Should Photoshop be illegal?

In recent years there has been a lot of controversy around the use of digital enhancement software: The main issue of debate tends to focus on the fashion industry, as it is argued that magazines and editorial shoots gives young people an unrealistic and, in many cases, dangerous expectation of how their bodies should look. But it does raise an important question, as to when – and if ever – digital enhancement is necessary.

Why use it?

For most people in the creative industries, photo-manipulation is a basic tool in every trade. You can use it to make photos stand out more by making certain colours pop while other colours are muted; It allows you to ‘revamp’ images over the years to keep up with the changing industries; it also allows you to perfect every image that you take by allowing you to remove blemishes, straighten out lines, level the contrast and so on. The possibilities really are rather limitless as you can essentially make any image you have into a completely new and maybe even completely different picture. Furthermore, photo-manipulation is not an easy task: Besides from needing a very steady hand and a keen eye for detail, you also need heaps of patience to be able to sit and stare at the same pixel images for many hours at a time while you work on a particular project. This means that the more you practice, the better you get, and if you are someone who wants to work in a creative industry, these skills are invaluable.

Does it really show skill?

On one hand, it does take a certain level of skill to manipulate a photo: Even if you are simply adjusting the colour ratios of a photo, you must still have at least a basic understanding of the software as well as an understanding of photo composition. However to some extent, it almost doesn’t matter if the photo you have taken is completely pants if you have the knowledge to manipulate the original into something artistic. On the other hand, can you still deem yourself an ‘artist’ or a ‘photographer’ if you need to rely on software to make your photo great?

Does it create false expectations?

One of the universal truths of modern day society is that when you compare yourself to other people, you are undoubtedly going to become sad and disappointed with what you have in life. This is made worse when the pictures you are looking at are not the entire truth of that person’s life, nor is it an accurate representation of society as a whole: As beautiful as celebrities can be and as flawless as the Victoria Secret models are, the majority of photos taken of them are then manipulated to look more appealing than they are. The time old story of ‘sex sells’ means that we are more likely to pay attention to a beautiful body than we are to the sight of your average person, even though the average person is an attainable role model to have. In recent years, fashion companies such as Dior have even banned super skinny models in their cat walks, so why are we not banning them in photographs?

The dangers?

To begin with, super skinny models only add to the stereotype that in order to be considered ‘beautiful’ you have to weigh as little as possible. This is not only bad for society, where the percentage of people with eating disorders is gradually rising every year, but it is also bad for the industries that condone them, as it almost suggest that they care about making money more than they care about the people who sell their clothes for them. It also portrays an image that the people in modelling campaigns are the ‘normal’ people of society, and it is everyone else who looks bizarre, when it reality it is the opposite way around. But not only do these people already have incredible bodies (simply because they work out, eat healthy and, mostly, because it is literally their job to look stunning) but then editors set to work to exaggerate the images more: legs get longer, skin gets smoother, lips become fuller, muscles get more defined, until we see an image that is not only a poor representation of society, but a bad representation of that model as a person, as though the hours they have spent in the gym and all that clean eating was pointless because a piece of software s what makes them look flawless in the end.

The upside?

Photo manipulation can be hours upon hours of fun and since the software is still surprisingly new, it is very hard to become a master of it. The software is constantly developing and improving and as such so are the skills that come along with it. It also is now becoming a sought after skill in the creative industry, with more and more employers wanting at least a basic understanding of photo manipulation software. It stands to reason that there is a clear need for it in society otherwise why such a high demand for the skill within the workforce? It could even be argued that photo manipulation is an art form in its own right, as it combines many different disciplines, while still requiring an in-depth knowledge of them all in order to create an image that is new and striking.

So what do you think? Is it really necessary in an artistic world, or is it doing more damage then it’s worth? Let me know 🙂

T xx

 

Advertisements

Annabelle Creation

I am a massive pansy when it comes to horror films, so anything even remotely creepy and I’ll probably have nightmares for weeks. So a few weeks ago, I was dumb enough to watch Annabelle. The film about the possessed doll and the many creepy things that happen while she is in the house. I have never watched any of the other Conjuring universe films so came to the film knowing very little about it, except for one thing: I HATE dolls…like seriously hate them. The only reason I watched this film is because I really hoped it would be bad. Like Chuckie. So bad that it is almost great.

I have never been so wrong in my life. 

The first film was pretty good: Good story, decent acting, just the right amount of suspense, and the horror was actually really good. I won’t give away too much information but if you want to watch a decent horror movie then definitely watch this one.

This weekend I agreed to go and see the sequel (which is actually a prequel?), Annebelle Creation, mainly because it was a pretty hectic week and mostly because we had free cinema tickets to use before September. BIG MISTAKE. I have barely slept for two days because of the horrible horror that I saw in this film.

The actors themselves

Now anyone who knows me knows that I’m not all that fond of kids…they creep me out. Mostly because everyone knows that if you want to make a horror movie you have at least two scenes with creepy kids singing a creepy nursery rhyme and there you have it: Horror movie. Horror aspect aside the kids were all pretty decent little actors…you genuinely believed that these were the types of kids who would end up in this situation. There was very little ‘hamming up’ that you normally see when children are on the big screen and so it all felt all too real. Which is apparently a good thing for a horror movie, but a horrid thing for scardey cat me.

The scares

Yes there were a few jumpscares, but I literally mean only a few. The worst parts of the film were the suspenseful pauses, where you would witness something horrible and then it would just fade into darkness. The other plus is that you very rarely saw the bad guy (the devil/monster/demony creature) and when you did it was only ever in the very corner of the screen or looking at it from behind, in the darkness, where you aren’t always certain what you are seeing. For me, that is what makes a good horror movie: Never reveal the monster, because 9 times out of 10 we can all tell it’s just a guy in a mask, or (most commonly) new CGI footage. By revealing the monster, all that happens is we realise that it is all fake. BUT…have multiple shots of scared looking kids, creepy little girls walking around at night with glowing eyes, and you are pretty much guaranteed a sleepless night.

Overall story

I enjoyed the story and the film did a great job of tying in the events of this film with the events that followed in the first (confusing, I know!). It explained how everything really came about, how Annabelle became Annabelle, the demon doll, and how the couple from the first film managed to get caught up in all of the horrible history. It also helped to explain more of the backstory as to why there was a possessed doll in the first place. And never underestimate the sheer terror of a close up shot of an unblinking, un-moving doll face with no noise in the back ground but for footsteps or breathing: In horror films, less really is more.

The film also helped to tie together the Conjuring universe in little Easter eggs. Having never seen the other films, I probably missed a lot of them. But they do mention the Nun from the Conjuring universe and that alone was enough to make me not want to watch the anticipated solo movie of the (ironic) demonic woman of God. Fans of the film would probably notice way more little nods to the original films and that is always a nice little touch to any film franchise, regardless of genre.

Bad points?

For me, it was exhausting dealing with the amount of suspenseful silences that filled this film. I was emotionally drained by about half way through! While I appreciate that all of them did add to the plot and did make the film that bit more realistic, I got really bored of this demon doll essentially screwing over a bunch of orphaned girls and a nun. A few of the scenes could have been shorter/not there at all and I don’t think this would have dramatically changed the film.

As with all prequels, you kind of know who is going to survive and who is going to die: You know from the outset that the doll is going to remain undamaged throughout this film, otherwise how did it turn up in the first one in such pristine condition. It also meant that you couldn’t get overly attached to the characters when you knew that at least the majority of them must have died in order for the doll to be so evil: If the doll did nothing but annoy and scare a few kids, why did it suddenly go on a killing spree in the first one? The doll wouldn’t be evil, just annoying.

That being said, it all hit the fan REALLY quick: One minute, they try to throw a doll down a well for sneaking into someones bed, and the next two people have been dismembered and are hanging up like Christmas lights around the house. It seems the monster went from mildly irritating to full-blown psychotic in less than 2 minutes, and while that was good to get things going, it probably didn’t have to take so long getting to that point to begin with. The scenes of screaming and running away were just as terrifying as the scenes of absolute silence and still frames, so maybe having a different pace would have belted this film up a notch.

Final thoughts?

I hate dolls. And no…I’m not including pictures because quite frankly I don’t want to relive the horror anymore than I already have. But the film is actually really good: Good horror, good logical story and a decent way to tie all the films together. Definitely go and watch this if you get the chance and definitely be prepared for a few sleepless nights as a result!

Have you guys seen it? Let me know what your thoughts were down below 🙂

T xx

Most expensive Star Wars toys

No one can deny that Star Wars is an insanely popular and well-loved franchise. The films have become a stable part of 20th Century cinema and even if you have never watched one of the films, the characters and universes are iconic: EVERYONE has made a ‘I am your father’ joke, as well as encouraged their friends to ‘trust the force’. It is also no surprise that the toys are highly sought after, and for a bit of ease of reference, here is a list of some of the most expensive Star Wars items ever created.

Rocket firing Boba Fett

Unsurprisingly, there are at least three Star Wars toys that are worth a stupid amount of money. The Rocket Firing Boba Fett toy released in 1980 currently sells for around £5,000. The toy was originally sold with a gun that shot out a small plastic rocket, but was quickly recalled when parents started to complain that this could injure their children. The toy was re-released without a firing gun, so naturally the original and almost ‘dangerous’ version is highly sought after by collectors and fans alike.

star-wars-rocket-firing-boba-fett-action-figure

LEGO Ultimate Collector’s edition Millennium Falcon

Now yes, LEGO have since made roughly 3 other versions of the Millennium Falcon, but the most sought after is the original: Made in 2007 this model consisted of roughly 5195 pieces and was the first ship to be made on ‘mini-figure scale’. Currently selling online for around £3,200.00 it is clearly even more sought after now that it is no longer being made.Image result for lego r2d2Oddly enough, any large scale LEGO Star Wars set is going to be worth big bucks after being discontinued: The large scale R2 D2 model originally sold for around £140 in stores, but now that it has been discontinued for nearly 2 years, it is worth around £450…and that’s out of box and made! Completely sealed packet, that has never before touched bricks, could sell for as much as £800.

Telescopic lightsaber Darth Vader

As with almost all toys, the first run of this toy in 1978 was recalled because the lightsaber could extend and potentially injure the children playing with it. The toy was re-released sans extending lightsaber but it happened so quickly that there are only about 200 versions of the original in existence. Selling for around £6000.00, it is one of the most sought after Star Wars toys going.

Darth Vader war helmet

Ok so technically this is not a ‘toy’ so to speak but rather the actual helmet that Darth vader’s main stunt double wore during filming for ‘The Empire Strikes Back’. This is therefore more of an original film prop, which somewhat explains the £115,000.00 price tag on it currently.

real darth vader

What other Star Wars toys have you guys heard of? Or…which Star Wars toys that you currently own do you reckon will be worth big bucks in a few years time?

T xx

 

Jaws: Book vs Film

I’m sure I speak for everyone when I say that Jaws was a damn good movie. I saw it for the first time when I was about ten and I don’t think I took another bath ever again: Literally any body of water that I could submerge myself in was a no-go for fear of shark attack. I was ten…leave me alone. Recently in a little charity store I found the book of Jaws by Peter Benchley, and I have noticed quite some stark differences in them both.

SPOILER ALERT IN PLACE.…if you have not seen Jaws, or wish to read the book, do not read further!

1. The people

In the book, the most appealing character of the whole story is the shark. The people of Amity are seriously xenophobic: Anyone that is not from Amity is simply there for money-making. The whole town relies on the summer tourists visiting the town and the beach so much that everyone there has to struggle through the winter to afford to stay in a relatively expensive seaside town. The houses are all rented out to summer folk, businesses hike up prices, and the main beach is opened to attract everyone even though there’s a man-eating shark around. The town is also pretty corrupt: There is only one journalist who runs the local newspaper, and he is best friends with the chief of police and the Mayor. The Mayor is also funded, it turns out, by some New York mobsters before they invested so much

Even the main characters are pretty nasty people. In the film, the main characters are pretty likeable: Brody is your run-of-the-mill chief of police, keen on public safety and a loving relationship with his happy wife and happy children. In the book, he is blunt, old fashioned and, most of the time, drunk. His wife, Ellen, is bitter, yearning for her younger years of rich friends and socialite lifestyle. Hooper is a cocky and womanising young man, who’s arrogance is almost as high as his IQ. The only character is somewhat endearing in his unlike-ability is Quint, the aged shark hunter, and only because he makes no apologies for who he is: He knows he’s a bit of work, but owns it.

Image result for jaws gifs

2. The affair

One of the main things that the film doesn’t cover is the affair between Hooper and Ellen Brody. Having known each other as upper class children, Ellen begins to fantasise about having a fling with Hooper. He is everything that she feels she left behind when she chose to marry Brody and live in Amity: rich lifestyle, fancy dinners, big social events, and a high profile name. Hooper doesn’t say no, but throughout the book Hooper is simply your generic rich-kid: He is used to not being told what to do and so very rarely will do what is needed. He and Ellen, while it only lasts for one night, go about their affair with blatant disregard for Brody. But at the same time, Brody is such a detached husband you almost can’t really blame Ellen for wanting someone more attentive. In the end, the very brief fling makes Ellen realise how lucky she is to have Brody and how much she does love him. Plus…well it’s not like the affair could continue…

3. The deaths

While the film hit most of the key deaths – the opening scene is quite possibly iconic in the horror world – the book has a few extra ‘deaths’ that the film played on slightly. In the book, the only deaths that are really talked about are, obviously, the very first attack on Christine Watkins and then the death of little Alexander Kintner. Every other death is only simply guessed upon: When Ben Gardener fails to communicate with base while he is out on his boat, people assume he has been eaten. The fact that no body is ever found also convinces everyone that he has been eaten by the huge shark. In the film, the floating severed head coming out of the boat sort of confirms that he is absolutely shark-meat, but the book seems to try and high light how paranoid the little town is becoming. Furthermore, even when the main characters die – Hooper is actually bitten in half by the shark when he is in the shark cage, and Quint is dragged under the water and drowned when his foot gets tangled up in a harpoon rope – you don’t really acre that they’ve died. If anything, I was almost proud of the shark for ending the lives of such horrible characters.

Image result for jaws gifs

4. The shark itself

The book did a wonderful job of making the shark seem like the innocent victim in the situation. He is just a fish, surprisingly clever for a ‘mindless predator’, who is simply just trying to have some dinner and survive. The attitudes in the book highlight just how old the book really is: Written in 1974 the book plays hugely off of the general scariness of sharks. In modern day, and most likely due to the huge success of the film, more and more people are realising that sharks are not mindless killers, that they have intricate and complicated lives that we are still learning about to this days. The solitary lifestyle is something that the book plays on, making it seem that this fish has picked this little town to terrorise. In reality, sharks very rarely attack people, and of these attacks few are ever fatal. When it comes to sharks it is having respect for the sharks home: Don’t swim near seals, if attacked/if a shark gets to close punch it on the nose, or stay close to shore within sights of a life guard. The book (and to some extent the film) is very old fashioned in its view that sharks are nothing but viscous predators, but to some extent that’s what made this book so enjoyable to read.

Final thoughts?

The book is a great read: Story aside Peter Benchley writes in such a way that you can not put the book down. Even just reading about a dinner party he can create tension so thick that you need to keep reading to find out what horrible thing happens. The book constantly puts the reader on edge and has you reading way into the early hours of the morning because you just can’t tear yourself away from it. The film is also excellent: I don’t think I would have researched sharks as much as I have done over the years if not for this film scaring the absolute pants off me when I was 10. Both do an excellent job of telling the same story, but simply with different end goals in mind: The film wants you to cheer for Amity, while the book wants you to cheer for the shark.

Which version did you guys prefer? Let me know in the comments below and follow me for more comparisons! 

T xx

Does gore still mean scary?

In modern day pop culture, it seems that if something is ‘gory’ then it will automatically be ‘scary’. But is this really true?

I will be the first to admit that I am a pretty squeamish person: I passed out twice just getting my ears pierced so you can imagine what I’m like around actual blood! But that being said, I don’t find blood ‘scary’ as such. I don’t have nightmares about blood rivers down corridors, or get freaked out by Red Weddings (well, I do but not for this reason!). Grossed out, sure…scared? Not so much.

Image result for horror film gifsScary, or just plain gross?

Why is blood considered scary?

For one thing, having an actual phobia of blood is one of the most common phobias around so this may be why horror movies, scary games and Halloween costumes have relied so heavily on it to be a scare tactic. No one really knows why it’s a phobia (early childhood trauma or just something on the inside now being on the outside?) but with so many people affected by it, it is a very easy tactic to go for. Plus, it’s relatively easy to make fake blood: Any costume shop will have a fake blood pack, or failing that you can find a simple recipe online that can save you a couple of quid.

Does it still work?

Personally, I don’t find blood scary. As i said before, it grosses me out but it doesn’t scare me. Most of my friends when asked this question, they agree that blood is gross rather than scary. The reason most people don’t want to watch ‘slasher’ films is because the blood makes them feel queasy, and most chances you spend your time waiting for the gore to be over rather than paying attention to the story. Now I will admit that in some cases, blood can help a movie: The very first Saw for example, was amazing! It had the right amount of gore to keep you interested as well as lending to the story arch of increasing desperation. But everyone can agree that as the franchise went on, it became more focused on how imaginative the deaths were rather than whether it actually add to the story.

Have we become desensitised?

I like a good horror film, but I love a bad horror film. On Netflix, Amazon Prime, even some TV channels, they all have a wonderful selection of B-Class horror movies. Story aside (if there even is a story) the ‘horror’ aspect of it is normally nothing more than blood and guts. But these days, it almost seems the aim to make the gore so shocking that it is laughable…the more blood used in a death scene and the funnier it seems to become. And i don’t mean funny in a ‘haha jokes’ I mean…it is just laughable in it’s absurdity. But are we becoming desensitised to this type of ‘violence’ or is it simply because it is so over the top we automatically know that this can not be real? While blood is far more common in all films these days (especially those with some sort of violence), we as a society seem pretty sturdy when it comes to blood and guts. However because we are so used to seeing blood even in our TV shows, horror movies now have to go above and beyond with the ‘gore factor’ in order to truly scare us. It seems that most horror movies theses days though are aiming to be so outlandish that they’ll become cult classics, or have to steer clear of blood all together to even be taken seriously in the franchise.

Image result for shining film gifs

What makes for the best horror?

While we all watch a film to see something that is very different to our normal everyday  lives, the joy of horror movies is that they all try to play on the reality: These movie scenes have to convince us that they can happen in real life in order for us to be scared of them in the first place. The more camp the horror, the less likely we are to be scared of it. Some of the best horror films (at least, the best in my opinion) are the ones that play on our reality in order to make us fear that what we have just seen could very well happen to us.

How do you guys feel about gore in horror films? Let me know in the comments, and recommend your favourite for me to watch this weekend!

If you liked this article, please have a look at some of my other articles and make sure to subscribe and follow me!

T xx

What I learnt from Wonder Woman

So I finally managed it…I made it to the cinema to see Wonder Woman. I won’t do a full review of the film but simply put…WOW. What a film! It was funny, it had Chris Pine (nom nom nom), it had adventure and action, it had romance, and probably most importantly, it had a woman kicking ass throughout the entire film. I didn’t know much about Wonder Woman before I saw this film and now I think I might be obsessed. So I thought I’d write a little article about WHY this film spoke to me as much as it did.

Wonder Woman knew what she wanted…

Wonder Woman, or Diana as she is commonly known, knew what she wanted and went after it. She begged her mother to let her train to become an Amazon soldier, and when she was told no she still took lessons anyway. She went to fight in WW1 because she wanted to help people and wanted to defeat the bad guy to save the lives of man. She didn’t care what it took, what it would cost, nor how she went about achieving these goals, because in the end she knew she was going to succeed, Failing was simply not an option.

Wonder Woman did what was right….

Throughout the film, the over arching concept was that man did not deserve the help of the Gods. Wonder Woman wanted to help man because she knew it was the right thing to do…that she couldn’t sit by and watch people suffering and die simply because the war was not ‘her war’. The film is set in World War One, so naturally women are viewed very differently to how they are in modern society. But no matter how many men laugh at her, ignore her, talk down to her or belittle her, Wonder Woman smiles sweetly and proves them wrong. No, man does not deserve her, but they deserve a chance that she can give them.

But she still understood the appeal of the dark side.

Yes, I mixed fandoms again. As mentioned above, the whole concept of what a person ‘deserves’ is weighted very heavily against what is right. Yes, a man who sees you as just a piece of eye candy deserves a good punch in the face, but the right thing to do is smile sweetly and simply walk away from him. A psychotic mastermind deserves to be flattened by a tank, but it would not be right to simply let them suffer at the hands of an angry God. While this film may take the concept to extremes (as do all good films, let’s be honest) it makes no secret of the fact that Diana understands that there are two sides to that debate…and both have very compelling arguments. In the end, it is what you believe is right that should win out, and that the concept of deserving is a subjective one.

Image result for wonder woman gifs quotes

Wonder Woman is always a lady…

Now I won’t make the argument that Wonder Woman is the first ever strong female lead, because it’s not necessarily true (Ripley, I see you there!), but it is nice to see a woman doing what she thinks is best with absolutely NO expectations of reward. Diana takes no credit for her heroic actions, remaining humble throughout all of the praise that she receives. When people talk down to her she remains composed and calm, meeting their condescension with reason and facts. She speaks her mind in an unapologetic manner, yet without any sarcasm or aggression. She is badass, without being mean. She meets every challenge with grace, elegance and attitude and just becomes more lovely with every new awesome stunt.

In short…she is everything I wish to be

Diana is fearless, brave, strong, and above all else…feminine. She is funny and charming and unapologetic in her quest for what is right, and that is something that I always try to keep at. This film made me want to pick up a comic book and read more about her, but I now see why she has been a symbol of female empowerment for so many years.

Image result for wonder woman gifsGo get ’em girl!

What’s been your newest favourite film? Leave a comment down below and I’ll add it to my To Watch list! 

Don’t forget to follow and subscribe! ❤

T xx

We are all animals

Throughout history, films have always had an impact on society: In most cases, they act as a platform for social commentary by highlighting issues within society, usually in a very subtle manner.

One film I have only recently seen has highlighted all of the issues that we are now seeing in modern day society. This film won Best Animated Picture at the Academy Awards 2016 and I am still moved by how well this cartoon highlighted the issues that we see in society everyday. Zootoptropolis (or Zootopia as it is sometimes called) highlights very common issues that are very rarely seen in these type of films: ignorance, prejudice, social class and racial stereotypes were all hidden under the pretence of predators vs prey in a society where animals of all shapes and sizes live together harmoniously.

This film doesn’t hold any punches: It is fun enough for children to watch it and still see the message in a lighthearted manner, while adults watching it are hit square in the face with how real the issues are. Watching the film, it struck me how it is essentially the same old story of Us vs Them. In society there always seem to be two sides that are fighting over very old, ignorant and stereotypical issues.

In this film, the main character is the adorable Judy Hops, the first ever bunny cop. She herself is one example of how you as a person can fight stereotypes, as throughout the film she is called ‘cute’ because she’s a bunny, and people assume that she is too sweet and too meek to ever make it as a real police officer in the big scary city of Zootropolis. She highlights the use of language when talking to other animals and how we should all think about our terms of reference before we open our mouths.

 disney disneyedit zootopia kp animationedit GIF

The film also highlights the way in which people can manipulate our prejudices towards people that are different to ourselves. In the film, (spoiler alert!) some prey animals want to infect all predators with a toxic plant that causes them to resort to aggressive and carnivorous behaviours. Throughout the film there is the underlying concern that all prey animals have that the predatory animals could very easily eat them if they wanted to, despite the clear fact that animals have evolved beyond this basic instinct. While it may not be seen as realistic, it helps to show how our own stereotypes of how people have behaved in the past affects how we think they are going to behave again: For example, there is the racial stereotype that all Chinese students are super smart or that all black people are ‘thugs’ or ‘ghetto’. There is little evidence to suggest that any of these are actually true, yet we are all exposed to these stereotypes on a daily basis, usually unknowingly. This is highlighted more in the film when Hops realises that even though she meant well and thought she was being PC, by assuming there is a ‘them’ and an ‘us’ she offends one of her newest friends.

Image result for zootropolis gifs so theres a them

I don’t want to go on about this film and its underlying components because I know this isn’t normally what I write about. But in recent times, with all the horrid stories we are hearing at the moment about Muslims being terrorists and the sexual harassment women have to deal with on a daily basis, this film made me think a lot about how we are all viewing each other. If a simple animation made for children can highlight how dangerous and how corrupt this type of thinking is, then why can’t a society see this? All in all, this film is wonderful. It’s funny, it’s silly, it’s sweet and it has some wonderful life lessons that people of all ages can learn from. If you haven’t, I highly recommend it…it may even help you see things from another perspective, and that is always a useful skill.

This may appear to be too insightful for a review on an animated Disney film, but I found it to yell loud and clear that while we all may be from very different walks of life and no matter how complicated our history may be, we are all animals and we are all equal. We can only move forward and build a society where all are welcome, all are equal and all we do we do in harmony.

Image result for mean girls bake a cake Mean Girls yet again with the truth…

What films have spoken to you guys? Has there been a film that made you rethink your priorities?

Much Love people 🙂

T xx