This film will break your heart.It's all too common to acknowledge statistics and forget the human cost. This gets that across in such a powerful and artistic way. Never delving too far into the political, this film shows simply the tragedy and the heroism that arose on that day.There's not much to say here that hasn't been said before. My only advice is watch it. Regardless of your politics, regardless of your beliefs, watch it. If nothing else, this film is a beautiful memorial to those who were lost.

It was like another documentary film that I saw one last week. But this time it was an even bigger scale. This, the original event took place exactly 50 years ago and first of its kind. Since then hundreds of similar events have been recorded. Many of them were made into films, but I don't remember this one was ever turned into one. This is about a raged gunman on the college campus, where many people got killed and injured. A shocking incident, even cops did not know how to handle it at first.So, the film reveals one of the most horrific episodes ever happened in the American soil. Like everything has a first time, this is where it all began for this kind of event. The filmmakers used some of the original archive footage to tell the story, but the majority of the film was the animation. Since it was a documentary film and was made under a tight budget, the visuals were not that pleasant, but the notion was well achieved.Documentary films and interviews are like thunder and lightening. So there are interviews in it, but most of them were made-up of. I mean they were real, though not with the real people, except their recorded voice interviews in most of the cases. It was challenging to bring back the original event on the screen since it is not a feature film to recreate whatever way they want, especially that occurred half a century ago. But very appreciable for even giving us this much of detail to feel the vibe.❝One of the truths I have learnt is that there are monsters that walk among us.❞It was like any other normal day on the campus of the University of Texas in Austin. But the scenario has suddenly changed when two student couple fell on the ground not aware of what just happened, and so the people around. After some time, it became clear that a gunman open fired on them and many others from a nearby tower, but the real issue is nobody could see him. Soon it reached the radio and television, and alert has been circulated. Then the cops got involved to solve the matter and how it all ends covered in the rest of the films.This is a good film, revealed most of the parts as much as in details, but I'm not fully convinced. Because the concept of narration was quite similar to feature film style where they want to keep the mystery. It all begins with one perspective and multiplies as it progresses. Except not focusing enough on the negative character. I understood the situation of the event, but I did not get enough detail about the gunman. It was like one side of the story. So mysterious and it stayed that way.Shorter and well paced. This is definitely worth checking out, though not a must see. To learn the history, the bad one. I had no idea about it prior to watch, but at the end, I felt it accomplished everything on its capacity to give out the truth. No matter it is a documentary film, along with the suspense, the tension was well balanced. So, more or less it is same as like watching a regular crime film. That's especially for those who are not into documentary films. I hope someone would make a feature film out of it.8/10

Back in 1966, a tragedy occurred at the University of Texas. A crazed gunman atop the clock tower began opening fire on folks down below...killing about a dozen folks and injuring many more during this 90 minute spree. This film is the second I have seen about it...and it's very different from "The Deadly Tower", a made for TV movie from 1975. "Tower" tells the story using voice actors and rotoscoped* animations of the actors. The voice actors read testimony by a variety of survivors who witnessed the incident. There are also a few folks who talk about it without the use of animation as well as some archival footage from the time. And, here's what is really interesting...instead of focusing on the killer as the previous film did, this new film deliberately avoided mentioning him or giving any attention to him personally. This was a wise decision and really showed respect for the man's many victims. Instead, it focused on the folks who risked their lives that day--who ran out to help the victims.Overall, it was a compelling story told in an unusual manner by Keith Maitland. Well worth seeing...especially since some folks really rose to the occasion that day and proved that within tragedy was some humanity. Just be sure, if you do watch, that you keep some Kleenex handy...just in case.*Rotoscoping is a simple technique for animation. A scene is filmed live and the drawings are made atop the original pictures. It's been around since at least 1915 when the Fleischer Brothers used it in their animated films.

WARNING! Major spoilers ahead.In 1968, Peter Bogdanovich based his film "Targets" on the mass shooting at the University of Texas-Austin on August 1, 1966. Bogdanovich focused on the shooter. Now, nearly half a century later, director Keith Maitland looks at the incident from the viewpoint of the victims in "Tower."After the MOMA screening on Nov. 26, 2016, the director answered questions about his film. The main purpose of this review is to preserve some of his responses.A big question was why "Clair de Lune" was the background music to the shooting of the sniper, Charles Whitman, by Austin police officer Ray Martinez. Maitland told the audience that a few weeks before the shootings, Whitman, a student at UT-Austin, had paid a late night visit to one of his professors. Whitman was clearly agitated. He said he was depressed, he had many issues in his personal life, and he needed an extension of time for his term project. Suddenly, the professor said, Whitman noticed the professor's piano and asked if he could play it. The professor agreed, and Whitman proceeded to play, according to the professor, "the most beautiful rendition of Clair de Lune he had ever heard." When Whitman was finished, all the anger had drained from him. As he left, Whitman said, "That's what I needed."Maitland explained that by using the piece just before Whitman's death, it was his way of acknowledging the humanity of the shooter. As his life ended, he was finally at peace.Of the eight people whose stories are told in this film, the most prominent is Claire Wilson, the first person shot, who lay next to her dead fiancé on concrete in 100 degree weather for nearly an hour before a couple of brave souls carried her to safety. Wilson, who also lost her unborn son, said at the end of the film that she had forgiven Whitman. The only depiction of the shooter in the entire film is a photograph of him as a child in a magazine article. Whitman is seen at age 3 standing between two rifles.Claire Wilson became a schoolteacher for thirty years and an adoptive mother. A lifelong activist, she dropped out of school at age 13 to volunteer to register voters in the deep South. She had received special dispensation to attend UT-Austin without a high school diploma.The film itself is superb. The rotoscopy is first rate, and the actors who play the subjects for most of the film are uniformly excellent. Highly recommended.