it was a trip to the movies on a random whim tonight, but as the world raves on about the genius of christopher nolan and his brilliant cinematic inception, i'm now sitting at home, basking in the affecting melodrama of 'aftershock.' there were no fancy flow-mo cameras; no endorsements from a star-studded cast; no ingenious convolutions in the plot; it was unabashedly uncomplicated but one helluva awesome film. it reminds me that a good film is neither about technicalities nor clever plot lines. its means to engage with the audience emotionally is so much more important than being impressive with the big names, truckloads of crew and expensive equipments...because sometimes, all it takes is a camera and one exceptional, sincere story.
a quick search on wiki just made me realize that we have coincidentally caught the film on the anniversary of the incident. although it's been 34 years since, i cannot imagine how much of the physical and emotional devastation the people have to go through and i don't want to because doing so will only trivialize the anguish of their experience. i find it ironic that an earthquake is called a natural disaster because there can be nothing more unnatural than the sight of perfectly normal ground breaking apart to swallow you up. hypothetically, if you thought that you were going to die, what would you do?
i don't know if i'll change my mind, but at the ripe old age of nineteen, my answer to my hypothetical, imaginary situation probably involves a bed, a lot of bedding, make-up and like only a gazillion liters of tears. some people i know would just call it pathetic.
