Does art have the power to make us good people? The director offers us plenty of evidence that artists are more sensitive, more compassionate, more empathetic. But he also offers us plenty of evidence that art does not make us better people. Before the Second World War, Germans were considered the most cultured people on the planet. Why are people who worship art capable of barbaric behavior? Why do we study art? Does it have the power to change us? Is Hempf correct? Are people incapable of change? 

Why is Martina Gedeck given the name Christa-Maria? Why is her code name, Marta? Does the film have a religious dimension? 

Why does Wiesler attempt to help Dreymann? Is he in love with Dreymann? Is he in love with Christa? Does Christa need to be sacrificed for the sake of Dreymann? 

Anna and Holly have very different responses to Harry Lime's crimes. How do you account for their different reactions? Why does Anna choose not to leave Vienna? Why does she choose not to benefit from the capture of Harry? What do we know about Anna's life during the war? What do we know about Holly's? Do their different experiences of the war affect their responses to Harry? 

What do you make of the film's final shot?

Why does Holly write Westerns? Will he continue to write Westerns after his time in Vienna? 

Critics have often said that the city of Vienna is a character in The Third Man. How is the city used as not only a setting but as a character? 

Why is this important to the content of the film? 

Do the multiple perspectives bring us closer to or further away from the truth? 

Do the individual narratives distinctively differ? Are they all Welles/Toland's visions or do they show individual narrators' perspectives? 

Do the perspectives of the individual narrators always make sense? That is, would Susan know the content of her own narrative? Would Jed have access to the information in his narrative? 

Do the narratives work with each other or contradict each other? 

Do the more subjective narratives support or refute the newsreel? 

Does the answer to Rosebud tell us anything? everything? nothing? 

Why don't we get to see the reporters' faces? 

If your Facebook news feed has been anything like mine this week, you're seeing a lot of talk about the results of Tuesday's elections. Just as important as who won and why, and whether we ought to be more relieved or concerned, it seems, is the stance we are now going to take towards those in our circle of 'Friends' who have offended us in some way or another over the course of the last several months. 

This week's installment in the Ethical Dilemmas on Film series is the 1967 film Two for the Road. Here are some questions to get you started in your reflection:

To what extent do Marc and Joanna's memories dictate the editing of the film? Are Marc and Joanna still talking to each other as the movie goes along or are they having independent memories? 

How does each scene have a corresponding scene? 

How is the film a rewriting of the story of Adam and Eve? 

Why does the film end where it does? 

How do the chronology and construction of this film affect how we view each of the characters? Do the formal choices that Frederic Raphael (the screenwriter) and Stanley Donen (the director) make change our minds about the film's ethical dimensions? That is, how do the film's formal innovations ask us to think about adultery? Power games? Misogyny? Love triangles? Etc. 

In her essay, "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema," Laura Mulvey argues that "pleasure in looking has been split between active/male and passive/female. The determining male gaze projects its phantasy on to the female figure which is styled accordingly. In their traditional exhibitionist role women are simultaneously looked at and displayed, with their appearance coded for strong visual and erotic impact so that they can be said to connote to-be-looked-at-ness." How does Two for the Road support or negate this theory?

2012 Rock Ethics Institute Stand Up Award Recipient

This week's installment in the Ethical Dilemmas on Film series is the 2001 Jill Sprecher film Thirteen Conversations About One Thing. Here are some questions to get you started in your thinking about the film:

Can you figure out the actual chronology of events? Why is the film told in the particular order that it is? 

Is there such a thing as a coincidence in this film? 

Does the film prove that reversibility is impossible? 

What does the film have to say about Schadenfreude? 

The film takes place in New York City. Is this surprising to realize? 

Should human beings aspire to be perfect? Should Christians aspire to be like Christ? Are either of these possible? 

Why must Sister Luke shed her personality and her memories in order to achieve perfection? 

One critic has written that unlike other films about religion, "this film does not treat the audience as the choir that will receive the preaching." How does The Nun's Story treat its audience? 

The Nun's Story has been compared to a war movie - "the near military discipline of the novices, trained to proclaim their guilt for breaking the rules and abase themselves in penance, has the psychological reality of enduring boot camp." Is this a fair comparison? How is violence conveyed in this film? Does the movie embrace religion? Attack religion? Is the religious life "against nature"? 

Is Sister Luke fighting her own nature in order to be a nun? 

Julian Haas is tireless in his pursuit of social justice as an advocate, activist, ally, and educator. In addition to founding Penn State's first fraternity for gay, bisexual, and progressive men, he helped plan the first LGBTQA-focused on-campus living community at Penn State. Julian is equally aware of the oppression he faces as a gay man and of the oppression he does not face as a white man. In helping others understand and respond to intersecting forms of oppression, to which they may not otherwise be sensitive, Julian embodies the principles of ethical leadership.

Does The Crying Game fit into any particular genre?