovered it, and before long, it became essential to the Halloween season. The film’s popularity grew without major reboots or advertising campaigns. Instead, it spread through tradition. People watched it with siblings, friends, and parents year after year. Over time, Hocus Pocus became a shared seasonal memory, passed down like a favorite Halloween decoration that reappears every fall.

Part of what makes Hocus Pocus so enduring is the feeling of nostalgia it evokes. The film takes viewers back to the excitement of childhood Halloween, with the thrill of costumes, trick-or-treating, and the magic of believing that something supernatural could be happening right around the corner. Unlike horror movies that rely on fear, Hocus Pocus is lighthearted. Its humor, catchy music, and sense of adventure make it the perfect choice for all ages. That comforting tone is exactly what Halloween needs to offset the horror movies and scary vibes. Watching it now feels like revisiting a familiar October from years ago, when everything was a little simpler and a lot more magical. Every time it airs, it reconnects people with the traditions that define the season of pumpkin carving, movie nights, and the sense that Halloween brings everyone together. In a world that changes so quickly, there’s something special about returning to the same movie, the same music, and the same magic that’s been around for decades.

The film’s visual world is another reason for its lasting charm. Set in Salem, MA, Hocus Pocus is filled with everything we associate with Halloween: pumpkin-lined streets, flickering candles, haunted houses, black cats, and just the right amount of fog. Its color palette of deep oranges, purples, and shadowy blues has practically become the standard for Halloween decor. Even the costumes and soundtrack add to its signature feel. The Sanderson Sisters, Winifred, Sarah, and Mary, are instantly recognizable with their colorful capes and chaotic energy. Their over-the-top personalities and humor have made them icons of Halloween pop culture. Every year, fans flood social media with memes, quotes, and photos of their Hocus Pocus-inspired costumes, keeping the spirit of the movie alive.

The release of Hocus Pocus 2 in 2022 showed just how powerful that nostalgia can be. The sequel attracted longtime fans eager to revisit Salem and new viewers discovering the sisters for the first time. It reminded everyone why the original film remains so popular, not because it’s the scariest or most sophisticated movie, but because it feels timeless. At its core, Hocus Pocus celebrates community, family, and the joy of make-believe. It invites everyone to laugh, sing along, and indulge in a little seasonal magic.The secret to Hocus Pocus’s longevity isn’t witchcraft, but emotion. Each year, as October rolls around, the movie reappears like clockwork, signaling Halloween has truly begun. It’s a reminder that the holiday isn’t just about candy or costumes, but about revisiting memories and traditions that make the season feel special. In a way, Hocus Pocus has cast its greatest spell on us all, the ability to make every Halloween feel just like the first one we remember.

by Sophia Caneira ’29 on October 9, 2025

---

A&E - Film & TV

---

Maybe you heard about Oppenheimer (2023) through the summer “Barbenheimer” phenomenon. Maybe you saw Interstellar (2014) and fell in love with Hans Zimmer’s score. Maybe your dad made you watch The Prestige (2006) during a family movie night one weekend. Maybe you’re a big Batman fan and do a great imitation of Heath Ledger’s “Why so serious”? Maybe you watched Inception (2010) and you enjoyed it, but were also thoroughly confused. Here we have the father of the nuclear bomb, space travel resulting in the discovery of a fifth dimension, warring magicians, Bruce Wayne, and dream thieves. Quite a wide range. But what do all these films have in common? The imagination and creative touch of critically-acclaimed director Christopher Nolan. 

Nolan was born in London in 1970; his father was British and shot commercials in Los Angeles, while his mother was an American flight attendant. His childhood was spent in both London and Chicago, playing with action figures, making films, and constantly going to the movies with his younger brother Jonanthan. Notably, Nolan’s father took him to see Star Wars (1977) and 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), the latter of which inspired the highly acclaimed and well-received Interstellar. Nolan attended the University College London (UCL), where he studied English literature and met his future wife, producer Emma Thomas. Together, the two of them participated heavily in an on-campus film society, the UCL Film Society. 

Nolan made his first film, Following (1998), in his 20s and on a $6,000 budget. When he did the press tour for the film, he began to realize just how dependent moviemaking was on audience reception. Nolan has at least some of the writing credit for all of his films except Insomnia, and has collaborated on scripts with his brother since his film Memento (2000). He also collaborates with his wife, with whom he created the production company Syncopy. 

Memento, Nolan’s first big film, began as a short story written by Nolan’s brother. The two of them worked on the story together, discussing points of view and elements that could be translated between the short story and the film. The movie is not structured chronologically, but Nolan wrote the script in chronological order to make sure the foundation of the story made sense before shifting the scenes into the order that they would be seen by audiences. He also credits the actors in the film, notably Guy Pearce, with helping to ensure the logic of the story remained intact. 

Nolan’s technique—from both narrative and technical standpoints—is what sets him apart as a director and as an auteur. His films frequently involve the use of symbolism, which he often incorporates visually (totems in Inception, stethoscope in Batman Begins (2005), etc). Many of his films include shocking plot twists and nonlinear timelines. Nolan also emphasizes the importance of realism. For example, when creating Interstellar, Nolan spoke with scientists in order to ascertain that the film didn’t violate any established laws of physics. He believes that every aspect of a film must contribute to the film’s logic, and tries to think from the perspective of the audience, asking: what does the typical moviegoer like, want, or expect from his films? Nolan is very deliberate; as the director, he knows what he wants from a story and a film, but he also allows room for the plot of his films to be open to interpretation by the audience.

From a technical standpoint, and something I find rather remarkable, is that Nolan doesn’t use computer-generated imagery—he believes one can get a better result from shooting real scenes in real locations. During his creation of Interstellar, he didn’t use any green screens. Instead, he built the entire set and enhanced the film with special effects. Nolan’s postproduction coordinator has said that he has worked on rom-coms with more post-production effects than The Dark Knight Rises (2012). In a digital age when CGI has become such a common technology, especially for movies in the superhero genre, it is remarkable that Nolan has made so many films that are beautiful to look at without the use of CGI. Nolan also takes note of where the camera is aligned relative to the subjects within the frame, always aware of the relationship between the characters and the audience. He doesn’t use the zoom on his cameras, but instead places the camera within physical proximity to the subject. He often shoots on IMAX, intending to create an experience for the viewer that is as immersive as possible. Nolan holds to the idea that the technical aspects of a film, even the ones we unconsciously register, make the experience. 

Nolan has been highly influenced by big names in Hollywood such as Ridley Scott, Stanley Kubrick, Terrence Malick, and Nicolas Roeg. He has been praised by his actors as a great problem-solver who is very hands-on on set. He is known for being on time, on schedule, very organized and prepared, with a deep sense of responsibility for efficiency in the making of his films. He won his first Oscar with Oppenheimer, which received much attention on its own accord, aside from being released the same weekend as Greta Gerwig’s Barbie (2023). His next movie, The Odyssey, stars Matt Damon and Tom Holland and is scheduled for release in July of next year. In the last few weeks, he was also elected president of the Directors Guild of America.

Ever since I first saw Nolan’s take on the Batman character in The Dark Knight trilogy, I have been fascinated with his work. I recently had the chance to see Inception, which I really loved. All of his stories are riveting and his cinematography captivating. His movies are full of twists and turns that make for a unique viewing experience and leave you with a whole host of thoughts long after the credits roll. Being an aspiring screenwriter and filmmaker myself, Nolan serves as a muse. His passion and devotion to his work and his team are extremely admirable. Having a sister who loves writing as much as I do makes Nolan’s collaboration with his brother all the more inspiring. I leave you with a quote from a Nolan interview on The Director’s Chair: “I think really the only useful advice I ever got in terms of trying to figure out your way into the film business, the film industry, is to get yourself a script and hang onto it. You have to play to your strengths, you have to do something that really excites you, and whatever’s different about that. It’s that idea, that screenplay, that concept that’s so important, and that’s what’s going to distinguish it, if you can do it successfully.” 

One thing’s for sure: Nolan has never been afraid to dream a little bigger (if you know, you know).

by Sophia Caneira ’29 on October 2, 2025

---

A&E - Film & TV

---

The Dark Knight Trilogy Review

Boy, do I wish I had been born in 2005 when Christopher Nolan gave us the gift of Batman Begins. Nolan’s next stab at the Batman franchise came in 2008 with The Dark Knight, but I think most people would agree that a one-year-old is a little too young to watch Heath Ledger’s stunning performance as the Joker. The first time I watched these films—as well as the third installment, The Dark Knight Rises (2012)—was during the COVID-19 pandemic, when family movie nights became a daily ritual instead of a Fridays-only event. It’s easy, I think, to fall in love with Nolan’s films, especially when the Caped Crusader himself is involved. Nolan’s take on DC Comic’s Batman still holds up in the modern day and his trio of films are widely considered to be the best superhero movies of all time. 

The Dark Knight trilogy is one of my favorite movie series of all time for many reasons, from the story and acting to the cinematography, but one of the most crucial elements of this series is its score. Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard created an unforgettable theme that surrounds and defines the character that is, and the movies that are, Batman. These films would not be the same without the music that creates such emotional and gritty moments in an already beautiful story. 

Another strength of these movies is their casts. Christian Bale stars as the main character, who he remarkably portrays as three different personas: the charismatic, lazy, womanizing Bruce Wayne that Gotham is familiar with; the introverted, principled Wayne that serves as a foil and that we only see behind closed doors; and the persona of Batman, who is neither hero nor villain. Michael Caine plays Alfred, Wayne’s father figure and his voice of reason. Morgan Freeman plays Lucius Fox, who, in a way, makes Batman who he is. Without Fox’s loyalty and wealth of resources, Wayne would not be able to maintain secrecy, nor would he be able to jump off of rooftops and arrive in style with the tumbler that, thankfully, does come in black. 

In the second installment, The Dark Knight, the most notable performance is Ledger’s portrayal of the Joker. His use of method acting creates a character who is very real onscreen. His mannerisms—the way he licks his lips when he talks, his hand gestures, his iconic voice and laugh—make his character frightening and very convincing. I also thought Harvey Dent’s (quite literally) two-faced character was a great inclusion of a well-known comic book icon. 

Batman has duality because he swings between hero and villain. He is not concretely one or the other, which makes him a compelling character. In The Dark Knight, we find him somewhere in between. Especially in the second installment of the trilogy, morality is a major concept and is debated between Batman and the Joker. The film, at times, is more like a psychological thriller than a superhero movie, exploring the ages-old ideas of good and evil through unconventional means. Gotham is used as a character in and of itself and serves as a microcosm for humanity. 

One minor criticism I have for the second film is the actor change for the character Rachel Dawes. Originally, in Batman Begins, Dawes’ character is played by Katie Holmes, whose performance I really enjoyed. Maggie Gyllenhaal’s portrayal of the same character in The Dark Knight is still notable, but I felt she didn’t have as much chemistry with Bale’s Wayne than Holmes did. However, this is a relatively minor detail, and with actor consistency aside, there’s not much to complain about. The entire cast, every character, brings value to the film and how the story unfolds. 

The Dark Knight is directed by Nolan, who created all three installments of the Bale trilogy in addition to other critically acclaimed films such as Inception (2010), Interstellar (2014), and, most recently, Oppenheimer (2023). Personally, I love Nolan’s direction. The style he uses in all of his films, with unexpected twists and turns, is evident here. He creates a film that is not only enjoyable for Batman fans and superhero-genre enthusiasts, but also for a majority of diverse audience members. Although my personal favorite of the Bale trilogy is probably the third installment, The Dark Knight Rises, the entire trilogy is certainly a work of cinematic art, sculpted by only the best talents in acting, directing, writing, and editing.

by Luca DeLucia ’28 on October 2, 2025

---

A&E - Film & TV

---

The Halloween season brings a multitude of different films that appeal to different audiences as the world once again gets into the spirit of the season. There are so many different ways to get into the spirit of Halloween. There’s always the classic thriller like Halloween (1978) to get the adrenaline running. Some might even prefer a horror that plays with the mind, such as Jordan Peele’s Get Out (2017). And for others who don’t want the scares, a simple night on the sofa with a hot chocolate and a screening of It’s the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown (1966) after their trick-or-treating will do just the trick. But what about those who want to seek something unique this Halloween season? How about a movie that aims to be as bizarre as possible, and to push what is possible even in the realm of the horror genre? The film they might be looking for has become a cult classic in the many decades since its release, and is a part of a franchise that has now grossed over $300 million worldwide.

Evil Dead II (1987) is the very movie, written and directed by Sam Raimi, who is most well known for directing the original 2000s Spider-Man trilogy starring Tobey Maguire. The movie stars Bruce Campbell as Ash Williams, a man looking to spend a weekend alone in a cabin in the woods with his girlfriend until he reads from a strange book found within the cabin, known as the “Necronomicon,” or “Book of the Dead.” Campbell’s role as Williams would be his defining role as an actor. As the house slowly drives Williams insane, more and more people show up to put an end to the madness, but just as quickly as they come into the cabin, they are soon swept up by the evil spirits Williams summoned by reading from the book, until he is the only one that remains.

Evil Dead II, as the name implies, is a part of a trilogy. It is the middle child between The Evil Dead (1981), and Army of Darkness (1992). However, the trilogy does not tell one cohesive story. Rather, Evil Dead II is a sort of remake of its predecessor, following nearly the same plot as the 1981 original. The Evil Dead is also a cinematic reimagining of Raimi’s college short film Within the Woods (1978), also starring Campbell. It is quite interesting to see just how different each movie in the trilogy tries to portray its ideas. Whereas The Evil Dead functions more like the conventional horror film, with moments of dread and silent intensity in between the deaths of characters, Evil Dead II aims to ramp up the comedy to the nth degree. The movie has a very loose plot: the overarching motive is simply for Williams to survive the night as he faces different problems within the house that lead him to the next innovative way someone is meant to perish. Deaths are excessive, with over-the-top acting and an unrestrained amount of blood. Campbell’s acting helps set the tone of the movie as well; his outlandish body movements and facial expressions make him fun to watch for the entire runtime. Williams bounces around the cabin as the monsters, known as the “deadites,” slowly turn him crazy as the cabin becomes more and more alive with each waking minute. In my opinion, there will never be a funnier moment in any horror movie, than the scene where Williams is forced to cut off his hand, for it got possessed by the book, and after he traps it under a trash can, he weighs down the can with the Hemingway novel A Farewell to Arms, as lightning strikes outside the cabin to symbolize a dramatic, and comedic, end to the scene. 

While The Evil Dead leaned mostly into horror and Evil Dead II combined horror with comedy, the third movie in the franchise, Army of Darkness, ends up forgoing the horror-comedy approach altogether. Army of Darkness is mostly a comedy, with horror aspects such as the deadites still lingering from the original two movies, but these serve more as goons from a superhero movie than an evil force that the protagonist has to overcome. Army of Darkness follows a more structured, albeit very whimsical and hysterical, plot that sees Williams going back to medieval times as he tries to get back to the present day (fun fact: the original name of this movie was meant to be “Medieval Dead”). Unlike Evil Dead II, Army of Darkness is a true follow-up, as the end of the latter movie sees Williams going back in time and leaving audiences on a cliffhanger as to how he might get home. The success of these three movies would lead to the series becoming a franchise, which includes two theatrical reboots (with a third one slated for 2026), a TV show that recasts Campbell as an older Williams, as well as many video games, comic books, and even a musical. It was Raimi’s campy and outlandish idea for a comedic horror film that has its roots delving from 1978 that ended up becoming one of the most well-known horror franchises of the modern day, celebrated by many fans for its unique take on the horror genre. And while each movie of the original trilogy aims to do something different in terms of its take, I find that Evil Dead II strikes a balance between horror and comedy, making it my favorite work of the entire franchise. If you were to ask me, I would love nothing more than to spend my Halloween weekend in front of the TV watching a man survive a night in a cabin in the woods against the Evil Dead.

by Andrew Katz ’26 on October 2, 2025

---

A&E - Film & TV

---

Why George Costanza is the Greatest Sitcom Character of All Time 

The question of who is the greatest sitcom character of all time has often been a debate between sitcom enthusiasts, but one character who is always mentioned is George Costanza from Seinfeld (1989-1998). If you have never seen Seinfeld, George is Jerry Seinfeld’s lifelong childhood friend, whose main characteristics are selfishness, laziness, cheapness, and outward overreaction at the slightest inconveniences he faces in life. From the outside looking in, you might be confused by how this character, who is just straight up a jerk, could be so beloved by the audience. Yet, Seinfeld viewers know that when George enters the screen, they will be entertained. This is due to two things about how George’s character is written. The first is that he is extremely insecure with everything about him, which the audience can relate to in their own lives. The second is that whatever selfish plan he comes up with always backfires on himself. Larry David, the co-creator and writer for the show, uses similar recipes when writing George’s plot for each episode. His plot is usually something like this: George comes up with a plan based on his insecurities, the plan is always a selfish one to benefit himself and hurt others, and the plan always backfires. 

With that level of thought being put into the character, the actor who plays George must play him to perfection. That is where Jason Alexander, the actor cast as George, knocks it out of the park. Alexander plays the role of George to perfection, as he is overly charismatic when he talks about his insecurities or when he is freaking out when his plan fails. Alexander truly makes you feel as if he has been George for his entire life. The over-the-top outbursts that George shows when he fails his selfish plans is what drives the comedic effect even more than the audience just seeing the plan backfire.  

But George has another quality that makes him so beloved. It is that he is slightly relatable. George’s problems mainly consist of his over-the-top parents and the ridiculous, random scenarios where someone is a jerk to him. The audience can relate to these two problem starters occurring daily. When audience members face these situations, they get over it, though they may wish that they could make a big deal about it. George, however, cannot get over it quickly. George instead makes it his mission to deal with the inconveniences as the only way he knows how—by stooping to the other person’s level. The audience also gets to feel superior to George, which is what makes his character so beloved, even when he is doing selfish acts. If George was cool with no insecurities, he would be an annoyance for the audience. But George isn’t cool. George just wants to get by in life by doing whatever benefits him, but he fails every time. That is what makes him so entertaining and the greatest sitcom character of all time.

by Thomas Marinelli ’26 on October 2, 2025

---

A&E - Music

---

It’s 1976. Strung out from being on the road and countless days in the studio recording their latest album, Hotel California, the Eagles were nothing short of burnt out. Hotel California became one of the most popular albums of all time, going on to sell 32 million records worldwide and cementing the band as one of the best of the decade, commercially and artistically. The Eagles never intended to be like most bands, and their lyrics matched their image. Hotel California was not meant to be about living the American dream; it was actually quite the opposite. Even for successful musicians, the picture-perfect reality connoted by the album title was far from what most people had in mind. America was heading into a society of excess in the late 1970s, and it was seeping into the music industry and Hollywood. Soon, music would no longer be about spreading a message of anti-conformity and following dreams, but rather about pursuing materialistic desires and whatever sold best. Knowing this, knowing that it would be hard to follow up their previous album, and with tensions rising by the minute in the band, the Eagles prepared their next release. It would take nearly three years before they put out The Long Run in 1979, a chapter closer to a decade riddled with tensions following Vietnam, Watergate, Hollywood’s rise, and rock’s slow death. All of this was captured in the album, which also marked the end of the Eagles for the time being.

Through 1977 and 1978, the band’s two leaders were at odds. Don Henley, the drummer and vocalist, and Glenn Frey, the guitarist and singer, were constantly clashing over creative differences. Coupled with a new member, Timothy B. Schmit, the presence of ongoing member Joe Walsh, and heavy drug use, the band seemed doomed to remain stagnant in popularity. Punk was on the horizon, and the disco craze was in full effect; rock was starting to show its age, and the California dream was dying. The Eagles had profited greatly as a Los Angeles band with a country-rock feel, but in this changing atmosphere, they had to adjust somehow.

In a way, the Eagles did what they did best: they told stories. The first song on the album, “The Long Run,” is an instant classic, and its message spoke volumes. It’s a song about uncertainty, but played upbeat—addressing fame, the struggle to keep the band alive, or perhaps rock itself. It’s something easier said than done, destined to fade over time. The second song, “I Can’t Tell You Why,” which brought more of a yacht-rock feel to the record, is about a struggling relationship that carries on without knowing how, or if, it can end—sensing a theme. Another track, “Heartache Tonight,” is more celebratory and upbeat, an instant single hit, though it’s about the inevitable end of another relationship. The final song, “The Sad Café,” reflects on the band’s early glory days, now gone with time, almost a final word before shutting down for good.

The album went on to sell over eight million copies—nowhere near the success of Hotel California, but that was expected. By 1980, the band had broken up, nearly ending in a fight on stage between Frey and Don Felder, the band’s guitarist. It was not the glamorous end one might expect, but how many endings are? It was the end of an era, reached by a rough road, but it did something music today rarely does: it didn’t hide anything. Not the way the band felt toward each other, the industry, or the direction of rock. It was disillusionment, fatigue, and nostalgia—but it was all true, and it was all out in the open.

There will always be times at the end of any chapter when one gets burnt out, frustrated, and feels like running away or starting over. But that comes with acceptance—acceptance that it’s okay to feel like that, to let others know, but never to give up. It would be a disservice not to leave everything on the field, even when you think you can’t take it anymore. The Eagles knew it was over, but they also knew there was one last run in them before they could walk away and start something new.

by Charlotte Renola ’28 on October 2, 2025

---

A&E - Fashion

---

The Power Behind the “PARKE” Sweatshirt

We have never been strangers to trends. In fact, trends are all around us. They come and go, and then come back again. Something about the PARKE sweatshirts being worn on the backs of not only hundreds of Providence College students, but also thousands of young adults across the country, has us buying $135 sweatshirts as if they are a rite of passage. They’re all over campus, and chances are, if you’re reading this, you could be wearing one right now. Chelsea Kramer, PARKE’s founder who goes by Chelsea Parke on social media, is more than a business owner and influencer: she is a marketing mastermind. Cultivating a false sense of scarcity, PARKE utilizes controlled drops to leave consumers setting alarms for drop times, frantically putting items in their cart before the coveted clothing items are sold out.

 It’s fascinating how PARKE has created such a loyal and dedicated customer base that will not only buy again and again, but will be outraged if their sweatshirt of choice is no longer available. Fans have taken to TikTok and other social media platforms to display their disappointment, posting different videos “mourning” the losses of their sweatshirts because they did not hit the checkout button fast enough or due to a computer glitch. The trick is that no PARKE drop is the same, as each collection of new drops has its own identity. This makes the superficial loss of a PARKE item that much more detrimental for customers, as the drop might have been their only chance to purchase a style they liked. Whether that style is an ode to an East Coast summer or celebrating the brand’s birthday, customers are addicted and influenced to continue buying. 

PARKE’s way of producing consistent products yet maintaining unique themes and variations of their clothing to keep consumers interested is absolutely genius. This all occurs at a rapid rate, too, as Parke is a producing machine. Drops are scheduled routinely, but always sell out. This creates a sense of urgency for PARKE’s customers, causing them to ignore whether or not they already have an item and enabling their desire to win the game of purchasing something and checking out successfully. 

That being said, next time you find yourself in the game of buying something—a process that seems so simple—take time to think about how there are so many moving pieces and strategies that brands use to get you to buy their product. You might be surprised by how much money you could save, or even become inspired by a company’s strategic planning.

by Flagg Taylor ’27 on October 2, 2025

---

A&E - Film & TV

---

Another Paul Thomas Anderson Masterpiece

Paul Thomas Anderson’s newest film, One Battle After Another, was touted by critics to be one of the defining films of this generation and given top-tier reviews across the media. The trailers released were vague, likely an intentional move by Anderson. Going into the theatre, I knew I would hold this film to an unfairly high standard due to the aura and mystery surrounding its release. Anderson’s film did not disappoint one bit. One Battle After Another is extremely relevant to our current political and cultural climate, exploring themes of revolution, fatherhood, and freedom through the story of a paranoid ex-revolutionary father and his daughter as they escape the evil figures from their past. 

The film has a star-studded cast, and all of them mesh together in comedic but beautiful and impactful ways. In the first act of the movie, we are introduced to the revolutionary couple of Perfidia Beverly Hills (played by Teyana Taylor) and “Ghetto” Pat Calhoun (played by Leonardo DiCaprio). The couple and the rest of the revolutionary group, the French 75, commit various acts of revolution, like freeing immigrants from a detention center or bombing a politician’s office. During these daring battles, Beverly Hills makes an enemy with the film’s main antagonist, Colonel Steven J. Lockjaw (played by Sean Penn), who then develops a strange perversion for Beverly Hills. A series of unfortunate events leads to the disbandment of Beverly Hill’s and Calhoun’s cell of revolutionaries, and Beverly Hill’s arrest and subsequent disappearance. As the first act closes, we are transported 15 years into the future, to the present day. 

In the second act of the film, the audience is introduced to DiCaprio’s new persona, Bob Ferguson, and his daughter, who has grown into a 16-year-old girl, Willa Ferguson (played by Chase Infiniti). Bob is an extremely paranoid, stoner father who constantly worries about the government coming back for him ever since he had to go on the run with his daughter after Beverley Hill’s arrest. However, Colonel Lockjaw decides to hunt down the father-daughter duo for reasons I will not spoil. The plot takes off from here, and the movie truly feels like one battle after another as Bob and Lockjaw both struggle chasing Willa across Texas. Anderson’s different shot variety and the fast pacing of the film give the tone of a long, suspenseful chase, one battle after another for the characters, each with their respective goals. The resolution sequence (a long car chase) at the end of the movie was truly special. I have not experienced such a tense environment in the movie theatre for a long time. 

On top of Anderson’s genius filmmaking, Johnny Greenwood composed one of the best scores I’ve personally ever heard. His score was just as important to the tense and suspenseful feelings felt throughout the play as Anderson’s filmmaking. Greenwood also selected some great songs for the soundtrack, some of my personal favorites being “Dirty Work” by Steely Dan, “Ready or Not Here I Come (Can’t Hide from Love )” by The Jackson 5, and “Soldier Boy” by The Shirelles. 

Finally, the star-studded cast of One Battle After Another delivered a multitude of award-worthy performances. Chase Infiniti made her film debut for Anderson’s work and delivered an inspiring and impactful performance representing Gen Z in a film, making a direct response to current times in the U.S.. DiCaprio was extremely funny and quirky while also having moments of deep passion, perfectly playing his role of a smoked-out, paranoia-stricken ex-revolutionary. Benicio del Toro plays Sensei Sergio, Willa’s karate sensei, who leads an underground railroad for Hispanic immigrants fearing government agents. Toro steps into this role beautifully, portraying a different type of revolutionary as a symbol of strength in the community. Teyana Taylor and Regina Hall play empowering and emotional roles as strong-willed and brave revolutionary women. Last but not least, Sean Penn plays a downright vile, detestable character in Colonel Lockjaw in a jaw-dropping performance. From the facial tics, his walk and posture, the hatred in his voice, Penn brings to life a “soldier boy” that will go down as one of the iconic villains of this generation. 

It is hard to give a deep synopsis of the intricate themes and skillful filmmaking of One Battle After Another without spoiling too much of the film’s plot and ending. I highly recommend making the trip to the theatre and experiencing it for yourself. It was one of the fastest and most tense three hours in recent memory. I’ll have to rewatch it once or twice more before making any crazy statements towards the film’s all-time standing, but with extremely high expectations for this movie, Anderson and his cast and staff somehow managed to meet these high standards and then some. One Battle After Another was a captivating experience and delivered impactful and relevant messages in a funny, action-packed film that could not have been released at a better time than now. 

by Sophia Caneira ’29 on September 25, 2025

---

A&E - Film & TV

---

Disclaimer: Spoilers Ahead

(500) Days of Summer (2009) is one of my favorite films I’ve seen. Even from the first moments, where the director’s disclaimer about Jenny Beckman, presumably a woman who broke his heart, is superimposed over a black screen, I was hooked. The movie follows the lives of Tom Hansen and Summer Finn over the course of their 500 days together, and how they fall in and out of love. For me, Tom is a relatable character. He is someone you might consider a hopeless romantic. He believes in the concept of true love and finding “the one,” while Summer does not. This comes between them and causes tension in their cautious relationship at multiple points. Personally, I think this flips the usual stereotype of the girl being obsessed and head-over-heels in love with the guy, who is usually depicted as more hesitant in the partnership when it comes to making a commitment and putting labels on the relationship. This is one of the many ways that this romantic comedy is unique from most others. 

Most rom-coms are fairly predictable; they follow the same formula that involves a meet-cute, exploration of the relationship, impending problems, and eventually a solution that results in the happy ending audiences crave. (500) Days of Summer is not like this. First of all, the movie jumps back and forth in time, between the high points in Tom and Summer’s relationship and the low points after their breakup. This method is almost reminiscent of the human experience of recalling memories. The way the movie is cut also allows for several powerful parallel scenes that create emotional contrast. For example, the different scenes that take place in IKEA. Despite the time jumps, the story isn’t given away, and the twist about Summer’s engagement is preserved until toward the end. Most of the time in rom-coms, the two main characters experience a challenge that threatens to end their relationship, but they are able to overcome that challenge once they see that they are better off together than they are apart. In (500) Days of Summer, Tom struggles with moving on from Summer because he believes she was the one, but they don’t end up back together. The only other movie I’ve seen where that twist occurs is in the movie La La Land (2016). This kind of unexpected twist rids the film of the predictability we expect from the typical rom-com. The movie explores how relationships are extremely personal and can invade every aspect of a person’s life, which isn’t usually touched on in the common flick. 

From a filmmaking standpoint, (500) Days is also a cinematic masterpiece. The movie employs a number of unique tactics to immerse you in the story. For one, the film jumps from past to present from start to finish. As the audience, we move through the 500 days focusing on Tom’s perspective, making him the main character and allowing us to empathize with his experience. The use of black and white clips, text superimposed on the screen, interviews with the characters, the “expectations vs. reality” scene of Tom arriving at Summer’s party, and even animation at some points, create an unconventional yet beautiful depiction of what a relationship can feel like. The film also includes a memorable soundtrack, which includes songs from a range of genres, from “Us” by Regina Spektor, to the classic “You Make My Dreams” by Hall & Oates, to songs by The Smiths. The Temper Trap’s “Sweet Disposition” became iconic through its use as a theme at several points in the film. 

I think many people, regardless of whether or not they have been in a romantic relationship before, can relate to this film in some way. The characters (especially Tom) are so accessible, and the unique way the movie was filmed and edited is compelling. While perhaps a somewhat simple love story of boy meets girl (although the narrator denies this), the plot and dialogue, such as Tom’s monologue before he quits his job, are quite thought-provoking. The film is so real—between the story and the acting—which I think is partially why it resonated with me so much. This underrated film was a very emotional watch for me, and I would certainly take the time to watch it again. At least for me, it’s the kind of film you’d be able to glean new details from each time.