Human Rights Poster:
Film Review: X-Men Last Stand:
Noah Webber & Wil Fisher
ENG3UI
Mrs. Linnerth
December 17th, 2015
The Violations As They Stand
Released in 2006 and the sequel to 2003’s X2, X-Men Last Stand is the third installment in the X-Men film series and focuses on the same characters as X2, with a few new and different characters as well. X-Men Last Stand stars fan-favourite Hugh Jackman as Wolverine alongside Patrick Stewart (Professor X) and Ian McKellen (Magneto). The film is rated PG-13, 104 minutes long and is chock full of human rights violations towards the “mutant class”.
The movie starts off with a clip of a young version of Ben Foster’s character, Warren Worthington III, “Angel” trying to hide his mutant abilities from his father Warren Worthington II. Warren Worthington II’s actions of him saying things will be better soon and they will fix his problem is evidence of article two being violated.
The movies plot continues and as it develops more human rights are violated, leading to more conflicts in the film. The next example of human rights is when an agency and the government develop a so called “cure” to get rid of the mutant “disease”. These prejudice thoughts towards mutants is wrong on many levels and is the start of many more complications throughout the film. The idea of “curing” the “disease” just shows that mutants are thought of as ill, and is a violation of many of their human rights including article one.
On the other side of things, Magneto’s view of the humans and how they should all be “erased” so that the next evolution (the mutants) will be able to rule is also a clear violation of human rights. Magneto’s lack of care for the lives of an average civilian/human is wrong and is one of the reasons that there are so many bad thoughts about mutants in the first place. His lack of care for the lives of people and his attitude towards wiping them out is a violation of their rights, including those under article three. This ends up leading to many of the fights between humans and mutants that are to come.
Later in the movie, we are brought back to Warren Worthington II attempting to force his son Warren Worthington III “Angel”, into taking the cure to get rid of his mutant abilities. This is violating “Angel’s” rights and in a way it also violates article nineteen. This greatly affects their relationship as father and son and when “Angel” makes his escape his father is yelling at him that it was what they had wanted, even though he was trying to make the whole decision on his own.
The most emotional scene in the movie is the scene near the middle of the movie where Professor X is killed in an attempt to help one of his students, Jean Grey, before she kills him. This is definitely the most emotional scene in the movie as Professor X was only trying to help Jean, but she was just too far los and over burdened with power and couldn’t control it anymore.
Overall, X-Men Last Stand was a good movie, showing the prejudice that we as humans have against those that are different from ourselves, and showing just how bad that we as humans can be towards each other.
Work Cited
X-Men, the Last Stand. Dir. Bret Ratner. Prod. Lauren Shuler-Donner. By Simon
Kinberg. Perf. Hugh Jackman, Halle Berry, and Ian McKellen. 20th Century Fox, 2006.
ENG3UI
Mrs. Linnerth
December 17th, 2015
The Violations As They Stand
Released in 2006 and the sequel to 2003’s X2, X-Men Last Stand is the third installment in the X-Men film series and focuses on the same characters as X2, with a few new and different characters as well. X-Men Last Stand stars fan-favourite Hugh Jackman as Wolverine alongside Patrick Stewart (Professor X) and Ian McKellen (Magneto). The film is rated PG-13, 104 minutes long and is chock full of human rights violations towards the “mutant class”.
The movie starts off with a clip of a young version of Ben Foster’s character, Warren Worthington III, “Angel” trying to hide his mutant abilities from his father Warren Worthington II. Warren Worthington II’s actions of him saying things will be better soon and they will fix his problem is evidence of article two being violated.
The movies plot continues and as it develops more human rights are violated, leading to more conflicts in the film. The next example of human rights is when an agency and the government develop a so called “cure” to get rid of the mutant “disease”. These prejudice thoughts towards mutants is wrong on many levels and is the start of many more complications throughout the film. The idea of “curing” the “disease” just shows that mutants are thought of as ill, and is a violation of many of their human rights including article one.
On the other side of things, Magneto’s view of the humans and how they should all be “erased” so that the next evolution (the mutants) will be able to rule is also a clear violation of human rights. Magneto’s lack of care for the lives of an average civilian/human is wrong and is one of the reasons that there are so many bad thoughts about mutants in the first place. His lack of care for the lives of people and his attitude towards wiping them out is a violation of their rights, including those under article three. This ends up leading to many of the fights between humans and mutants that are to come.
Later in the movie, we are brought back to Warren Worthington II attempting to force his son Warren Worthington III “Angel”, into taking the cure to get rid of his mutant abilities. This is violating “Angel’s” rights and in a way it also violates article nineteen. This greatly affects their relationship as father and son and when “Angel” makes his escape his father is yelling at him that it was what they had wanted, even though he was trying to make the whole decision on his own.
The most emotional scene in the movie is the scene near the middle of the movie where Professor X is killed in an attempt to help one of his students, Jean Grey, before she kills him. This is definitely the most emotional scene in the movie as Professor X was only trying to help Jean, but she was just too far los and over burdened with power and couldn’t control it anymore.
Overall, X-Men Last Stand was a good movie, showing the prejudice that we as humans have against those that are different from ourselves, and showing just how bad that we as humans can be towards each other.
Work Cited
X-Men, the Last Stand. Dir. Bret Ratner. Prod. Lauren Shuler-Donner. By Simon
Kinberg. Perf. Hugh Jackman, Halle Berry, and Ian McKellen. 20th Century Fox, 2006.
News Article:
Article Here
Credible Source:
-From CBC news which is a credible source
-CBC is Canada’s news network and has to make sure to use correct information
Annotations:
Key Points:
-Canadian government fails to provide the same child welfare for children on native reserves that is provided everywhere else in Canada
-A complaint was filed about this back in 2007 by Cindy Blackstock (executive director of the First Nations and Family Caring Society, along with the Assembly of First Nations)
-Support for child welfare on reserves is much lower than that of the support given by the government to children living off of the reserves
-The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal says that the government must act on making its support less discriminatory
-Compares on-reserve child welfare to the residential schools system
-Saying they are going to fix these things
-Government made many attempts to get rid of this case
Questions:
-Who are the authors?
Further research needed (couldn’t find the author's anywhere)
-Why did it take so long for the government to notice this issue?
Researched it but couldn’t find specific information on why the issue wasn’t noticed by the government for so long; mostly found people’s opinions on the topic itself)
Summary:
-Talks about how the federal government is failing to provide the same level of welfare support that is provided for everyone else for First Nations children
-Canadian Human Rights Tribunal agreed this was an issue that the government needs to fix
-Cindy Blackstock questions why the fight for this was necessary, but says it is good for the children
-Government responded to this issue by saying that it is there job to fix this and that they will fix it
-Hearings for this began in 2013, but were continually pushed away by the government
Human Rights Connections:
-Article 2: Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
-The First Nations children are not being given the same welfare support as non-First Nations children.
-Article 7: All are equal before the law.
-The government is not paying the same amount of child welfare to all children and are therefore basically saying that the First Nations children are below the law.
-Article 1: All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
-The rights of the First Nations people and their children are being violated as they are being paid less child welfare simply because of their race.
Discussion Question:
-Why do you think that the government was trying to have the case thrown out?
Work Cited
"Canada Discriminates against Children on Reserves, Tribunal Rules."CBC News. CBC News, 26 Jan. 2016. Web. 26 Jan. 2016. <http://www.cbc.ca/news/aboriginal/canada- discriminates-against-children-on-reserves-tribunal-rules-1.3419480>.
Credible Source:
-From CBC news which is a credible source
-CBC is Canada’s news network and has to make sure to use correct information
Annotations:
Key Points:
-Canadian government fails to provide the same child welfare for children on native reserves that is provided everywhere else in Canada
-A complaint was filed about this back in 2007 by Cindy Blackstock (executive director of the First Nations and Family Caring Society, along with the Assembly of First Nations)
-Support for child welfare on reserves is much lower than that of the support given by the government to children living off of the reserves
-The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal says that the government must act on making its support less discriminatory
-Compares on-reserve child welfare to the residential schools system
-Saying they are going to fix these things
-Government made many attempts to get rid of this case
Questions:
-Who are the authors?
Further research needed (couldn’t find the author's anywhere)
-Why did it take so long for the government to notice this issue?
Researched it but couldn’t find specific information on why the issue wasn’t noticed by the government for so long; mostly found people’s opinions on the topic itself)
Summary:
-Talks about how the federal government is failing to provide the same level of welfare support that is provided for everyone else for First Nations children
-Canadian Human Rights Tribunal agreed this was an issue that the government needs to fix
-Cindy Blackstock questions why the fight for this was necessary, but says it is good for the children
-Government responded to this issue by saying that it is there job to fix this and that they will fix it
-Hearings for this began in 2013, but were continually pushed away by the government
Human Rights Connections:
-Article 2: Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
-The First Nations children are not being given the same welfare support as non-First Nations children.
-Article 7: All are equal before the law.
-The government is not paying the same amount of child welfare to all children and are therefore basically saying that the First Nations children are below the law.
-Article 1: All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
-The rights of the First Nations people and their children are being violated as they are being paid less child welfare simply because of their race.
Discussion Question:
-Why do you think that the government was trying to have the case thrown out?
Work Cited
"Canada Discriminates against Children on Reserves, Tribunal Rules."CBC News. CBC News, 26 Jan. 2016. Web. 26 Jan. 2016. <http://www.cbc.ca/news/aboriginal/canada- discriminates-against-children-on-reserves-tribunal-rules-1.3419480>.