The Weldon Times

The Student Newspaper at Dalhousie Law

[theweldontimes-blog]

Introduction (By: Paul Neville)

This was my second (and unfortunately last) Atlantic Film Festival. The AFF gives movie lovers a chance to mainline movies for one week. Last year I only went to a few movies. This year, my goal was to go to a movie every night. Popcorn was most definitely involved.

  I want to acknowledge the great jobs the programmers do for the AFF. They manage to spotlight Atlantic and Canadian talent, while mixing in titles that have been huge on the international festival circuit. At almost every show time you’re battling with yourself over which movie to see. There’s an abundance of riches on display.

  That being said, if there was something I could wish for next year, it’s that they provide more repeat showing of movies. I recognize that there’s less theater capacity in Halifax than there is in Toronto, for example. But it’s unfortunate that local movies like Bunker 6 are only shown once at the same time as V/H/S/2. Presumably, both movies draw from a similar audience. A second showing might alleviate that problem.

  Moreover, most of the movies often ran long. This led to a situation where, in theory, if things were running on schedule, you could see two movies in one night. In practice, this usually never happened. I ended up missing out on the only showing of a movie because another ran long.

  But these are minor complaints. On the whole, the AFF provided what must be one of its strongest slates ever. For those who might check it out next year, I’d say make an effort to see as many local films as possible. I spent a little too much time on movies I’d be able to see in theater a week later, and it’s something I regret. I also wish I had been able to see more of the shorts.

  Lastly, congratulations to Rogers, which continues to act as a parody of itself by serving as the AFF’s corporate sponsor while making sure that none of their customers can get reception while waiting in line. Seeing their logo in front of every movie always produced a laugh.

  Movies I wish I’d seen but didn’t: Tracks, Blue is the Warmest Color, Bunker 6, Cheap Thrills, The Grand Seduction.

[theweldontimes-blog]

There Are Monsters (By: Paul Neville)

"Fuck composition, we're just going to shoot it." I'm paraphrasing one of the characters in Jay Dahl's There Are Monsters when they describe their plan for shooting the documentary within the story. Judging from There Are Monsters, it was also the philosophy on the set of this movie.

  There Are Monsters is based on a short film by the same creative team from a few years ago. It concerns four young people who set out to make a documentary. Weird things happen along the way. Eventually, they are picked off one by one by an army of monsters. You see everything coming from a mile away.

  It's a found footage movie, in of itself not a bad technique - V/H/S/2, another film at the AFF, makes fine use of it. But Monsters uses it inconsistently; the explanation for these events being filmed is that the characters are videotaping the behind-the-scenes of a documentary they are making. This does not explain the enumerate occasions where scenes are filmed in the same style but without the possibility of a character holding a camera. The found footage device is used at the convenience of the filmmaker, not because it helps tell the story more effectively. It’s his excuse for the movie being unintelligible, poorly shot and out of focus, but it doesn’t earn it.

  I hesitate to pile on too much. The director, introducing the movie, revealed he had been working on it for five years. Anyone who spends that much time working on an artistic project should be commended. This is doubly true for those brave enough to submit their work to an audience. Without a doubt there are genuine moments of terror, and many moments of suspense are quite effective. The performances are uniformly strong, though no one is really given a character with any real depth – a day later, I couldn't tell you any of their names. Inevitably, they all get killed in less and less interesting ways. Lambs to the slaughter here.

  The short film featured older actors in the lead roles, and an isolated house for a setting, two things that helped establish a sense of realism. For the feature, the older couple has been replaced by four attractive, young documentarians. One must begin asking whether Cabin in the Woods has ruined all movies with this premise? In light of Cabin, it was hard not to chuckle at a scene un-ironically set at an ominous gas station, the stoner character archetype, or the increasingly ridiculous behavior of the characters.

  The downside to the five-year post-production is the chance that something else steals your thunder. "I'm in a fucking horror movie", a character quips. It's a genuinely funny line, well delivered. But it seems so insubstantial when compared to Cabin's total self-awareness. You can almost picture the Director patting himself on the back when he came up with it in the pre-Cabin days. Now, it just a tease for better movie that exists elsewhere.

  There Are Monsters was billed as the scariest movie to come out of Atlantic Canada. On the strength of that tagline, I checked it out. In retrospect, I’m not sure how meaningful that marketing hook is. After all, I have no idea how many horror movies have come out of Atlantic Canada. I gather not many, so it’s kind of like selling something as being the best romantic comedy about genocide [The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel Rwanda? Shake Hands with the Devil Wears Prada? Oh god, I am so sorry –Ed.]

  Aside from being unhelpful, the marketing hook was also not true - the short film was scarier.

  Final Rating: (D+)

[theweldontimes-blog]

The Double (By: Paul Neville)

There are two caveats that need to be registered at the top of this review. First, this was my sixth movie in six days, which means I may not have been in the right state to watch it. Second, I know nothing when it comes to Russian literature. This movie was based on a Dostoyevsky short story, so it’s possible I’m missing something. In all honesty, Albert should probably be writing this review.

  Nevertheless, I’ll try my best. Jesse Eisenberg plays a man working for a company; it’s set seemingly in the future, only everything looks dystopian and communist Russian-like. One day, his exact double shows up and begins undermining everything in Mr. Eisenberg 1’s life, from performing better at the same job to stirring the interest from his unrequited crush (Mia Wasikowska). When asked why she seems interested in Eisenberg 2, she says it’s something about his face.

  The movie is funny and clever. The set design is impressive and perfectly cold. By and large, it does what it sets out to do (I think). It’s a movie about shifting identity, taking place in a heightened reality, but ultimately, it’s pretty straightforward. I want to like it, but it left me cold. Perhaps it’s meant to be admired from an intellectual perspective rather than loved from an emotional one.

  The possibility exists that I’m just not the target audience for The Double. I haven’t seen Terry Gilliam’s Brazil, which I gather heavily influences this movie. I also like my head-trip movies to be a little more of a trip. For as much as I enjoyed observing this movie, I never felt myself totally connecting with it. It was too simple for a weird movie, and too weird to be a simple movie.

  But The Double gets points for ambition, and for being different. I’d rather someone swing for the fences than play it safe. The Double definitely isn’t a home run, but there’s something there. It’s like a beautiful house I like looking at that I’d never live in.   

  Final Rating: (B-)

[theweldontimes-blog]

Blackfish (By: Paul Neville)

Blackfish will make retroactively hate your parents for taking you to Seaworld as a kid. It’s also one of the best documentaries of the year. I saw this great film once over the summer and gladly watched it again during the AFF.

  The movie is a well-constructed takedown of whale captivity. Former Seaworld employees and awesomely charming researchers straight out of a dark-roomed thriller provide the testimonials. Bit by bit the film makes a convincing case that all animals held in captivity at Seaworld should be released.

  This is not as easy a case as it would seem. The movie gives us the story of Tilikum, a whale involved with the deaths of three people; most recently, he attacked and killed experienced trainer Dawn Brancheau. The incident spawned a contentious lawsuit about the inherent dangers of getting in the water with orcas. In tracing Tilikum’s story and the conditions of his capture, Blackfish makes you weigh sympathy for the animals against sympathy for those who are killed by them.

  But, I’d argue anyone who likes animals (or has a soul) will come out feeling worse for Tilikum than the dead humans. The movie seems to be arguing that trainers are at least partly to blame for their own demise; one researcher notes that he’s been around orcas in the water hundreds of times, but has never gotten out of his boat. The implication of his statement is clear.

  It’s a tricky moral position to take. The trainers interviewed all seem to genuinely care for these animals. Surely, the deceaseds similarly found themselves conflicted between their love for the animals and their doubts about the morality of animal capture. It’s the corporate overlords at Seaworld that come out like the true villains. We see evidence that they under-inform their staff about the dangers of working with these animals. Excerpts of testimony by Seaworld blaming Brancheau for her own death are mustache-twirlingly evil.  How should we feel about a movie that spends more sympathy for the killer whale than the death of a human? The answer might not be important.

  After all, documentaries don’t need to be objective. Arguably all the best ones have a clear point of view. Even strict adherence of objectivity is a point of view. Blackfish thinks the capture of whales is inhumane. It presents convincing evidence that this is the case. It’s allowed that point of view. What makes is a great documentary is that it convinces you.

  Perhaps the most effective section is the origin story of Tilikum. Captured for a ramshackle park in British Columbia called Sealand of the Pacific, we see footage of the dark shed where Tilikum was kept at night long after he outgrew it. Stories are conveyed of ritual beatings at the hands (fins?) of the other whales in captivity. Now, following the death of Brancheau, he’s kept in isolation. We see footage of him floating there, looking sad in his own tank at Seaworld, used for breeding but little else. Even knowing he would probably kill me, I still wanted to get in the water and give him a hug.

  There seems to be a consensus on the topic of animal cruelty: if you do it, you’re an asshole. No one would have felt bad if Michael Vick’s dog bit his hand off. Arguably, we view animals as morally blameless in any interaction with humans. Bad behavior is usually (rightly) passed onto the owner. Certainly, everyone would rather have had Seaworld shut down twenty years ago, and see no one die; but if Seaworld’s whales kill trainers, that’s Seaworld’s fault, not the whales’. They’re the owners, and they were the ones who put the whales in bathtubs for the remainder of their lives. It’s sort of an end-around by the movie on the issue of victim blaming. But if we’ve learned anything over the last five years, it’s that corporations are the easiest villains to root against since Nazis. So far be it for me to blame the whale when I could blame Seaworld.  

  On second viewing, it was easier to notice some post-production trickery to re-enact some of scenes. Sound effects of crying whales are definitely sad. But I’m pretty sure the sound isn’t from the video being shown, and that the video isn’t of the actual event being discussed, to cite one example. This is but a minor nit, as the overall experience is moving and powerful. Anyone who sees this should immediately want to sign every petition in favor of releasing whales back into the wild. Free Willy.

  Final Rating: (-A)

[theweldontimes-blog]

Letter from the Editors (By: Suzanne Kittell)

Well, OCIs have come and gone, and many of you are now wallowing in purgatory. Some of you might not have even had the chance to OCI with your top picks. I’m here to tell you, I know that feel, bro. I’m going to get personal with you in order to give you a couple pointers in a little segment I like to call “Suzie got no love through OCIs”.

  Pointer #1: Go Where You’re Wanted

For those of you who applied to multiple cities, but don’t get hired this round, focus your efforts next year on the city that showed you the most love during OCIs. Spend your summer establishing a connection between yourself and that city, so that when you apply again, your interviewers will see that you’re serious about staying.

  Pointer #2: Cold Call, Cold Call, Cold Call

If you don’t get hired through OCIs, call around to law firms who don’t participate in the process. They need students too. And if need be, work for free. A summer of volunteering at a law firm looks great on a resume, and shows that you’re goal-oriented. If a firm says no, convince them. Sending a cover letter gives you a great chance to let a firm know how much they stand to benefit by having free help.

  Pointer #3: Keep Your Eyes Peeled

A lot of firms hire throughout the year, not just during recruitment. Keep on the lookout for job postings through the CDO, NALP, firm websites, and the multitude of newspapers and magazines available in the lobby of Weldon.

  Pointer #4: Keep in Touch With Your Interviewers

Maintain relationships where you’re serious about trying again. Sending an email after an unsuccessful round of interviews asking where you went wrong can either provide you with the right goals, or save you the time of reapplying (A recruiter told me I wasn’t hired because of my field of study in undergrad…no way to change that now).

  Pointer #5: Turn Your Faults Into Success Stories

Once you know or have a good idea why you struck out, isolate that downfall and figure out how you’ll address it in the next round of interviews. Working as a student in a law firm is ALL about how quickly you can adapt, so bouncing back from a bad grade, or learning to balance life and school is a huge skill. Tell them how you got to that point, and how what you learned will make you a better hire. (I told my interviewers specifics about how I changed my study habits from 1L to 2L).

  Pointer #6 (And the most important of all): Do You, Bro

As soon as the recruitment process begins, you’re stuck in Weldon with hundreds of other people essentially competing with each other. You’ll have to deal with people snooping around your prospects, humblebragging their own, and talking incessantly about jobs. This can be especially painful once you’re out of the game and certain people insist on reminding you daily. What you have to keep in mind is that you’re not here to be a cookie-cutter candidate; you’re here to develop and hone your personal skills and interests in order to find a job that fits you. If it takes you until after graduation to find that job, who cares? It’s better to find the right place late than force yourself into the wrong place early.

 The next few months may suck; I’ve been there. But it ain’t over yet. Celebrate your friends’ successes, never bad-mouth a firm, and keep your eyes on the prize. Go get ‘em, Tiger.

[theweldontimes-blog]

Student Spotlight: Gillian Angrove (By: Hannah Choo)

              You see them every day (maybe even everywhere since Halifax is so small), but how well do you know your fellow Weldonites? Do you know their life before or outside of law school? Their biggest fears? Their inspiration? In order to learn more about the people you sit with in class, each issue will have an article focusing on a student. It will be a chance for us to get to know one another a little better – putting a story to a face, rather than just a name, or worse, just a label: classmate. First up is the wonderful Ms. Gillian Angrove (3L).

             You might know Gillian as the current co-chair of the Dalhousie Feminist Legal Association, or as the previous coordinator for the Pro-Bono Program. Maybe you know her as the girl with the contagious smile/laugh. Or, the one who is always cold, bundled up in puffy and wooly jackets that are two-sizes too big for her. Regardless, not many of you would know that some of the people in her long list of personal heroes include Supreme Court judges (Justice Abella and L’Heureux-Dube), lawyers (Katrina Pacey and Joe Arvay) and celebrities (Clair Huxtable and Jay-Z). Nor would you know that the Vancouver Island native had all sorts of experience before moving across the country to start her legal career at Dalhousie.

            Gillian has always been involved at school. “I was a huge nerd – no shame,” she said. She was part of the student societies for both of her undergraduate majors, Geography and Environmental Studies at the University of Victoria. Before graduating, she participated in the school’s co-op program and travelled to Ghana with “Students without Boarders” to work with a Ghanaian NGO on access to education for girls, as well as advocating for women’s reproductive rights. It was an experience that changed her life forever – one that taught her to have perspective and be grateful for what she has: “We only had electricity every other day, and had to get our water from the well which we walked to and rationed for the week,” she explained. “I miss Ghana and its people every day.”  

After her undergraduate studies, Gillian continued to work with youth in the education field. She soon moved to Vancouver to work for Children of the Street Society, a non-profit started after the Executive Director lost her thirteen-year-old daughter to drug addiction and sexual exploitation. Gillian had to travel all over the province to deliver workshops about the prevention of sexual exploitation to elementary and secondary schools. She shared the Executive Director’s personal story with the students, and spoke about human trafficking, recruitment into the sex trade and online exploitation. “It was a tough job, but incredibly rewarding,” she recalled.

Due to her experience working with young kids and teenagers, she always thought she wanted to become a teacher.  But while working for the Children of the Street Society, Gillian was also volunteering at the Downtown Eastside Women’s Centre. This was the time of the Missing Women Inquiry. “On a daily basis, I was energized and inspired by the women and children who were just some of the most courageous people I have ever know,” she said. “Those women and children inspired me to go to law school.”

             It was a mix of her love for the ocean, her mom’s upbringing in Nova Scotia and listening to Rankin Family on repeat during her childhood that led Gillian to Dalhousie. “I romanticized the east coast,” she said. “And I have to say, living here has exceeded all of my expectations.” However, her first day at law school was not as easy as settling down in Halifax. “I think I was far too naïve to be fearful. I didn’t attend any open houses before applying, and I didn’t talk to any students about their experiences. It wasn’t until the night before our very first day that I felt the nerves. I stayed up until six am, fell asleep for two hours, and then headed into school. So glad the adrenaline kept me going that day!”

Looking back on her two years, the first day jitters seem to be nothing compared to her current worries. When asked about her biggest fear as a 3L, Gillian explained that it was about leaving Weldon and not having contributed to making it a better place. “I love our school,” she said. “But I think there are things that could be done to make it just off the charts amazing. The space itself isn’t very welcoming or inclusive. Also, I am worried that we are really limiting access to legal education with such a high tuition, and ability for graduating students to pursue social justice careers.” As to any other worries during her final year at Weldon? “The temperature – please, if someone is reading this and knows where the hidden thermostat are, please turn up the temperature.”

Gillian shared that she could not have made it through law school without the people – the school staff, professors and her fellow students, as well as her partner, Ben and her family – especially after experiencing the most challenging moment of her life here. While studying for her first exams in December, her best friend from back home called. “Unbeknownst to many, her Dad had been struggling with depression for a little while, and he committed suicide,” said Gillian. “It’s still hard to even think about. I didn’t know what to do – or how I was going to get through exams if I did stay to write them. I ended up staying in Halifax and getting through the exam period, with the help of a few close friends. To this day, I wish I had just gone home.” What did she learn from this experience? “That it’s okay to put life before law school – and it’s okay to go seek out the support of the staff and faculty at the law school.” 

As much as she would miss the people and the school when she leaves, Gillian is looking forward to the next chapter of her legal career: a clerkship with the Federal Court of Canada in Ottawa. And while she does not have a personal motto, she will leave you with a quote (from Harper Lee’s “To Kill a Mockingbird”) that she is and will continue to be inspired by: “The one thing that doesn’t abide by majority is a person’s conscious.”

[theweldontimes-blog]

Prisoners (By: Paul Neville)

In Quebecois director Dennis Villeneuve’s English-language debut, Prisoners, the characters live by the same ideology: pray for the best, prepare for the worst.  The movie asks what someone does when something they can’t prepare for happens. 9/11, Iraq, Abu Ghraib, the subprime mortgage crisis, it’s all here; pick your metaphor. This is an examination of the death of America since the dawn of the century masquerading as a thriller.

  I’m making it sound more pretentious than it is. Ultimately, Prisoners is a successful movie because you will be on the edge of your seat. It’s two and a half hours, but it feels much shorter. Hugh Jackman and Mario Bello play parents who take their family over to friends’ house for Thanksgiving (The friends are well played by Terrence Howard and Viola Davis). Each couple has a young daughter; at some point, they disappear. The trail leads to the world’s most hateable man, Paul Dano. From there, we get one of the best pieces of popular cinema about 9/11 since The Dark Knight.

  Weirdly, Prisoners shares a lot in common with the Batman sequel. Both feature performance from super-creep David Dastmalchian, playing a super-creep. Both feature movie-stealing turns from a Brokeback Mountain alum. Both explicitly invoke moral questions in the wake of 9/11. I’ve only seen Prisoners once, but I’m also pretty sure that, like The Dark Knight, its story won’t hold up over multiple viewings. 

  Which is the downside to this movie. It suffers from the same problem as many mysteries: the questions are more captivating than the answer. The first two hours are infinitely more interesting than the last thirty. The resolution makes sense, but it’s still a little convoluted. Ultimately, the plot is somewhere between pulp fiction and airport fiction. But, the acting, and the visuals, elevates this to something bordering on special.

  Cinematographer Roger Deakins makes a tremendous contribution to the movie. The Brit is making a case for himself as the Michael Jordan of cinematographers. He manages to make empty grocery-store parking lots look like haunted graveyards. Every house in the suburbs looks somehow menacing; we wonder what might be happening inside. Never has the death of America looked so beautiful. The movie is dark, but it’s always stunning.

  Villeneuve should also receive tremendous credit. The way he constructs the movie makes you forget you’re watching the umpteenth variation of the same story. He portrays scenes of explosive emotional outbursts with perfect restraint, as he showed with his previous film, Incendies. In lesser hands, Jackman’s performance could have steered off the track. Instead, he delivers a few moments that could go down as the finest of his career.

  Jake Gyllenhaal’s Detective Loki, however, is the best part of the movie. Sporting a great haircut and a cool facial tick I spent two days trying to recreate, he’s about as far away form Donnie Darko as he’s ever been. We get a hint of a dark past from the script, but it’s Gyllenhaal’s performance that fills in the gaps. It’s too bad that the other supporting characters don’t feel anywhere near as well fleshed out.

  Although maybe the best part of the movie is what it doesn’t have: an explosion. Or anything computer generated for that matter. No city is ever in peril. The stakes are much lower – just the disappearance of two kids. But the stakes are personal, and we care way more for those kids than the millions of people that Iron Man, Superman and Captain Kirk fought to save this summer. With a movie climate that favours big spectacle at the expense of everything else, it’s rare to have a movie that lets a bunch of good actors carry a solid story. When we get one, it feels like a drop of water for the dehydrated.

  Prisoners is an annoyingly perfect title. It refers of course to the people literally imprisoned during the course of the story. But the characters are all prisoners of circumstance. The boy who is abused by a priest; the carpenter who barely gets enough work in this economy; the too-smart detective in a shoddy police department. Everyone is stuck in a place where bad things happen to good people, and there isn't a damn thing they can do about it. The movie depicts people of faith in a world where no god exists. At least in our world we know there are movie gods. They might be dying, but they're still around. How else can you explain a movie like Prisoners? 

Final Rating: (B+)

[theweldontimes-blog]

Don Jon (By: Paul Neville)

In Don Jon, everything is porn – magazine advertisements, television commercials, even romantic comedies. Everything we are being sold is wish fulfillment; empty, and devaluing “the real thing”. Its main character, the titular Jon, is addicted to online pornography. He even prefers it to sex with a real woman. For a generation of people raised with an Internet connection, it will resonate. So how much does it matter that it’s essentially a romantic comedy? It’s a good one, for sure. But it’s getting high on its own supply.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays Jon, basically channelling The Situation (marking a definite career high for The Situation) [For his low, see the Comedy Central Roast of Donald Trump – Ed.]. Jon is immersed in the GTL lifestyle. This includes going to the club and picking up as many 10’s as possible. Since it’s Joseph Gordon-Levitt, and since he wears awesome V-neck sweaters, he ends up with the ultimate 10, Barbara (Scarlett Johansson). Problem is, even the ultimate 10 can’t live up to the standard of Jon’s online girls.

  The movie is full of interesting ideas, and yet, it underexplores all of them. Barbara, for her part, loves romantic comedies populated by the likes of Channing Tatum and Anne Hathaway. Don Jon argues that, like porn, these romantic comedies package false expectations that inhibit our ability to expect “normal” from our relationships. Porn also corrupts how we interact with the institutions in our life. Sinning and going to church to confess is easier and more efficient than actually not sinning. Not sinning would require actual work. Confessing is a hustle-free transaction. The movie repeats the cycle of porn, club, church, family to comedic effect. But it’s not quite as insightful about these things as it thinks it is.

  On balance, it’s an enjoyable movie. Gordon-Levitt has quickly become one of the best actors of his generation. Taking on writing and directing duties for the first time, he shows promise. Scarlett Johansson is great playing J-Woww with a soul. Julianne Moore comes into the picture late and is arguably the best part of the movie (once again proving the rule: Julianne Moore + movie = better movie). Shout out to Tony Danza who is great as Jon’s dad, in what must be 2013’s most effective use of steroids.

  It’s the kind of movie that’s easy to watch, so you should probably watch it if it’s on. Still, it’s a bit of a missed opportunity. It wants to speak to how the pornography culture has affected our lives, but undermines its own message. After all, porn addiction is just a Julianne-Moore-showing-you-the-way away form being cured. The porno version, Don’s Jon, writes itself.

  Even though it tries to take it seriously, it mostly uses porn addiction to mine laughs. Shame, another recent movie that tackled sex addiction, made you hate your life after you watched it. It was also a better movie. It did for sex was Requiem for a Dream did for drug use. Don Jon treads in the same waters, but doesn’t provoke the same kind of soul crushing experience. But that’s not necessarily what everyone wants from a movie. Some people want a happier ending. Don Jon wants us to believe that chasing those endings can deprive a person of true happiness. Unless Julianne Moore is involved.

Final Rating: (B)

[theweldontimes-blog]

Law School as a Two Year Degree (By: Alex Bruvels)

  There are two ways to view a law degree. The first is as a professional degree. It is a means to accessing gainful employment with a good salary. The second is as an academic pursuit of higher knowledge. To learn the foundation of law, its policy underpinnings, master their application while learning to constructively question and challenge the concepts you as a law student are taught. The romantic soul of this writer yearns for the reality of the latter. However, as a debt-ridden cynic I acknowledge the former as the more valid descriptor.  Adapting the first view, Canadian law school as a professional degree, there is a strong argument to be made that it could be offered as a two-year as opposed to a three-year program.

The impetuses for a two-year program are numerous. Law school tuition is increasing exponentially annually, student enrolment is rising, available postgraduate employment opportunities are declining and despite these factors, new Canadian law schools are opening.  The common denominator is two veined; students accumulate more debt with poorer employment prospects.  At least a partial solution is to ease this burden by diminishing the cost of obtaining a law degree. This can be achieved by one less year of tuition and associated costs, coupled with the gain of entrance into the workforce one year earlier. Likely, if law faculties did adapt the two-year program, tuition would be raised substantially to offset the loss of tuition formerly generated by third year enrolment. Nonetheless, the student would still ultimately save funds.

  To successfully implement the transition to a two-year program would require cooperation and adaption by all Canadian law schools to avoid a perceived hierarchy that would slot the three-year program institutions atop the two-year program institutions as offering a superior education. Two obstacles arise: first, advocates must convince law schools to transition and second, convince all law faculties to transition to prevent dissenters from undermining the necessary unity required for the changeover.  Neither of these tasks is easy to accomplish and to do so requires further investigation to successfully formulate a strategy to implement the potential transition.

  Using Schulich as a template, virtually all courses would be mandatory. A two-year law degree would see first year courses largely the same, with the exception of the elimination of Public, and Constitutional switching from second to first year as a replacement. Second year would require students to take (with corresponding credit hours indicated): Civil Procedure (4), Evidence (4), Professional Responsibility (2), Business Associations (4), Family (4), Administrative (4), Tax (4), Wills and Estates (3), Compulsory Moot (1) and a mandatory paper course (3), which would offer a choice from a specified bundle of three options.  A student taking this course load would cover what are viewed as the core competencies amongst professors, legal practitioners and students. Though there is certainly room for debate and accordingly tweaking of this list, it does demonstrate that conceptually, a two-year degree can feasibly cover the foundational aspects of a legal education.

  This format would admittedly diminish the overall quality of the degree. Students would have less opportunity to unearth their likes and dislikes vis-à-vis areas of the law. Equally important losses include: participation in practical clinics such as Dalhousie Legal Aid, optional mooting and exchanges. Perhaps the gravest damage would be to the societal aspects of Schulich, which have always been a crown jewel and source of pride for the institution. Given the reduced continuity in student population, pivotal societies such as Domus Legis and the Law Students' Society would suffer from reduced leadership. Accordingly, the activeness of these groups and their contributions to the currently thriving Schulich community would likely diminish.

  It is debatable whether students would choose a streamlined, cost effective but less enriched academic experience over the traditional format. Given the recognition of the necessity of a shift toward a more pragmatic model of post secondary education for not only law but also all university faculties due to shifting market paradigms, law students would likely favour the two-year degree. The next step would be to open a forum for discussion on how to lobby law Canadian law schools on a national scale to adapt the plan. 

[theweldontimes-blog]

Love It or Lease It: The Plight of Tenants in Nova Scotia (By: Alex Hartwig)

As a friend of mine once sagely put it: "Nova Scotia is a third-world country with first-world infrastructure". In many ways I would consider this a complement. Halifax shares many of the features that I associate with my favourite tropical destinations: spectacular sunrises, swerving bicycles, boardwalk buskers, bustling markets, toothless smiles, jaunty tunes, daytime drink specials, old people who tell stories. The ocean, and all of the delicious and beer-battered things that live in it. This is why I am in Halifax, and this why I love it. 

But when it comes to Nova Scotia's tenancy laws, a dose of the twenty-first century wouldn't hurt. 

If you are a student, or young, or low income, or afraid of commitment, there is a very good chance that you rent a place rather than own one. Despite the many Halifactions of people who rent the law in Nova Scotia leans heavily in favour of landlords, more so than perhaps any other province in Canada. Of the many problems that tenants routinely experience, some of the most common are as follows:

1) Application Fees

 These are fees that a rental companies charge you just to apply for an apartment (not to be confused with a security deposit - see below). They are straight-up illegal (Residential Tenancies Act section 6 if you're playing along at home), but there is nothing stopping a landlord or rental company for asking for one regardless. Some companies post it on their websites. I could name names if it weren't for these dastardly laws on defamation. Sure, you could try and recover the fee through a residential tenancies hearing, but the $30.25 application fee plus the trip out to Bayer's Lake will probably cost more than the deposit itself. So, unless you really want to stick it to the man, buy two fewer pitchers on the weekend and call it even. 

2) Bedbugs

These were an urban legend (literally - I'm from a small town) before I moved here. Often, when a tenant complains to a landlord about bedbugs, the landlord will say the tenant brought them in with their filthy mattress, furniture, et cetera, and do nothing. Solution? Take a ton of photographs, talk to your neighbours, and pester you landlord repeatedly. In writing. The right to a bedbug-free environment falls under the delightful catch-all of "Condition of Premises" at s. 9(1) of the RTA. Yes, it is your landlord's problem, unless they can prove that the bedbugs moved in with you. Try dropping the words "tenancy hearing" and see if the landlord doesn't squirm. Until then, good night. Sleep tight. 

3) Rent Control

This one has been in the news lately, because Nova Scotia has none. Rent can only be increased once within each anniversary of your lease being signed. However there is NO LIMIT on how high your rent can be increased. Nova Scotia hasn't had rent control since the 90s, and if your landlord feels like increasing your rent ten-fold, they can. Scary huh?  

Lack of rent control allows for another shitty possibility: economic eviction. In November of 2011 the RTA was amended to provide security of tenure regardless of how long you've been at your current apartment, but this doesn't mean squat if your landlord doesn't like you and decides to up your monthly to $4,000 next fall. With an election looming this issue is being pushed in some quarters but without sufficient media attention. I would say vote accordingly but I couldn't say who for ...

4) Security Deposits

Most of us have paid a deposit. Some of us can expect to see that money again. Landlords can charge up to half a month's rent to be held in deposit pending any damage done to the property. This is meant to be a kinder alternative to the first-and-last required in many other provinces. In theory the landlord has to apply to keep the deposit. In practice they pocket it, claiming that the smudge on the roof of your oven costs $500 to clean. Then the tenant has to do the legwork to get it back. For those of us moving out of province this is not even an option. It would be the easiest thing in the world to require that all deposits be held in trust pending a successful application by the landlord. Instead, security deposits are quick cash for any slumlord and probably the worst thing about rentals out here.

Being a tenant will always kind of blow. Not being able to paint the walls or tear up the floorboards is an affront to personal freedom. Still, this province can do better. For all its rustic charm and natural beauty Nova Scotia could afford to be a little less shantytown and a little more three-star resort. Preferably with fewer bedbugs.  

[theweldontimes-blog]

The 2013-14 Smith Shield Mooters Collectors Cards. 

[theweldontimes-blog]

Malala vs. Miley?

Suzanne Kittell

Editor-in-Chief, Weldon Times

I started reading The Feminine Mystique this week; I’d been meaning to for a long time now and I’m glad I finally did. After spending the summer hearing critics and peers alike say “Blurred Lines” is just a song, just a music video, I had a wakeup call about the dissonance between where we think Feminism has taken us, and how we actually treat these issues when they arise.

  The mere thought of buying clothes for work exhausted me as questions ran through my mind that never occur to the men I work with: Does this suit accentuate my figure too much? Not enough? Does this necklace draw too much attention to my cleavage? I bought bras that flattened my chest because I was afraid the natural size of my breasts made me look unprofessional. Nevermind being told to smile by men on the subway, and being ogled by men on the patio beside my apartment. But I could be conscious of all that unfair pressure and still let it control me. I’m an intelligent woman working in a professional career, and I still worry about how my hips look in a skirt.

  There was always a resistance I personally felt towards capital-F-Feminism. I didn’t want to acknowledge that we were fighting different battles from the men we worked alongside; that always felt to me like defeat. I thought, let me beat my male classmates to the top grades, to the awards, to the jobs, and then we’ll see who needs to sit around and talk about Feminism. This summer taught me that I do; that we do.

  So here I am, a couple of chapters into Betty Friedan’s monumental work, and noticing the people around me employing the very same logic that was used to oppress women half a century ago.

  Today, I came across the following meme comparing Miley Cyrus to Malala Yousafzai:

  We are constantly being valued by how conservative or provocative our clothing is. I try to minimize my bust at work because we very much live in a culture of slut shaming. We actually partake in a popular culture that praises Robin Thicke for using nude women as props in a song about sex, and shames Miley Cyrus for being nude herself in a song about vulnerability. For reference, here are screen captures of either video at their height of nudity:

Robin Thicke - Blurred Lines

Miley Cyrus - Wrecking Ball

Feminist outcry regarding the unobscured female nudity in Thicke’s video was quickly responded to dismissively. That’s what hip hop has always been like. Those girls in the video chose to be nude. They’re attractive and they’re using that to their advantage. What’s the big deal? Cyrus has been defending her actions on the talk show circuit and in open letters for months. Glamour magazine offered an interview with Robin Thicke’s wife about the video. Their hard-hitting question was whether the claim ‘Robin Thicke has a big dick’ is true.

  There’s clearly a problem here. So why are we so tempted to take Malala’s great accomplishments and use them to diminish the North American woman’s struggle with her sexuality? Why are we so eager to shrug off a woman’s attempt to exert power over her own body in a time where teenaged girls are committing suicide after their rapists are pursued half-heartedly? Instead of acknowledging what women like Cyrus are trying to achieve, we engage in veiled slut-shaming.

  Enough has been said back and forth in the barrage of open letters that followed Sinead O’Connor’s advice to Cyrus. The issue is certainly complex and can’t be fully explored in a column of this kind; there are pressures to account for, and assumptions to be scrutinized, and this is not an adequate venue.

  However, what can be said is that the greatest enemy Feminism has to overcome is not men; it is women who refuse to work together. There is no need to rank the struggles of the women of different cultures, or to give priority to one over another. Oppression exists in many different forms and until we realize that Miley and Malala are fighting in the same war, we can never win.  

[theweldontimes-blog]

WELLNESS AT WELDON - COMMUNITY UPDATE

  Visit the Weldon Times Online or the Wellness Committee Online for direct links

www.facebook.com/theweldontimes

theweldontimes.tumblr.com

@theweldontimes 

www.facebook.com/wellnessatweldon

@wellnessatweldon 

  FOR YOUR BODY

            Run or Dye Marathon – September 28

            5km Zombie Trail Run – September 28

FOR YOUR BRAIN

            Culture Days – September 28, 29, 30

            Symphony Nova Scotia Magnificent Mozart – October 3

            Savage Love, An Evening with Dan Savage – October 3

            Nocturne: Art at Night – October 19

            Shakespeare by the Sea – October 19-November 3

FOR YOUR SOUL

            Psychic Protection & Energetic Self Care @ Little Mysteries* – October 16

* Dal Students receive a 15% discount of regularly priced books at   Little Mysteries with student ID

Wellness Expo***** – October 19-20

****Get in for free with the Wellness Committee

FOR YOUR CAREER

            Leading Ladies Martini Mixer @ Press Gang – October 13

 FOR YOUR BFF

            Ideal Pet Show – October 4-6

[theweldontimes-blog]

Wellness Committee Society Profile: The Dalhousie Feminist Legal Association (DFLA)

Wellness Committee: Suzanne Kittell, Heidi Collicutt, and Chantelle Coulson

The Dalhousie Feminist Legal Association (DFLA - pictured above at last year's 30th Anniversary of the Charter event) is one of Weldon’s many societies and is the subject of this month’s Society Profile. DFLA is devoted to the principles of equality and feminism, and works to create an inclusive space for all Weldonites. The society aims to enhance education in the areas of gender and the law and feminism, offers resources and support to the law school and to the Dalhousie community, and provides a safe space for feminist organizing.  

Along with events such as the Take Back the Night event and Feminist Legal Bingo, DFLA also organizes events annually at Weldon for V-Day and International Women’s Day. DFLA also coordinates a successful mentorship program, now in its 7th year, which pairs law students with practicing lawyers in the community. In 2012, DFLA was responsible for the Charter Party event held at Weldon, an event commemorating the 30th anniversary of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. DFLA organized a panel of speakers for this event that included several of the women who were instrumental in advocating for section 15 of the Charter in the 1980’s. DFLA also fondly looks back on its 2012 Pith & Substance video, which won first place in the Society category!

DFLA’s newest initiative this year is its Speaker Series entitled Two Sides to Every Story. Every month, DFLA will host one Weldon professor and a community member as they engage in a lively discussion about a range of topics including immigration reform in Canada, disclosure of HIV status, religion and the law, and career planning for social justice students. Be sure to check out the first Speaker Series event on Tuesday, September 24th, at 5pm in room 105 to hear Professor Erdman discuss the current status of abortion in Canada.

 DFLA always welcomes new members and meets Tuesdays at 12:00pm, in room 204. Feel free to contact the DFLA Exec with any questions or comments at [email protected]. 

[theweldontimes-blog]

Halifax Theaters Review (By: Paul Neville)

As someone who tries to spend more time in movie theaters than in the library, I’ve been tasked with writing a brief introduction to the local movie theaters for those new to Halifax. Whether you’re seeking a blockbuster or a small independent movie, there’s usually a theater nearby that can meet your needs. With that said, here is a rundown of the three places people should know about.

Park Lane Theatre

            The downtown staple, Park Lane provides a mix of commercial wide-releases and some smaller speciality movies. Located on Spring Garden Road, it’s a quick walk for most. Occasionally, they screen fan favourite movies like Back to the Future or Stand By Me.

Movie to see here in the fall: The Wolf of Wall Street

The Oxford

            This theater offers speciality indie releases in an old-time theater setting. Though sometimes a few weeks behind the major cities, the programmers here rarely let a movie worth seeing slip through the cracks. Though the older atmosphere has its charm, the size of the auditorium is a tad big for the size of the screen, and for some reason, there are no middle rows in the lower deck. Still, it’s probably the best movie going experience in the city.

Movie to see here in the fall: 12 Years A Slave

Bayer’s Lake Theatre

            Located just outside of the city, Bayers Lake is a quick drive or 20-dollar cab ride, meaning it’s best to go in groups to split the cost. One reason to pay the extra cost to make the trek is that Bayers boasts the only IMAX screen in Atlantic Canada. Dinning options surround the theatre. 

Movie to see here in the fall: Gravity, in IMAX 3D (preferably under the influence).

Carbon Arc Cinema 

Located in the museum of natural history, the Carbon Arc Cinema plays old, rare, and fringe movies. Run by volunteers, they screen once a week during their programming seasons (Oct-Nov and Feb-Apr). Selections range from Neve Campbell 90s classic The Craft, to lost Australian horror film Wake in Fright.

Movie to see here in the fall (rumoured): The Act of Killing.

[theweldontimes-blog]

ALL ABOUT KALE! (Bought to you by the Wellness Committee)

Wellness Committee: Suzanne Kittell, Heidi Collicutt, and Chantelle Coulson

As students, we don’t always have the time or ambition to adopt the healthiest eating habits. Next time you’re feeling drained, serve up a little of the “queen of greens” for a quick nutritional boost!

One brand - Earthbound Farm Organics - reports that in 85 grams of mixed baby kale, you can exceed daily recommended values of Vitamins A, C, and K.

Already krazy about kale? Celebrate National Kale Day on October 2nd. (nationalkaleday.org)

Kale Fun Fact: Lacinato kale is known as “Dino” kale because of its bumpy surface - just like dinosaur skin!

Recipe:

Kale Chips

Help satisfy that chip craving while still getting in your leafy greens!

What You Will Need:

kale, ripped into bite-sized pieces

olive oil

salt

your favorite seasonings 

1. Preheat your oven to 350F.

Toss kale pieces in olive oil.

Lay kale on baking sheet in a single layer.

Sprinkle with salt and any other seasonings.

Bake in the oven for 15-20 minutes, turning half way through - don’t let them burn! 

Good seasoning options to try:

Parmesan

Montreal chicken spice

Fresh ground pepper

Paprika 

Want to have your favorite foods featured by the Wellness Committee? Email [email protected] with the recipe and picture.

[theweldontimes-blog]

How to be the Worst: 3 Tips for Being Insufferable by the End of 1L (By: Ryan Wake)

Tip #1: GET INTO THE HABIT OF TALKING ABOUT YOUR GRADES…A LOT

            While I don’t have any friends, I do know of a guy who, during the entirety of law school, has yet to reveal any of his grades because he doesn’t want people to identify him by the marks he receives. If you, the reader, are rolling your eyes and saying to yourself something like, “obviously this guy just couldn’t get good grades” then congratulations, you are well on your way to being insufferable! While talking about grades might seem like a simple task, there are a few handy tricks that can really speed up the bullet train to unlikeability.

            First, while you have to be sure to constantly drone on about your good grades to anybody within earshot, always remember that nobody can ever know about assignments where you didn’t get a good grade. Cowardice plays a big part in this and you need to tap into that part of yourself that only wants to be judged on your most unequivocal successes while being terrified of anyone ever seeing you as you actually are. The hope is that by 2L people will think of you as a “heavy hitter”, an A+ machine sent back in time to blow their curve to hell. People will desperately attempt to switch into classes they don’t even want to take just to avoid getting hammered by your legendary (and largely self-fictionalized) law skills. In this way, you are able to create the disharmony and envy that we are really looking for.

            Second, there will be many people that try to derail you in your mission. They will gamely acknowledge your success then politely steer the conversation toward something not related to the law. Do not be deterred. Using your masterful vocabulary, you can deftly turn a wayward conversation back toward exciting talk of grades. An example: “That’s a very sad development for your new puppy…don’t you think its B.S. the dean only gave me 80 on that LRW assignment?!” There. Nicely done.

Tip #2: HUMBLEBRAG LIKE IT’S YOUR JOB

            If you’ve ever heard somebody loudly discuss how much ass they are kicking at school and thought to yourself, “I like the desperate plea for further validation, but why so much honesty?” then the humblebrag is for you. The humblebrag is very hot right now and with some practice, you too can subtly let people know you achieved far more than them with minimal effort. If you are unclear as to how this works, the main idea is to get a good grade on something, always through painstaking labour, and when the assignment is returned you inform the world you did not care to do well on the assignment AT ALL. While the concept is simple, the execution can be tricky.

A good model to follow is John Travolta’s character from the 1996 motion picture Phenomenon. When the rest of the law school rabble asks you just how you got that A, be sure to act confused, explaining that though you “barely studied at all”, you were sauntering to the exam when you were knocked down by a majestic light in the sky and suddenly you just knew exactly how to navigate that hypothetical. But even the dumbest law students are a skeptical bunch and they will protest that there must be another explanation. “But I saw you in the library all week!” they will cry. This is when you double down on your lie. Give any cockamamie story you can to ensure the alternate narrative of your success survives. Like the conspiracy to kill JFK, nothing can be left to chance.

Tip #3: BITCH ABOUT “S.N.A.I.L.S.” EVERY DAY

            Aside from being derisive, complaining to every person you meet about Students Not Actually In Law School studying in your library is delightfully cliché. Just as the hipster hates the music of the masses, you must revile being made to study in the same geographical area as lowly undergrads the same age as you. It’s all about attempting to widen the separation between you and the rest of society. It is through valuable methods like these, that lawyers have developed their reputation around the globe as laid back and considerate people.

            What’s that you say? You’re a 1L and you haven’t had any exam periods to develop a venomous dislike for people you once were a few months ago? Well, that’s never stopped 1Ls before and it shouldn’t stop you now. Just go around vaguely mumbling about how SNAILS totally ruined your studying in your library. Were you on Facebook the whole time? Yes. Were the loud and obnoxious people likely 3Ls whose Upper Year dinner you failed to turn up for? Sure. But that isn’t the point. The point is you’re better than people who chose not to follow your same academic path. And everybody damn well needs to know it.