The SLA AnyWay 5k was started in 2020-2021 by Ethan Chen, a former SLA Students Run member. In hosting the second annual race, my hope was to establish the AnyWay 5k as a yearly event. To build off of last year’s race, I held an in person race in addition to the virtual event. I kept participation free in order to foster an inclusive and accessible race and, like last year, gave every runner who completed the race a medal. Money raised from shirts and donations went to the SLA Home and School Association, who will use it for freshman mini-courses next year. See the numbers below:

The main challenge with planning this race was reigning in its scope. With the help of my mentor, I was able to eliminate expectations of needing chip timing, or large event permits. After creating a more realistic plan for my race, I started by pursuing funding from Braskem for shirts, medals, a timing system, as well as for food and water at the event. After receiving full funding, I began advertising the race on RunSignup and Instagram. My goal was to reach new participants, as well as participants from last year’s race. I also put up posters around the school with scannable QR codes. Leading up to the race, I held three group runs, open to all race participants. For the in person race, I marked a course from Lloyd Hall to about 2.5 km out. Runners would turn around at this halfway point and cross the finish line where they started, receiving their medal, a bottle of water, and a soft pretzel.

   ^^^Poster^^^

I designed this poster during my capstone marketing campaign. These were put up during report card conferences with the hope that parents would see them and sign their kids up for the race. I used a QR code to make it easy for people to access registration, and placed the poster strategically in the stairwells and hallways.

   ^^^RunSignup, Instagram, Shirts, and Medals^^^

Runsignup is the website that Ethan and I used for race registration, as it allows the user to integrate virtual racing into a 5k event. The race was mainly advertised on the Anyway 5k Instagram, which features photos from group runs, and the in person race. The shirts were ordered from custom ink, and feature the race logo on the front, and Braskem logo on the back. The medals were ordered from Crown Awards, using the same design as last year, with no date printed on them. This is so that uncollected medals can be reused across years.

   ^^^Braskem Pitch^^^

This is the original Braskem funding pitch. It features 3 separate funding levels, based on participation, for shirts, medals, food, water, and a timing system. This setup was based on Ethan’s pitch, allowing me to compare and contrast this year’s funding to last year’s during my pitch presentation. This also allows Braskem to get a better understanding of how their funding will be used based on how many participants show for the race.

Links -

Bibliography: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qrVcleoJv_7z8cCWqntOgdCPD4zMi47XoW_dKcD2kWE/edit?usp=sharing

RunSignup Page: https://runsignup.com/Race/PA/Philadelphia/SLAAnyWay5k

Instagram Page: https://www.instagram.com/slaanyway5k/

The SLA AnyWay 5k was started in 2020-2021 by Ethan Chen, a former SLA Students Run member. In hosting the second annual race, my hope was to establish the AnyWay 5k as a yearly event. To build off of last year’s race, I held an in person race in addition to the virtual event. I kept participation free in order to foster an inclusive and accessible race and, like last year, gave every runner who completed the race a medal. Money raised from shirts and donations went to the SLA Home and School Association, who will use it for freshman mini-courses next year. See the numbers below:

The main challenge with planning this race was reigning in its scope. With the help of my mentor, I was able to eliminate expectations of needing chip timing, or large event permits. After creating a more realistic plan for my race, I started by pursuing funding from Braskem for shirts, medals, a timing system, as well as for food and water at the event. After receiving full funding, I began advertising the race on RunSignup and Instagram. My goal was to reach new participants, as well as participants from last year’s race. I also put up posters around the school with scannable QR codes. Leading up to the race, I held three group runs, open to all race participants. For the in person race, I marked a course from Lloyd Hall to about 2.5 km out. Runners would turn around at this halfway point and cross the finish line where they started, receiving their medal, a bottle of water, and a soft pretzel.

   ^^^Poster^^^ 

I designed this poster during my capstone marketing campaign. These were put up during report card conferences with the hope that parents would see them and sign their kids up for the race. I used a QR code to make it easy for people to access registration, and placed the poster strategically in the stairwells and hallways.

   ^^^RunSignup, Instagram, Shirts, and Medals^^^

Runsignup is the website that Ethan and I used for race registration, as it allows the user to integrate virtual racing into a 5k event. The race was mainly advertised on the Anyway 5k Instagram, which features photos from group runs, and the in person race. The shirts were ordered from custom ink, and feature the race logo on the front, and Braskem logo on the back. The medals were ordered from Crown Awards, using the same design as last year, with no date printed on them. This is so that uncollected medals can be reused across years.

   ^^^Braskem Pitch^^^

This is the original Braskem funding pitch. It features 3 separate funding levels, based on participation, for shirts, medals, food, water, and a timing system. This setup was based on Ethan’s pitch, allowing me to compare and contrast this year’s funding to last year’s during my pitch presentation. This also allows Braskem to get a better understanding of how their funding will be used based on how many participants show for the race.

Links -

Bibliography: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qrVcleoJv_7z8cCWqntOgdCPD4zMi47XoW_dKcD2kWE/edit?usp=sharing

RunSignup Page: https://runsignup.com/Race/PA/Philadelphia/SLAAnyWay5k

Instagram Page: https://www.instagram.com/slaanyway5k/

Roger Ebert’s 2.5/4 star review of “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid” is a bit disappointing to me, and I am curious as to how the era in which this review was written had an impact on his view of the film. He starts out with an overall summary of his thoughts on the movie, stating: “the completed film is slow and disappointing.” He attributes this notion to two main factors. One being the casting of Newmann, a well established and expensive actor, as the lead role. The second being that the movie is “too cute, and never gets up the nerve, by god, to admit it’s a western.”

To the first point, Ebert claims that the money spent on Newmann compelled the studio to protect their investment by increasing the overall production value of the film, something he saw as a detriment to the pacing. What could he possibly be talking about? Surely not the extremely long chase scene between Harriman’s “super posse” (which I think is a very funny title, good job Ebert) and our two heroes!? I actually really like this scene by the way. Supposedly, the chase scene is so long because George Roy Hill wanted to make the money spent on all the shooting locations worth it by keeping much of the footage. I disagree with this point, and I find it interesting that at the time, the length of a scene would be just as indicative of a “high production value,” as things like special effects. This lengthy scene contributes wonderfully to the overall aesthetic of the movie, temporarily transitioning the movie away from its roots as a comedic “western.” (I’ll dive into the “” here later.)

From a narrative perspective, while George Roy Hill could have portrayed the terror of being chased by the “super posse” and therefore justified the rest of the film, using a much shorter scene (the first five minutes of the chase prove this), I think it is quite effective at doing something else entirely. The length of the chase, and the protagonists’ attempts to thwart the super posse is exhausting, in the best, most darkly comedic way possible. While I enjoyed every minute of that terror and exhaustion, Roger Ebert clearly did not. Ebert, in his claims about production value and whatnot, implies this exhaustion to be a byproduct of lazy filmmaking and greedy executives. He makes it very clear that he thinks the scene is a drag, bogging down the rest of the movie to a point beyond recovery. Personally, due to my enjoyment of what the scene does for the movie, I’ll subscribe to the idea of the scene being deliberate, and the product of a director with an unconventional vision.

Ebert doesn’t quite make his meaning on the second point as clear as the first, but I’d like to take a crack at what he means when he thinks the movie won’t “admit it’s a western.” In the later half of the review, he refers to the movie’s dialogue being too contemporary, affecting the believability of the movie. I think this is a misconception of the movie, and the genre as a whole. The movie, while based on real events, never seems to sell itself as a serious period piece, or as representative of the classic western genre. I think that looking at this movie as a subversion of the genre would be more accurate. This movie shifts the traditional western setting, placing western themes in a non-traditional western setting like Bolivia. Additionally, the dialogue, which Ebert attributes to the film trying to “act cutesy,” is a refreshing take on what could have truly made this movie a drag (imagine that long chase scene sans the witty dialogue). The traditional themes of good versus evil, or even anti-hero outlaws, are not present in this movie. Butch and Sundance are not strikingly good or evil, and typically, to be an anti-hero, one must be acting with intentions that are ultimately good. Butch and Sundance are in my eyes a good old pair of anti-villains, which is undoubtedly an unconventional take on the protagonist, even outside of the western genre. All of these slightly unconventional elements make the movie feel extremely aware of the western genre and its tropes, which makes Ebert’s claim that it is trying and failing to be a western misguided.

Overall, I think that Ebert didn’t give this movie a chance. It is fair enough that he didn’t enjoy the chase scene, I can get that. I personally believe it to be great, and a deliberate artistic choice, but… fair enough? You got bored which is completely subjective, and I can’t take that away from you. I don’t think I could agree to disagree with his points about the nature of the film as a failed western though, as I think that falls short of the movie’s vision as an anti-western. Of course, I could talk all day about how badly he missed the mark on this specific point, but it’s probably easier for contemporary viewers to spot the genre commentary, as traditionally themed western movies are more “a thing of the past” now than in 1969. Regardless, I review his 2.5/4 star review, with a 2/4 star review (his points were half fair, half not).

I noticed a general lack of explicit thriller themes in the official rear window posters, so I made mine as over the top and blood splatter-ey as possible. I also wanted to convey themes of spectatorship, voyeurism, violence, and reflect various scenes from the movie in the poster. Starting with the top panel, we see the silhouettes of a group of people, watching the scene shown in the middle two panels. I also have a little quote from the movie that I added for the cool mysterious aesthetic. I had a scene in mind when I made this panel. When the lady across from Jeff’s dog is killed, she loudly accuses her neighbors of apathy, while they watch from their respective places. I feel as if this scene represents the theme of spectatorship quite well, as we have Jeff confronted with the nature of his curiosity, his intentions questioned. Is Jeff a seeker of justice, willing to go to any lengths to see it be served, or a voyeur, merely interested in satisfying his boredom? This is where our title comes in. Scrutiny! Which we will get back to later. Next is the middle left panel, where we have a pool of blood with flowers sprouting out. This is in reference to the flowers in which Lars Thorwald buried a piece of his wife’s body. We have bloody footprints leading away from the flowers, which is just a stylistic choice that references a mystery cliche, and leads our eyes to the next panel. The footprints take us inside the window, behind Jeff, who has his camera out. We see a silhouette behind Jeff, as well as a flash that references the scene where Thorwald invades his home, and Jeff defends himself using a camera flash. I wanted to tell a bit of a story here, implying that the murderer was sneaking up on Jeff, though this doesn’t happen in the movie, I thought it would be cool to have some motion within my poster. Then, boom! Bottom panel! Title! Scrutiny! As viewers, we are tasked with scrutinizing the actions of Jeff and the others on a scale, deciding where and when the line between curiosity and voyeurism gets crossed. It’s a bit of a “do the means justify the ends” kind of situation. Ultimately, Jeff is vindicated, as Lars Thorwald is revealed to be the murderer, but the moral ambiguity of his actions are thought provoking, and (in my opinion) the main focus of the movie.

Soundcloud link:
https://tinyurl.com/mh34d9wb