★ 8 / 10
**About the first such incident in the US
Reno
**About the first such incident in the US history.** It was like another documentary film that I saw one last week. But this time it was an even bigger scale.…
**About the first such incident in the US history.**
It was like another documentary film that I saw one last week. But this time it was an even bigger scale. This, the original event took place exactly 50 years ago and first of its kind. Since then hundreds of similar events have been recorded. Many of them were made into films, but I don't remember this one was ever turned into one. This is about a raged gunman on the college campus, where many people got killed and injured. A shocking incident, even cops did not know how to handle it at first.
So, the film reveals one of the most horrific episodes ever happened in the American soil. Like everything has a first time, this is where it all began for this kind of event. The filmmakers used some of the original archive footage to tell the story, but the majority of the film was the animation. Since it was a documentary film and was made under a tight budget, the visuals were not that pleasant, but the notion was well achieved.
Documentary films and interviews are like thunder and lightening. So there are interviews in it, but most of them were made-up of. I mean they were real, though not with the real people, except their recorded voice interviews in most of the cases. It was challenging to bring back the original event on the screen since it is not a feature film to recreate whatever way they want, especially that occurred half a century ago. But very appreciable for even giving us this much of detail to feel the vibe.
> ❝One of the truths I have learnt is that there are monsters that walk among us.❞
It was like any other normal day on the campus of the University of Texas in Austin. But the scenario has suddenly changed when two student couple fell on the ground not aware of what just happened, and so the people around. After some time, it became clear that a gunman open fired on them and many others from a nearby tower, but the real issue is nobody could see him. Soon it reached the radio and television, and alert has been circulated. Then the cops got involved to solve the matter and how it all ends covered in the rest of the films.
This is a good film, revealed most of the parts as much as in details, but I'm not fully convinced. Because the concept of narration was quite similar to feature film style where they want to keep the mystery. It all begins with one perspective and multiplies as it progresses. Except not focusing enough on the negative character. I understood the situation of the event, but I did not get enough detail about the gunman. It was like one side of the story. So mysterious and it stayed that way.
Shorter and well paced. This is definitely worth checking out, though not a must see. To learn the history, the bad one. I had no idea about it prior to watch, but at the end, I felt it accomplished everything on its capacity to give out the truth. No matter it is a documentary film, along with the suspense, the tension was well balanced. So, more or less it is same as like watching a regular crime film. That's especially for those who are not into documentary films. I hope someone would make a feature film out of it.
_8/10_
Read full review
★ 9 / 10
Rotoscope animation glues together accounts of this horrific story into a gripping, unique documentary
Movie_Muse_Reviews
At the onset, it might seem insensitive to tell the story of a deadly mass shooting using rotoscope animation, but after you settle into the style of filmmaker…
At the onset, it might seem insensitive to tell the story of a deadly mass shooting using rotoscope animation, but after you settle into the style of filmmaker Keith Maitland's "Tower," you realize how useful (and even powerful) a tool animation can be to tell a story that largely exists in fragments of witnesses' memories.
Maitland pieces together the horrifying 90 minutes on a sweltering summer day — August 1, 1966 — when a lone sniper essentially took the University of Texas at Austin campus hostage from the top of the campus clocktower, killing 16 people and wounding more than 40. With only testimonials and scarce video, audio, photos and news media coverage of the event at his disposal, Maitland mostly turns to animation to fill the gaps and relate what actually happened as completely as possible. The finished product is as close to a moment by moment account of the shooting — from the perspective of those who lived through it and were closest to the action — as possible.
Most filmmakers would shy away from a subject like this. There's not much to work with, it could feel too exploitative of people's trauma and live action reenactments of what happened would come across as inauthentic if not comical. But the rotoscoping effect, and Maitland's choice to animate his subjects as they looked in 1966, casting actors to play them in animated reenactments and to read their testimonials with younger voices, addresses all these concerns. It's as if Maitland dips part of the documentary in fiction just so that it can all come together more cohesively. Instead of cutting frequently between the real and the reenacted, he blends to the two.
This also turns "Tower" into a captivating, pulse-pounding retelling of events, almost as if it were a feature film. For those unfamiliar with story, it's all the more engrossing, and kind of jaw-dropping when you consider that it all actually happened. Adults young and old today have no shortage of mass shootings to draw from in their minds, but few lasted 90 terrifying minutes like the UT-Austin tower shooting. That makes it all the more important to create the vivid account we get in "Tower." What the witnesses and survivors experienced doesn't deserve to be reduced.
As has been the case with most media accounts of mass shootings, the focus always turns first to the shooter — who could be so evil and/or disturbed to take human lives this way? This was especially the case in this shooting; the attention was turned to the perpetrator and not the victims (and heroes) by magazines and broadcast media, some of which we see in the film. "Tower" almost entirely ignores who Charles Witman was and instead gives the narrative of events back to these victims and heroes. Maitland wants to honor their experiences and dig deeper into how they remember and process trauma instead of heaping attention on the selfish individual responsible for it all.
Again, it might seem like rotoscoping would work counter to this objective by obscuring the film's subjects in portraying them as "cartoons" with professional actors' voices, yet Maitland navigates that creatively as well and shows us that authenticity doesn't only come from the way someone looks or sounds, but that their "voice" is their story. The rotoscoping actually forces us to focus on their story and only their story. It allows us to live in those moments, rather than the person's recollection of those moments.
"Tower" stands out as a piece of creative, resourceful documentary filmmaking, one that allows the director to tell a complete story from disjointed pieces, and an absolutely gripping story at that. You might argue that this method and style allows Maitland to exert a bit too much of his own influence over the film, but his creative license largely comes in the form of accents that honor rather than exaggerate the stories of his subjects. Regardless, "Tower" raises the bar for how documentary stories can be told.
~Steven C
Thanks for reading! Visit Movie Muse Reviews for more
Read full review
99%
TOMATOMETER
· 100 reviews
89%
AUDIENCE
· 2.5K ratings
7.9/10
8.7K
•••
No seeds