(From an e-mail by Amanda to Vitaly Sumin)

Subject: Notes

Saraband.

Well, the biggest thing that stuck out for me was how CLEAR Bergman was as a director. He knew exactly what he wanted and just did it. Even if it meant literally showing an actor how to fall or hold someone's hand, he was soooo specific! It made the story very simple.
I watched some of the making of, and loved this quote. "What is half hidden is far more suggestive, more seductive, more exciting, than what is fully visible."
I am a firm believer that as soon as something is shown or sometimes even spoken (our darkest secrets, thoughts, special moments, etc.) the power is taken away, even if it's just a little.
It's true with anger & fear as well. In a horror movie it's ALL about NOT showing the monster. With a threatening person (Marlon Brando, Robert DeNiro performances), it's when they're not yelling and exploding, that they are their most frightening, powerful. Not just to the other characters, but I think to the audience as well.
This makes me think of both Misha and Irina. It is why the first Misha I auditioned with (Steve?) was so scary to me. He never raised his voice.
I am a big fan of a sense of danger in things. It's very prominent in the choice of music I like. I like a sense of TRUE uneasiness. Not knowing where the artist is pulling from or even what they might exactly be saying. This theory is really hard for me to express.
Even in film, (directors Stanley Kubrick/David Lynch/David Cronenberg). I don't just mean weird, avant-garde. I can't really explain it, other than a sense of strangeness. NOT trying to force it, but it's just really there.
Anyway, back to Saraband: I noticed that it was mostly all close-ups. Interesting. Also, there was no real antagonist/protagonist. Everything really seemed to happen in very small beats.
Again, these are all just my babbling thoughts, so thank you for listening :)
O. I hope you don't think I was too harsh when speaking about 'Crash'. Sometimes I am overly critical and maybe too blunt when I speak.
I really disliked that film.
It wasn't just being beat over the head with the stereotypes; I also didn't care for the performances either. I didn't like how everyone was a caricature, yet we were supposed to buy them as real, everyday people.
I also don't like overly sensitive acting (it's why I HATED the way I was directed in 'Trap'). The men in that film (Crash) were so sensitive! I could have driven a truck through Don Cheadle's pauses and filled one up with Terrance Howard's tears.
Again, it's that too much in your face stuff. Let ME as the viewer decide how I want to feel about racism. Don't give me a hyper-moral story. It's a turn-off.
It's why I also think Boris is more interesting if he is just waiting his death. There can be a certain A-moral-ism there. Different than Igor.
Well, I hope you enjoyed my thoughts! I'm sure I will be sending more shortly.
My bio is on Word, which I don't have right now. So I will get that to you in the next couple days.
Let me know YOUR thoughts.

---

October 19

(From an e-mail by Amanda to Vitaly Sumin)

Subject: Crime and Punishment

Hello Vitaly.
I have attached my babbling thoughts that I had written down while reading the book. They may not make much sense to you, because they are not maybe complete thoughts. I still have a few pages to go, and not completely done with Saraband either. The main points that I am taking away so far, is the UNIVERSALness in ALL OF US.
Where do we get our consciousness from? We are messed up individuals, and yet no one has figured out how to fix it. In hundreds more years, if this earth is still around, our children will have the exact same problems. They will vary, but SOMETHING stays pretty universal in all of us.

--Amanda

It is the human behavior. The KNOW and TELL of right and wrong. Proof again, we are not animals.

Consciousness...What is it? WHO is it? Where does it come from? Who is that voice?

Who do we become when we are that "bad" person?

There are no such things as contradictions.

The Napoleon Complex, ie: Super Hero vs. Human Being:

We are not super heroes. We just all like to think we are. It is those of us who are lonely and wish to be something else. We are human. It is an idealistic/romantic delirium. Logic always wins.

Is God that voice in us? It's got to be SOMETHING universal.

The "victim mentality" is an entire different way of life. It is its own end. It piggy-backs choice after choice, down a path of hell - stuck in misery and unhappiness. No one can fix it (you) for you.

Those of us who actually WERE victims of something HAVE to learn a different way of thinking.

Two types of people? "Those who understand and those who don't." Is that a victim/dreamer/idealistic mentality? It's a state of mind. You can be /have duality...It's what you choose to DO.

Dostoevsky was way ahead of his time. People have always been the same. For hundreds of years. The same struggles inside. It is all universal. No matter the country, language, age, race, sex, time period.

Where does FEAR lead you vs. TRUTH? You have to learn to accept and LET GO. "The truth will set you free"...And yet all we wanted was to be free in the first place. We choose the LONGEST road, because we think it's easier. Short-term, quick-fixes.

Now...Are we able to IMPLEMENT this knowledge? CAN the lesson be learned? If so, why has it gone on for so long, hundreds of years? Are we capable of REAL change? Or just small, varying amounts?

Are we natural born killers?

What about a bipolar person...An ACTUAL duality. Super hero + disastrous strength and ability. Genius & idiot combined.

Maybe idealism is the fuel and logic is the automobile.

My favorite quote in the book, thus far: "And do you pretend to strength?" -
Svidrigailov

Do any of us really HAVE strength? What are our virtues? Day to day (people), what are we overcoming?

If we're struggling to be a certain way, how many times are we succeeding? If it is natural to us, is it "strength"?

Are we predisposed to WHO we are? Is "WHO WE ARE" what we STRIVE to be, or is it was comes naturally?

---

September 27

(From an e-mail by Amanda to Vitaly Sumin)

I am still not sure exactly how I will incorporate the religious influences, but will surely come across new ideas while we continue to analyze the script. I'm guessing that she (Irina) struggles with the religious aspect. That she struggles with ANY belief system, and probably questions if God really exists, and if He DOES, does he love her?