Review: 'I'm not ashamed'

I'm not ashamed.
The title is ironic, because all I felt an overwhelming sense of shame for watching it.
The movie is essentially christian propaganda in which any character who does not go to church ends up being a bad person. It is poorly acted, poorly scripted, and is factually inaccurate.
The boys hardly knew Rachel, let alone being in a class with one another and stopping her in school to hit her up about the video project incident. It also shows Eric taunting her about her beliefs before he shot her which also never happened. It suggests that Eric and Dylan bullied a disabled kid??
It was amusing how all the characters were better looking versions of their real life counterparts.
And Rachel, I don't think it's appropriate to ask a disabled kid on a date and get him all excited when you have no sexual interest in him.
I'm so ashamed.

There is only one reference I have seen in which Dylan bullied Adam Kyler who was mentally disabled. So that part may be partially true.

Some references:

Adam Kyler [247/8,677] DK (and three others) harassed and threatened to kill him; parents went to administration

Joshua Lapp [483] people didn’t dare talk to EH or DK; say “hi” and get bad response

Keith Parkison [1,069] DK picked on people, including Keith; almost had physical fights

Keith Parkison [1,070] EH picked on people

Amanda Paukune [1,074] DK was “mean and sarcastic” to her

Mr. Craig Place (CHS teacher/dean) [1,090] EH picked on freshmen

Evan McClaugherty [2,038/21,138] accidentally bumped EH who pushed him, said he should “watch his back”

Chris Walker [2,236] heard from someone that once DK was “very scary” — there was a fight and DK was going “crazy”

Seth Biggi [2,476] DK picked fight with jock

Ali Boukhalfa [2,522] a friend accidentally bumped DK, this led to pushing

Ms. Tommie Nykanen (CHS teacher) [5,179] scared of DK; he laughed at her inappropriately, defiantly

Megan Minger [5,528] EH stared at her — evil stare

Melissa Walker [5,995] KMFDM — thought it was a radio station; EH “got all defensive”

Melissa Walker [6,001–2] asked EH about KMFDM hat — “what station is that?” EH got upset, said “you just wait and see”

Michael Biggs [6,140] EH stared, intimidated him

Jennifer Harmon [6,548] everyone was scared of them

Gary Reininger [7,068] DK/EH yelled at jocks junior year

Dustin Thurmon [7,260] athlete who had problems with DK/EH; EH wanted to fight him

Tara Zobjeck [7,380] DK called her “bitch” after gym incident; harassed her

Tara Zobjeck [7,416] pushed people and cheated in gym

Chris Morris [8,897] EH started fights with jocks, expected Chris Morris to back him up

Michelle Hartsough [10,150] DK was rude/difficult; hit her once because she counseled him on infraction at work

[Lacy Koch's boyfriend] [10,286] DK called girl a bitch during flag football; other boy intervened, told DK to back off

Devon Adams [10,616] EH/DK made fun of boy in theatre department

Chris Morris [10,838] recently, EH more aggressive; picking fights, expecting Chris to back him up

Michelle Hartsough [16,607] DK: scary person

Sasha Jacobs [17,411] dated EH 16–20 times (10/97 to 1/98); broke up, got email threats

Jerry Snow [17,957] in 8th grade his daughter got threatening letter from EH, DK and others

[Dustin Kent Thurmon] [19,326] EH picked fight last year

Carrie Preziosi [21,138] had confrontation with EH about 4 months ago (from 5/4/99)

Matthew Wills (boyfriend of Tara Zobjeck) [23,450] threatened to kick ass of DK for harassing Tara

Jason Kirk [24,351] had run-in with boy he thinks was EH on July 4, 1998

Jacquelyn Baker [25,053] DK scared her — the way he walked and looked at her

Ms. Catherine Dudley (mother of Colby Dudley) [25,366] Colby had confrontation with EH

Eric Harris [26,014] journal entry where he wrote, “I make fun of people who look like me”

Dylan Klebold [26,236] inscription in EH’s yearbook: “can’t wait to dub the new freshman”

Dylan Klebold [26,238] inscription in EH’s yearbook: “sitting in the commons dubbing & laughing at fags”

Dylan Klebold [26,388] journal entry about trying not to ridicule/make fun of people at school

Dylan Klebold [26,396] journal entry: “I try not to pick on people”

>The movie is essentially christian propaganda in which any character who does not go to church ends up being a bad person.

I'm reading Ralph W. Larkin's Comprehending Columbine right now and this line seems very much in synch with what Larkin has to say about the evangelical crowd in Jefferson County, Colorado. He makes the Christian crowd at Columbine sound FAR snobbier/meaner-spirited/exclusionary than Cullen did.

>It suggests that Eric and Dylan bullied a disabled kid??

Well didn't Dylan kill Kyle Velasquez who was disabled?

>It was amusing how all the characters were better looking versions of their real life counterparts.

That's Hollywood for you; without looking it up, I'm going to guess Rachel is being played a 25 year old who is far taller than the real Rachel?

The Larkin book also suggests that Richard Castaldo "used to hang out with them sometimes", referring apparently to E&D. This is in a quote from an interview with someone named "FS2," as in "former student."

That's a lot of dates between Eric and Sasha Jacobs.

Dylan fucking KILLED a disabled kid.

Lunkhead McGrath wrote:

>I'm reading Ralph W. Larkin's Comprehending Columbine right now and this line seems very much in synch with what Larkin has to say about the evangelical crowd in Jefferson County, Colorado.  He makes the Christian crowd at Columbine sound FAR snobbier/meaner-spirited/exclusionary than Cullen did.

Sue Klebold made some similar accusations in her book.

I'm curious how Sue Klebold or Larkin or Cullen for that matter could possibly think they know how things really were at Columbine. Only the kids that were there really know, and memories are almost always warped after a tragedy like that. The people involved are either sainted or reviled. Not only that, but different people have different experiences. Besides, Dylan and Eric had no desire to fit in with the Christians, and we're known for mocking them openly and disdainfully, along with their other friend Eric. While it's true that good Christians would continue to try to reach them, rather than exclude them, let's not forget that these were still just children, who were being made fun of for their faith. Who knows, maybe some of them did try to reach out. And maybe some of them died for it. Unfortunately, we'll never know for sure.

Lunkhead_McGrath wrote:

The Larkin book also suggests that Richard Castaldo "used to hang out with them sometimes", referring apparently to E&D.  This is in a quote from an interview with someone named "FS2," as in "former student." 

Interesting, here is the text from the book in reference to the above quote:

In a group interview with several former female Columbine students, the following transpired:

FS1: One of the things, too, that always sticks out to me is that if you ask anyone, almost anyone, at Columbine, about the shooting, one thing you get a lot is “ They killed all the wrong people.” It’s just that comment in general, that they killed all the wrong people, that’s really saying something about our school.

FS2: They’ re supposedly attacking all the popular people, but the people they killed were like, they were friendly to everybody, they weren’ t in major cliques, and I remember Richard Castaldo got shot and he’s in a wheelchair, he’s a paraplegic now. I remember going, “ Why did they shoot him? ” He used to hang out with them sometimes. I hung out with him. He was so … out of everybody, he was the least conformist, he hung out with nobody, he didn’ t care what people thought about him. He tried to be kind to everyone. … Out of everyone that I knew really really well, that was majorly effected by the shooting, that got shot or that died, he was a total loner. And Isaiah, why Isaiah [Sholes]? He was the only African American that got shot. And you know, there’s lots of talk that’s why he got shot, and he was nice to everyone he met. He was so nice [Crying] (Recorded May 13, 2003).

>Sue Klebold made some similar accusations in her book.

At who? The Christians, or at Larkin or Cullen? I'm assuming you mean the Christians. Sue was raised Jewish but raised Dylan Protestant right? Larkin is making distinctions between evangelicals (whom he claims were snobby). Did any Christians at Columbine ever snort at Dylan for being part-Jewish?

>I'm curious how Sue Klebold or Larkin or Cullen for that matter could possibly think they know how things really were at Columbine.

Well....that's what we're all sort of trying to know...the Larkin book is good at making it clear how hard it is to really know, because so many different perspectives exist. In particular, Frank DeAngelis, who've I've (until now) never thought of as being to blame for much of anything that happened, comes across in the Larkin book as being almost PATHETICALLY in the dark about all the bullying, which of course Larkin cites numerous instances of (and Cullen, of course didn't--no mentions of Rocky Hoffschneider in HIS book!) DeAngelis is quoted over and over as saying things like "Bullying? Sure, there was bullying, but it isn't as bad as people say it is!" I'm also now learning it was Brooks Brown who pointed out the "freshman bowling" stuff, which turned up in the new Rachel Scott fiction, followed by someone saying a line in the movie, "Just another day at Columbine!"

>Only the kids that were there really know, and memories are almost always warped after a tragedy like that.

...the approximation of truth of which is, of course, the theme of the Larkin book (at least thus far, I'm only 130 pages in.) One guy says bullying was horrific, another guy says he doesn't remember any bullying, a third kid says some bullying, some not bullying, one kid is different from another kid. Part of Larkin's main point seems to be what a *facade* Columbine was--an upper class, award-winning, white suburban high school whose facade depended on teachers looking away from gangs of jock bullies who went "freshman bowling," beat kids up, threw them into lockers, slapped their girlfriends around, violated the innocent, and who (faculty) allowed Rocky Hoffschneider to park his $100,000 car in a 15-minute parking space all day. The ketchup-tampon incident happened....oh wait, or DID it? Wait, only one guy spread the notice, and Brooks Brown quoted it secondhand? Did it happen? (Cullen's 2016 revision of his book says "the details are murky" about the ketchup incident in his new epilogue.)

The victims were the scapegoats for E and D. I think that no matter whether they were representatives of another race, athletes, Christians, or the disabled. E and D has vented all his anger on who they could get, without any choice, without any logic, without any compassion and common sense. And the most absurd that not a single bully was not injured. They were going to die anyway if their friends and innocent people get hurt, their parents will suffer the rest of his days in disdain. They were blinded by revenge. Dylan said that no matter how you try to understand, you will not be able (something like that). Indeed, it is not necessary to seek a reasonable explanation for crazy things.

Lunkhead McGrath wrote:

>Sue Klebold made some similar accusations in her book.

At who?  The Christians, or at Larkin or Cullen?  I'm assuming you mean the Christians.  Sue was raised Jewish but raised Dylan Protestant right?  Larkin is making distinctions between evangelicals (whom he claims were snobby).  Did any Christians at Columbine ever snort at Dylan for being part-Jewish?  

>I'm curious how Sue Klebold or Larkin or Cullen for that matter could possibly think they know how things really were at Columbine.

Well....that's what we're all sort of trying to know...the Larkin book is good at making it clear how hard it is to really know, because so many different perspectives exist.  In particular, Frank DeAngelis, who've I've (until now) never thought of as being to blame for much of anything that happened, comes across in the Larkin book as being almost PATHETICALLY in the dark about all the bullying, which of course Larkin cites numerous instances of (and Cullen, of course didn't--no mentions of Rocky Hoffschneider in HIS book!)  DeAngelis is quoted over and over as saying things like "Bullying?  Sure, there was bullying, but it isn't as bad as people say it is!" I'm also now learning it was Brooks Brown who pointed out the "freshman bowling" stuff, which turned up in the new Rachel Scott fiction, followed by someone saying a line in the movie, "Just another day at Columbine!"

>Only the kids that were there really know, and memories are almost always warped after a tragedy like that.

...the approximation of truth of which is, of course, the theme of the Larkin book (at least thus far, I'm only 130 pages in.)  One guy says bullying was horrific, another guy says he doesn't remember any bullying, a third kid says some bullying, some not bullying, one kid is different from another kid.  Part of Larkin's main point seems to be what a *facade* Columbine was--an upper class, award-winning, white suburban high school whose facade depended on teachers looking away from gangs of jock bullies who went "freshman bowling," beat kids up, threw them into lockers, slapped their girlfriends around, violated the innocent, and who (faculty) allowed Rocky Hoffschneider to park his $100,000 car in a 15-minute parking space all day.  The ketchup-tampon incident happened....oh wait, or DID it?  Wait, only one guy spread the notice, and Brooks Brown quoted it secondhand?  Did it happen?  (Cullen's 2016 revision of his book says "the details are murky" about the ketchup incident in his new epilogue.)  

I have always been of the mind that DeAngelis knew something. More than he let on. If he didn't then that was his true failure as the leader of that school. In any case if he did know even having an inkling about any of it and turned a blind eye as some have said then that is sickening. I do know that in one particular documentary DeAngelis fabricated a story about himself and Dave Sanders which upsets me. And sometimes he knows just who the boys were. He can name them and say they were troublemakers and then other times he has no idea who they were. The Trenchcoat Mafia never existed as far as he knew. The lies he spews are just bad.

> have always been of the mind that DeAngelis knew something. More than he let on. If he didn't then that was his true failure as the leader of that school. In any case if he did know even having an inkling about any of it and turned a blind eye as some have said then that is sickening. I do know that in one particular documentary DeAngelis fabricated a story about himself and Dave Sanders which >upsets me. And sometimes he knows just who the boys were. He can name them and say they were troublemakers and then other times he has no idea who they were. The Trenchcoat Mafia never >existed as far as he knew. The lies he spews are just bad.

Larkin seems ultimately to sympathize with DeAngelis, although this strangely comes after citing numerous instances of hideous bullying and faculty looking the other way (also Larkin amusingly takes a slight potshot at DeAngelis' appearance, noting that he wore an unbuttoned shirt, or something like that). Larkin specifically claims it was almost ALWAYS the Trenchcoat Mafia kids who were targeted. He calls Hoffschneider and his lackeys (who seem like villains out of a bad teen afterschool movie taken to an extreme) "The Predators" and brings up Hoffschneider like twenty times, sometimes referring to him by his initials, then by his full name, then back to the initials.

Hearing about these people, you'd wonder if you stood less chance of getting the fuck beaten out of you at a 1981 Black Flag concert in a Washington DC basement, then walking down the hallowed halls of Columbine. It's honestly pretty horrifying--and I thought MY school was dumb.

As for my own opinion of DeAngelis, I don't know that he's a sickening or evil guy, but I do now have the opinion that he was a bit pathetic about being in the dark, or being in denial. Certainly Larkin makes it clear that the school cared far more about sports than anything else, which would be more typical of a go-nowhere Midwestern dump of a high school than a supposedly upscale place like Columbine, which Larkin claims people specifically moved to that part of Colorado to send their kids to school there. Guhhh.

Totally untrue! DeAngelis was a beloved hero at Columbine! Haven't you guys read Cullin's book?!

>Totally untrue! DeAngelis was a beloved hero at Columbine! Haven't you guys read Cullin's book?!

Well, the Larkin book does point out that the community very much rallied around DeAngelis after the shooting.

It also takes a nasty but subtle shot at Cullen (whose book hadn't been published yet) when discussing the whole "psychopath/depressive" duo thingy.

Retarded Christian movie.
Fuckwads who took advantage of a tragedy to push their religion should be curbstomped

hate99 wrote:

Retarded Christian movie.
Fuckwads who took advantage of a tragedy to push their religion should be curbstomped

Do you expect to be taken seriously with that avatar?

Oh yes, totally. I didnt like it one bit.

Allthough, I probably would have liked the real Rachel Scott.

Well, I mean, Dylan DID kill Kyle, so yeah, there's that...
...but, for the most part: indeed, a bunch of drivel that absolutely did not happen and those who participated should all be ashamed of themselves (ironic, huh?)

FreeJust wrote:

Well, I mean, Dylan DID kill Kyle, so yeah, there's that...
...but, for the most part: indeed, a bunch of drivel that absolutely did not happen and those who participated should all be ashamed of themselves (ironic, huh?)

He killed more than just Kyle... I still don't understand why people assume Dylan knew Kyle had any issues, there is no proof of that and again, no ones death was more tragic than others... they didn't deserve to die. I feel like people are saying "kyle dying is a lot worse than the other 12... his death was even less deserved" no... Dylan never said "I want to kill a special needs person" he wanted to kill everyone, he didn't even care if his friends died.

Screamingophelia wrote:

I still don't understand why people assume Dylan knew Kyle had any issues, there is no proof of that

At risk of sounding incredibly insensitive, I think it's because Kyle just looks like a stereotypical special needs kid.

Screamingophelia wrote:

Dylan never said "I want to kill a special needs person"

But he and Eric certainly talked about killing "retards". Assuming the pair didn't deliberately target him, if Kyle had been full blown Down Syndrome or severely, blatantly autistic something tells me they would've treated him exactly how they treated Isaiah; call him slurs and then riddle him with bullets.

That is something I never really thought of. I get caught up on what I perceive has kind of ranking those who died... like "well it was sad that Steven died when he was only 14, but Kyle had special needs!!! So he had a worse life, he didn't deserve to die" no one did.

Christian propaganda movie deluxe.

Elephant, Zero Day and we must talk about Kevin are highly recommended.

Norwegian wrote:

Christian propaganda movie deluxe.

Elephant, Zero Day and we must talk about Kevin are highly recommended.

Elephant was sensationalist garbage that portrayed its version of E&D as gay lovers and the vast majority of its run time is dedicated to long tracking shots of random people going about their day (meaning most of the movie is basically boring to the point of unwatchability). We Need to Talk About Kevin is similarly sensationalist, going far into the "psychopath" theory of thought to explain school rampages (though the scenes where the mother is struggling and ostracized after the rampage are accurate and helpful). Zero Day is the only movie thus far to have portrayed school shooters with any reasonable accuracy.

QuestionMark wrote:

Norwegian wrote:

Christian propaganda movie deluxe.

Elephant, Zero Day and we must talk about Kevin are highly recommended.

Elephant was sensationalist garbage that portrayed its version of E&D as gay lovers and the vast majority of its run time is dedicated to long tracking shots of random people going about their day (meaning most of the movie is basically boring to the point of unwatchability). We Need to Talk About Kevin is similarly sensationalist, going far into the "psychopath" theory of thought to explain school rampages (though the scenes where the mother is struggling and ostracized after the rampage are accurate and helpful). Zero Day is the only movie thus far to have portrayed school shooters with any reasonable accuracy.

My interpretation of this.
Elephant is not, in fact, a portrayal of Eric and Dylan. They are loosely based on the Columbine- shooting. Plus, at the time, they did not know what we now know about the two.


We must talk about Kevin is slightly fictional and not ment to be educational. Its true, however, that some school shooters are psychopaths, but in any case, theres more to it.

Problem is, theres no blueprint for how we can explain school shooters. Zero Day may have an accurate portrayal in some examples. I E two boys that are bullied and they both encourage each other. Yet, if its going to be more objective: What else is there to the story? Are they also mentally ill? And so on

And if you have we must talk about Kevin. So Kevin is a psychopath. What else would have driven Kevin to commit a school shooting? Is there a run- in with authority? Run in with the law? Female rejection?

Norwegian wrote:

Elephant is not, in fact, a portrayal of Eric and Dylan. They are loosely based on the Columbine- shooting. Plus, at the time, they did not know what we now know about the two.

I know. The portrayal of the two killers in that film is still inexcusable, and my other point about the movie being comprised largely of pointless padding still holds true. It's an art-house approach that I feel meshes poorly in attempting to explore the character of a rampage killer.

Norwegian wrote:

And if you have we must talk about Kevin. So Kevin is a psychopath. What else would have driven Kevin to commit a school shooting? Is there a run- in with authority? Run in with the law? Female rejection?

So you agree then, that the movie falls short in explaining the true character of the "typical" rampage killer?

QuestionMark wrote:

Norwegian wrote:

Elephant is not, in fact, a portrayal of Eric and Dylan. They are loosely based on the Columbine- shooting. Plus, at the time, they did not know what we now know about the two.

I know. The portrayal of the two killers in that film is still inexcusable, and my other point about the movie being comprised largely of pointless padding still holds true. It's an art-house approach that I feel meshes poorly in attempting to explore the character of a rampage killer.

Yes, but Im not entirely convinced that this was the point, as it doesnt focus that much on the school shooting, but a mother- son- relationship

Norwegian wrote:

And if you have we must talk about Kevin. So Kevin is a psychopath. What else would have driven Kevin to commit a school shooting? Is there a run- in with authority? Run in with the law? Female rejection?

So you agree then, that the movie falls short in explaining the true character of the "typical" rampage killer?

Yes bur Im not really convinced that the school shooting was sentral to the film. I interpreted it more as a focus on a complex mother/ son- relationship, and her inability to separate facts from fiction. Im not sure wether its really ment to give an accurate portrayal of the school shooter, given that the main focus is on the mother. Im not really sure what message they were trying to accomplish, but I like films that are somewhat difficult to interpret, though. Added to this, its based on a book

Yeah, the movie wasn't great.