Dustin Bennett- "Aaron Burr, Part 2" by Dana O'Keefe feels like a student film, but I was surprised to find out that it actually premiered at South by Southwest. It's ambitious and I appreciate the effort that went into it, but there's a definite "lo-fi" feel to it and I believe that clashes with its "updated history" theme. The visuals are a little paler and darker than usual, the narration sounds less crisp than expected, and the firefight sequence in the woods definitely seems like an attempt to cover for a lack of resources. Additionally, an issue during the correspondence where light-colored text was superimposed over a light background seems like a simple fix that shouldn't have made it to the final cut.
I did find "Aaron Burr, Part 2" informative though, and it's always important to explore the sides of history that textbooks gloss over. The writing was certainly the highlight of the film for me.
The short film Aaron Burr, Pt. 2 by Dana O’Keefe tells the story of the historical figure Aaron Burr and his feud and duel with Alexander Hamilton. Unlike other historical films that recounts the past through the portrayal of the subjects in the time in which the event took place, this film blends both contemporary footage and recreations of the historical events to give a fresh and unique take on the life of Aaron Burr. For example a scene shows Burr writing to Hamilton, but with a phone and in a modern setting. Other scenes show the portrayal of events in the appropriate time and with appropriate wardrobe. Burr’s narration is also accompanied by shots of modern times that are relevant to his statements. The films soundtrack also plays a part in its approach of putting a modern take on history. Songs like The Next Episode by Dr. Dre and other modern music help keep a contemporary tone to the historical events. Through the films storytelling approach it is able to efficiently inform the audience of the history behind the story and at the same time give the story an intriguing narrative.
Alex Cherry:“Aaron Burr, Part 2” supplies an intriguing viewpoint on Burr’s life, and the feelings he might have about it looking back. Instead of using an objective narrator, the voice over is Burr himself, which is an interesting artistic choice. Instead of simply reciting facts as a narrator might do, Burr tells his life from his point of view, which allows for his personality to be more clearly shown. He makes an attempt to set the record straight, correcting certain facts and voicing his opinion about people such as Hamilton and Washington, such as when he calls Washington “incompetent.” The film utilizes both fictional recreations and archival products such as paintings to tie the young, new Burr who is speaking to the Burr who actually existed. At first, the narrative scenes appeared to be poorly done reenactments with simple costuming and inaccurate locations, but then as the film progressed and the anachronisms showed through, it was revealed to be Burr in our present day looking back at the time he lived. The anachronisms were confusing at first but then supplanted the story and made it more relatable, as I was capable of imagining what Burr and Hamilton’s communication might have looked like today through text message. The film was highly opinionated and even cheeky at points, but served as an interesting look at a sometimes overdone and boring revisit to history.
Ryanne Whyte: The first thing I did when I started watching Aaron Burr, Part 2 was look at when it was made. It surprised me that Dana O'Keefe came up with such an original idea 5 years ago, before anyone had heard of Hamilton. O'Keefe uses a very stylized atmosphere for her piece in order to merge the past with the present. The music and dialogue are more representative of the past, while the costume and setting (until towards the end) represent the past. O'Keefe also used a lot of close-ups and extreme close-ups in the piece which makes it more personal to the main character. Overall, the story was well executed and had tremendous personality.
Mario Cirinese: The short film "Aaron Burr, Part 2" shows Aaron Burr's side of the story dealing with the duel against Alexander Hamilton. The director uses live action shots along with archival photos to further advance their narrative to tell the story they believe to be important. Dana O'Keefe's use of modernized music throughout the film helped the audience connect with the story. During a scene where Burr and Hamilton are passing messages back and forth through text messaging truly shows the directors intentions on further modernizing this old tale. This new take on history was executed masterfully and I look forward to watch more video's by Dana O'keefe.
I believe the modern day twist to this classic history lesson was brilliant. The duel scene was hilarious to me because I think there should've been some video effect or something to make it look more realistic. I think the scene could've been executed better. I think it was really cool How they brought the scene back to present day and it was a parking lot. It was truly amazing how they transitioned the story while staying with the concept. Overall Dana O'keefe did a great job bringing this old school story to the modern day world.
Phillip Spain: "Aaron Burr, Part 2" was a very interesting short film that explored the side of Aaron Burr and his role in history, as most people tend to gloss over him as being little more than the "villain" in Alexander Hamilton's story. What makes the film unique is how it shows scenes reenacting what happened while being narrated, but does so in a modern setting, while also including the modern versions of landmarks and business started or influenced by Burr and Hamilton. This stylistic choice helps guide the viewer into thinking about the long term effects of not only the infamous duel, but the two men themselves, and how that affects them even today in the modern world. I will say, I dislike the final shot of Burr pissing on Hamilton's grave. Despite their long time rivalry and the ultimate outcome, most accounts I've read indicated that Hamilton and Burr still had a certain level of respect for each other, and it felt really out of character, and sort of thrown in for shock value. Overall though, it was an interesting and unique short film that gave a different side to an important story in US history.
Zach Andry: Aaron Burr Part 2 tells the story of a man history tells us was one of the most infamous men of the time. This film was interesting to watch due to the different time periods it apart to be filmed. I was confused however if they were saying he was still alive with such a large portion of the film having Burr walking in modern day. For the most part the narration was excellent it did not strike me as cheesy. However the voice effect was I felt good for the film. Despite my confusion on the time period due to the settings and some of the duel scenes have more modern looking guns overall i really enjoyed the film.
Cameron Panhans: "Aaron Burr, Part 2" is a short film directed by Dana O'Keefe that attempts to modernize the story of the duels between Burr and Alexander Hamilton. The film blends archival material and reenactment footage that was shot by the director. O'Keefe utilizes a lot of cool and neutral colors that help convey a dark and ominous nature throughout the film. Depth of field is also typically limited throughout the work which helps focus the film around the characters and their actions and emotions rather than their surroundings. This modernization of the story of Aaron Burr incorporates these technical aspects with modern scenery and a contemporary soundtrack to bring to life O'Keefe's short film.
Jesse Tollison: "Aaron Burr, Part 2" is a perspective piece on that of Aaron Burr, the man who killed Alexander Hamilton in an infamous duel. Critically, I don't know how to feel about the piece. It provokes interesting, unique thoughts in that, if Burr claims exaggerations are coming from those in Hamilton's camp, then Burr himself's perspective must also be exaggerated. On the other hand, stylistically speaking, the mutation and crossover between period piece and modern interpretation is distracting and gets in the way of the narrative, pushing me away from the story.
Maddie Kennedy: "Aaron Burr, Part 2" by Dana O'Keefe was an interesting depiction of the man most famous for killing Alexander Hamilton in a duel. The film explores his perspective through a blend of recreations, archival photographs, and contemporary footage. The film succeeds in endowing Burr with a level of complexity that history has often denied him as the killer of Hamilton. As Kendrick Lamar says, "everybody gone respect the shooter, but the one in front of the gun lives forever." This film gives Burr the chance to tell his side of the story. The blend of footage was interesting and creative, and was in some ways more compelling than a traditional documentary. I enjoyed some of the small bits of humor in the film. It was interesting to see this uncommonly told story created prior to Hamilton the musical, and how they both dealt with the subject matter.
Savannah Stanley: Dana O'Keefe utilises an interesting mix of music and voice-over for her sound design for "Aaron Burr, Part 2." This, along with her use of cuts creates a unique narrative to tell an equally unique story. With the rise of the musical, Hamilton, we are obviously predisposed as an audience in Hamilton's favour regarding this topic. O'Keefe's narrative creates a gap between historical precedence and modern human emotion, which is emphasised by the mixture of historic costuming and modern settings and technology interspersed throughout the film. These bursts of anachronisms are assisted by shots that are short and flash across the screen in times of battle and repetitive, slightly altered variations of the same scene in shots regarding the duel and Aaron Burr's reflections upon it. Earlier I mentioned the music, which was powerful and intense without being overly melancholy or upbeat. This choice, accompanied almost solely by Burr's voice, changed the mood of the film from biographical to almost fictitious. Burr became omnipotent and omnipresent, and while his actions become understandable, he becomes a more powerful being throughout the course of the film than he was at the beginning. The overall effect was not of comedy, as is listed in the description, but is legitimately entertaining and consistently grasps the attention of the viewer by constantly altering our understanding of the world of the film through its use of cuts, repetition, and sound design.
Jack Beuckman: The short film "Aaron Burr, Part 2" by Dana O'Keefe is about Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton. The film talks about the true story of Aaron Burr and what really happened in the duel between Hamilton and Burr. The film was produced like a documentary. It had a voice over of an actor pretending to be Aaron Burr. The voice over was very good. The audio was very clear and the effect O’Keefe used on the actors voice fitted the style of the film well. The B-roll consisted of pictures of old historic pantings and footage of the actor portraying Burr reacting moments of Burr’s life. One of my favorite parts was the choice of music in the film. I like how many of the cuts and edits fitted with the beat of the music. The cinematography was really well done as well. I thought the lighting for the scene of Burr in the house practicing for the duel was very good. It fit with the music and the emotions O’Keefe was portraying. Overall I really liked the idea of the film and i thought it was executed very well.
McKenzie Miller: Dana O’Keefe’s “Aaron Burr, Part 2” is a narrative told from the perspective of Aaron Burr on the duel between himself and Alexander Hamilton. The film is a modern day story of what happened between the pair and throughout history when they were alive. Most of the footage used was modern day reenactments of battles and wars along with some archival footage and pictures. This film is a take on what few people may believe: that Alexander Hamilton shot at Burr first. Burr is able to tell his side of the story and make his voice heard. I believe it was a very interesting short narrative and allowed the viewer to see that there are always two sides to a story especially in history.
Taylor Hendrix: The short film, “Aaron Burr: Part 2,” is a take on history with a twist. It shows the dual between Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr, but in modern times. This short film shows what happened in each other’s lifetimes in a modern way. The focus throughout the dual scene was kind of off. I am unsure if this was on purpose or not, but if it was, it was because the scene was in the past. With the dual being in the past, the unclear focus may mean that it is unclear to not only the audience, but the characters as well. The ominous voiceover throughout the film sounded as if the narrator was on a walkie talkie. This film choice was made because it is a twist on the war. The war did not have modern day technology, but with the modern day twist, it did! Overall, this short was comical, but I am not a big fan of history, so I did not enjoy it that much.
Victoria Walker: “Aaron Burr, Part II” is a short film created by Dana O’Keefe. This film tells a modern day version of the dual between Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr ,but from Aaron Burr’s perspective. I thought that was a unique way of telling the story because most history books only portray Hamilton as the victim and Burr as the villain. This film is important because it makes the view question the integrity of Hamilton. Moreover, I was impressed at how the director used modern day music that described New York at the 1:57 mark. Along with that she showed the viewers exactly where the dual took place but in modern day society. I thought was a cool idea and it was very well planned out. It also add to the lingering them associated with Aaron Burr being the forgotten man. Lightening was also another creative aspect of this film. The film depicted more of a pale color. That could essentially contribute to the gloomy tone of the film . Perhaps my favorite part of the film is at the end when Burr explains how he was not to blame from Hamilton death. I love the phrase “The only real difference between us is his hand shook and my mine never does. Also I really enjoyed the scene where he looks over Hamilton grave as if he is celebrating his accomplishment and saying he has the last laugh.
Hannah Bynum: "Aaron Burr, Part 2" is an interesting, historical short film focusing on the infamous duel between Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr. In many cases when learning about history people hear one side of an event and assume that is the truth. This film attempts to change peoples perspective on these historical figures by exploring Burr's side of the story with a neat, modern twist. It was very interesting to watch under the idea that "history is a contested state". I believe that statement is true and made me wonder what other historical events I and many others view one-sidedly.
Dustin Bennett- "Aaron Burr, Part 2" by Dana O'Keefe feels like a student film, but I was surprised to find out that it actually premiered at South by Southwest. It's ambitious and I appreciate the effort that went into it, but there's a definite "lo-fi" feel to it and I believe that clashes with its "updated history" theme. The visuals are a little paler and darker than usual, the narration sounds less crisp than expected, and the firefight sequence in the woods definitely seems like an attempt to cover for a lack of resources. Additionally, an issue during the correspondence where light-colored text was superimposed over a light background seems like a simple fix that shouldn't have made it to the final cut.
ReplyDeleteI did find "Aaron Burr, Part 2" informative though, and it's always important to explore the sides of history that textbooks gloss over. The writing was certainly the highlight of the film for me.
Louis Lartigue:
ReplyDeleteThe short film Aaron Burr, Pt. 2 by Dana O’Keefe tells the story of the historical figure Aaron Burr and his feud and duel with Alexander Hamilton. Unlike other historical films that recounts the past through the portrayal of the subjects in the time in which the event took place, this film blends both contemporary footage and recreations of the historical events to give a fresh and unique take on the life of Aaron Burr. For example a scene shows Burr writing to Hamilton, but with a phone and in a modern setting. Other scenes show the portrayal of events in the appropriate time and with appropriate wardrobe. Burr’s narration is also accompanied by shots of modern times that are relevant to his statements. The films soundtrack also plays a part in its approach of putting a modern take on history. Songs like The Next Episode by Dr. Dre and other modern music help keep a contemporary tone to the historical events. Through the films storytelling approach it is able to efficiently inform the audience of the history behind the story and at the same time give the story an intriguing narrative.
Alex Cherry:“Aaron Burr, Part 2” supplies an intriguing viewpoint on Burr’s life, and the feelings he might have about it looking back. Instead of using an objective narrator, the voice over is Burr himself, which is an interesting artistic choice. Instead of simply reciting facts as a narrator might do, Burr tells his life from his point of view, which allows for his personality to be more clearly shown. He makes an attempt to set the record straight, correcting certain facts and voicing his opinion about people such as Hamilton and Washington, such as when he calls Washington “incompetent.” The film utilizes both fictional recreations and archival products such as paintings to tie the young, new Burr who is speaking to the Burr who actually existed. At first, the narrative scenes appeared to be poorly done reenactments with simple costuming and inaccurate locations, but then as the film progressed and the anachronisms showed through, it was revealed to be Burr in our present day looking back at the time he lived. The anachronisms were confusing at first but then supplanted the story and made it more relatable, as I was capable of imagining what Burr and Hamilton’s communication might have looked like today through text message. The film was highly opinionated and even cheeky at points, but served as an interesting look at a sometimes overdone and boring revisit to history.
ReplyDeleteRyanne Whyte: The first thing I did when I started watching Aaron Burr, Part 2 was look at when it was made. It surprised me that Dana O'Keefe came up with such an original idea 5 years ago, before anyone had heard of Hamilton. O'Keefe uses a very stylized atmosphere for her piece in order to merge the past with the present. The music and dialogue are more representative of the past, while the costume and setting (until towards the end) represent the past. O'Keefe also used a lot of close-ups and extreme close-ups in the piece which makes it more personal to the main character. Overall, the story was well executed and had tremendous personality.
ReplyDeleteMario Cirinese: The short film "Aaron Burr, Part 2" shows Aaron Burr's side of the story dealing with the duel against Alexander Hamilton. The director uses live action shots along with archival photos to further advance their narrative to tell the story they believe to be important. Dana O'Keefe's use of modernized music throughout the film helped the audience connect with the story. During a scene where Burr and Hamilton are passing messages back and forth through text messaging truly shows the directors intentions on further modernizing this old tale. This new take on history was executed masterfully and I look forward to watch more video's by Dana O'keefe.
ReplyDeleteI believe the modern day twist to this classic history lesson was brilliant. The duel scene was hilarious to me because I think there should've been some video effect or something to make it look more realistic. I think the scene could've been executed better. I think it was really cool How they brought the scene back to present day and it was a parking lot. It was truly amazing how they transitioned the story while staying with the concept. Overall Dana O'keefe did a great job bringing this old school story to the modern day world.
ReplyDeletePhillip Spain: "Aaron Burr, Part 2" was a very interesting short film that explored the side of Aaron Burr and his role in history, as most people tend to gloss over him as being little more than the "villain" in Alexander Hamilton's story. What makes the film unique is how it shows scenes reenacting what happened while being narrated, but does so in a modern setting, while also including the modern versions of landmarks and business started or influenced by Burr and Hamilton. This stylistic choice helps guide the viewer into thinking about the long term effects of not only the infamous duel, but the two men themselves, and how that affects them even today in the modern world. I will say, I dislike the final shot of Burr pissing on Hamilton's grave. Despite their long time rivalry and the ultimate outcome, most accounts I've read indicated that Hamilton and Burr still had a certain level of respect for each other, and it felt really out of character, and sort of thrown in for shock value. Overall though, it was an interesting and unique short film that gave a different side to an important story in US history.
ReplyDeleteZach Andry: Aaron Burr Part 2 tells the story of a man history tells us was one of the most infamous men of the time. This film was interesting to watch due to the different time periods it apart to be filmed. I was confused however if they were saying he was still alive with such a large portion of the film having Burr walking in modern day. For the most part the narration was excellent it did not strike me as cheesy. However the voice effect was I felt good for the film. Despite my confusion on the time period due to the settings and some of the duel scenes have more modern looking guns overall i really enjoyed the film.
ReplyDeleteCameron Panhans: "Aaron Burr, Part 2" is a short film directed by Dana O'Keefe that attempts to modernize the story of the duels between Burr and Alexander Hamilton. The film blends archival material and reenactment footage that was shot by the director. O'Keefe utilizes a lot of cool and neutral colors that help convey a dark and ominous nature throughout the film. Depth of field is also typically limited throughout the work which helps focus the film around the characters and their actions and emotions rather than their surroundings. This modernization of the story of Aaron Burr incorporates these technical aspects with modern scenery and a contemporary soundtrack to bring to life O'Keefe's short film.
ReplyDeleteJesse Tollison: "Aaron Burr, Part 2" is a perspective piece on that of Aaron Burr, the man who killed Alexander Hamilton in an infamous duel. Critically, I don't know how to feel about the piece. It provokes interesting, unique thoughts in that, if Burr claims exaggerations are coming from those in Hamilton's camp, then Burr himself's perspective must also be exaggerated. On the other hand, stylistically speaking, the mutation and crossover between period piece and modern interpretation is distracting and gets in the way of the narrative, pushing me away from the story.
ReplyDeleteMaddie Kennedy: "Aaron Burr, Part 2" by Dana O'Keefe was an interesting depiction of the man most famous for killing Alexander Hamilton in a duel. The film explores his perspective through a blend of recreations, archival photographs, and contemporary footage. The film succeeds in endowing Burr with a level of complexity that history has often denied him as the killer of Hamilton. As Kendrick Lamar says, "everybody gone respect the shooter, but the one in front of the gun lives forever." This film gives Burr the chance to tell his side of the story. The blend of footage was interesting and creative, and was in some ways more compelling than a traditional documentary. I enjoyed some of the small bits of humor in the film. It was interesting to see this uncommonly told story created prior to Hamilton the musical, and how they both dealt with the subject matter.
ReplyDeleteSavannah Stanley: Dana O'Keefe utilises an interesting mix of music and voice-over for her sound design for "Aaron Burr, Part 2." This, along with her use of cuts creates a unique narrative to tell an equally unique story. With the rise of the musical, Hamilton, we are obviously predisposed as an audience in Hamilton's favour regarding this topic. O'Keefe's narrative creates a gap between historical precedence and modern human emotion, which is emphasised by the mixture of historic costuming and modern settings and technology interspersed throughout the film. These bursts of anachronisms are assisted by shots that are short and flash across the screen in times of battle and repetitive, slightly altered variations of the same scene in shots regarding the duel and Aaron Burr's reflections upon it.
ReplyDeleteEarlier I mentioned the music, which was powerful and intense without being overly melancholy or upbeat. This choice, accompanied almost solely by Burr's voice, changed the mood of the film from biographical to almost fictitious. Burr became omnipotent and omnipresent, and while his actions become understandable, he becomes a more powerful being throughout the course of the film than he was at the beginning.
The overall effect was not of comedy, as is listed in the description, but is legitimately entertaining and consistently grasps the attention of the viewer by constantly altering our understanding of the world of the film through its use of cuts, repetition, and sound design.
Jack Beuckman: The short film "Aaron Burr, Part 2" by Dana O'Keefe is about Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton. The film talks about the true story of Aaron Burr and what really happened in the duel between Hamilton and Burr. The film was produced like a documentary. It had a voice over of an actor pretending to be Aaron Burr. The voice over was very good. The audio was very clear and the effect O’Keefe used on the actors voice fitted the style of the film well. The B-roll consisted of pictures of old historic pantings and footage of the actor portraying Burr reacting moments of Burr’s life. One of my favorite parts was the choice of music in the film. I like how many of the cuts and edits fitted with the beat of the music. The cinematography was really well done as well. I thought the lighting for the scene of Burr in the house practicing for the duel was very good. It fit with the music and the emotions O’Keefe was portraying. Overall I really liked the idea of the film and i thought it was executed very well.
ReplyDeleteMcKenzie Miller: Dana O’Keefe’s “Aaron Burr, Part 2” is a narrative told from the perspective of Aaron Burr on the duel between himself and Alexander Hamilton. The film is a modern day story of what happened between the pair and throughout history when they were alive. Most of the footage used was modern day reenactments of battles and wars along with some archival footage and pictures. This film is a take on what few people may believe: that Alexander Hamilton shot at Burr first. Burr is able to tell his side of the story and make his voice heard. I believe it was a very interesting short narrative and allowed the viewer to see that there are always two sides to a story especially in history.
ReplyDeleteTaylor Hendrix: The short film, “Aaron Burr: Part 2,” is a take on history with a twist. It shows the dual between Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr, but in modern times. This short film shows what happened in each other’s lifetimes in a modern way. The focus throughout the dual scene was kind of off. I am unsure if this was on purpose or not, but if it was, it was because the scene was in the past. With the dual being in the past, the unclear focus may mean that it is unclear to not only the audience, but the characters as well. The ominous voiceover throughout the film sounded as if the narrator was on a walkie talkie. This film choice was made because it is a twist on the war. The war did not have modern day technology, but with the modern day twist, it did! Overall, this short was comical, but I am not a big fan of history, so I did not enjoy it that much.
ReplyDeleteVictoria Walker: “Aaron Burr, Part II” is a short film created by Dana O’Keefe. This film tells a modern day version of the dual between Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr ,but from Aaron Burr’s perspective. I thought that was a unique way of telling the story because most history books only portray Hamilton as the victim and Burr as the villain. This film is important because it makes the view question the integrity of Hamilton. Moreover, I was impressed at how the director used modern day music that described New York at the 1:57 mark. Along with that she showed the viewers exactly where the dual took place but in modern day society. I thought was a cool idea and it was very well planned out. It also add to the lingering them associated with Aaron Burr being the forgotten man. Lightening was also another creative aspect of this film. The film depicted more of a pale color. That could essentially contribute to the gloomy tone of the film . Perhaps my favorite part of the film is at the end when Burr explains how he was not to blame from Hamilton death. I love the phrase “The only real difference between us is his hand shook and my mine never does. Also I really enjoyed the scene where he looks over Hamilton grave as if he is celebrating his accomplishment and saying he has the last laugh.
ReplyDeleteHannah Bynum: "Aaron Burr, Part 2" is an interesting, historical short film focusing on the infamous duel between Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr. In many cases when learning about history people hear one side of an event and assume that is the truth. This film attempts to change peoples perspective on these historical figures by exploring Burr's side of the story with a neat, modern twist. It was very interesting to watch under the idea that "history is a contested state". I believe that statement is true and made me wonder what other historical events I and many others view one-sidedly.
ReplyDelete