Hello, my children,

There is much debate as to the validity and purpose of differing magical components. As you all know, our tradition of magic is proud and monumental with accounts and precedence dating back millennia when the first folk had carved runes into the rocks of the caves of creation. 

 Such matters are important to consider, yet they are far from perfection. Everything shall be questioned, for these tales are but premonitions, constructed realities meant to support the “understanding” and rich historical narrative which those at the very height of magical comprehension spin in order to make it more difficult for students to shake off the boundaries of their education.

However, as a people’s magician, I hope to facilitate your ever extended search for powers great enough to subjugate worlds and realms infinitely large and incomprehensibly complex.

In order to do such a thing, we must first strip back the most basic components deemed necessary for these processes. The gold and effort one spends hampering their magical equations with this drivel is ludicrous, and it is time you know the difference between deceptive components and those of true substance.

Exhibit A: lavender, and all other components related to essential oils or scented balms, are likely to not have any place within our magic traditions. Now, of course, such things are useful in herbal remedies or in the relaxation of one’s mind before setting out to perform one’s daily rituals, however, this relatively recent addition remains a sign of mere minstrel-ship. 

Do not concern yourselves with simple medicines. That is not our goal, and the act of filling one’s ritual circle with flowers freshly picked from the meadow limits the purview of study within but a few months out of the year when harvested.

Similarly, honey is not useful when applied to medical salves or magical potions. Everything of that sort is useless and superfluous to merely make your products taste slightly better, a simple carnal distraction for working individuals.

On that note,

Exhibit B:

Blood is a tricky substance. One’s colleagues may be enamored with collecting, categorizing, and displaying their immense access to various creates and their nutrient byproducts, but it is not nearly as simple as finding your nearest cow and inserting a spout in its side like it were a tree brimming with sap. Furthermore, it is not as simple as asking a friend or subordinate of yours to volunteer a hand and let the blood spew forth just to get some samples.

The blood one collects for their rituals is distinct and purposeful for different types of magics, as many of you would also know, but the blood of the common human folk is absolutely not useful, There is nothing arcane about the blood of a human. Small folk and elves on the other hand are what one should collect to enhance their rituals.

Students often ask me as to whether what magic is, which I find to be an inane question that all should already have understood before coming to study at this institution of ours. I say that human blood does not possess any magical properties, yet the same is not true for those of sylvan descent… what could possibly be the origin of this strange distinction?

In our ever marching desire for a complete comprehension of the world around us, it angers me to need to highlight my own ignorance when providing a full explanation for your questions. I don’t know why sylvan blood is magical and human blood is non-magical, there is no known reason, substance, or property that we can trace, it is merely a fact that I am woefully underprepared to provide a satisfactory conclusion to your burning curiosity. 

But you all must trust me when saying that some substances provide us with no use, and others serve such an integral purpose to magical processes.

Until next time,

-Samuel Turner

Robert Eggers may only have two feature films under his belt, but he is one of the most exciting filmmakers on the rise. Despite only being 37 years old, he has already received numerous awards, and his films have been well received by critics and audiences alike. Prior to filmmaking, Eggers began his career as a theatrical director and designer in New York. He transitioned to film production in 2009, and served as production designer for 16 films. As soon as he took the plunge and made his directorial debut, he took the horror genre by storm.

Many people, myself included, have credited Eggers for ushering in the return of arthouse horror to the masses. His films masterfully blend history and myth with an overwhelming sense of dread. Paranoia, madness, and isolation are the true horror that plagues the human mind, and Eggers’ films The Witch and The Lighthouse are proof that no era is free from these terrors.

The Witch (2015)

I stand by my belief that The Witch is quite possibly the strongest directorial debut of the 2010s. Inspired by his childhood in New England and a long standing interest in witches, Eggers’ 2015 period horror film is a portrait of Puritan fear in 17th century America. Then-unknown Anya Taylor-Joy stars as Thomasin, the oldest daughter of an English settler family recently banished from their colony. Already the scapegoat of the family, two of her siblings disappear and the remaining two accuse her of witchcraft. Life escalates into a nightmare as her parents William (Ralph Ineson) and Katherine (Kate Dickie) fall deeper into their religious fear and paranoia.

Eggers performed extensive research to achieve the film’s historical accuracy. Costume designer Linda Muir created costumes with materials used at the time, and Eggers hired carpenters to build a historically correct house for the set. At some points, it’s genuinely hard to understand what is being said due to the historically correct accents used by the actors, especially for William. The meticulous detail thoroughly impressed and entertained me. I was fully enveloped in the world, which made the ending all the more chilling. If not for the witchcraft, this film could be a 16th century slice of life. However, the power of witchcraft consumes these settlers’ lives, testing their faith in God and each other. The ominous and sometimes graphic depictions of this power kept me hooked through the film’s menacing conclusion.

The Lighthouse (2019)

Eggers’ second film was intended to be an adaptation of Edgar Allan Poe’s final work “The Light-House”, and although Eggers and his brother Max (co-writer of the film) scrapped this idea the resulting film is just as disturbing as any Poe story. Another period horror, this time set in the 19th century, The Lighthouse shows two lighthouse keepers’ descent into madness. Filmed in a nearly square aspect ratio and entirely black and white, this film was also developed with great attention paid to historical fidelity. In fact, it was even shot using a film lens from the 1930s.

Just as soon as I thought I knew what was happening in The Lighthouse, the film began its full descent into chaos. The film enveloped me in the madness slowly, and by the time I reached the end I felt just as trapped and lost as Robert Pattinson’s character Ephraim Winslow. I lost my sense of time, and from there reality and dark fantasy blurred. The claustrophobic, lonely world that Winslow and Thomas Wake (Willem Dafoe) inhabit successfully hypnotized me like the constant spinning of a lighthouse’s lantern.

Currently Eggers is working on a film titled The Northman, a revenge thriller set in 10th century Iceland. Filming ended in December 2020, so hopefully a release date will be available soon. Reportedly Eggers has also been developing a remake of the 1922 silent horror film Nosferatu, though no news has been released in regards to it since 2016.

In just two feature films Robert Eggers has already earned almost universal acclaim. His dedication to research and ability to create an atmosphere that is both accurate and unnerving make him a prime candidate for “next greatest filmmaker of our time”. Whatever may lie ahead for Robert Eggers, I’ll be there day one to watch the future of horror unfold before my eyes.

Shout-out to Godzilla Vs. Kong! An incredibly fun monster movie to watch with friends! I think many people assume that as a film major I wouldn’t like a movie like this because it isn’t particularly “sophisticated” or “thought-out”. But really, what that is assuming is that I only can watch movies for its artistic value, which is simply not true. In the end, Godzilla V. Kong and Parasite are two different movies, and therefore you have to watch them differently to appreciate them.

That being said, I’d venture to say that there is most certainly a wrong way to watch any movie. And that is… with the lights on. That is, watching a film while openly welcoming outside distractions that will take you away from the movie. There’s a reason (besides the popcorn) that movie theaters were such a staple in our culture pre-quarantine. The darkness, the carpeted, non-creaky floors, and especially the massive screen that no matter what you can see the whole of. Even if you’re constantly making fun of it with your friends next to you, you are still being surrounded by that movie. There’s an inherent closeness between the audience and the film that movie theaters facilitate.

Now, compare this to throwing on something while your roommates cook dinner. No matter how much you like the movie, your environment just wants to suck you out of it. Even a diehard filmophile would have a tough time picking up exactly what that filmmaker wanted. I can’t help but feel bad! All of the labor and the hours of sleep lost just for you to check your phone every 5 minutes while watching what they poured everything into.

Christopher Nolan was not in the right when he demanded the theatrical release of Tennent. He was being selfish, ignorant, and entitled. But I understand why he yearned for people to “experience” his movie, not just to see it. I don’t agree, but I can sympathize. And I hope you can too… at least a little.

Best,

Jonah J Sobczak

-jonahso