I am a True Harry Potter Fan and I Truly Loved the Half-Blood Prince Movie. What are you going to do? Avada Kedavra Me?

Call me crazy. Call me a traitor. You can even call me a filthy Mudblood. But first, just shut up and listen. If you fail to do so, I will be forced to Stupify you so that you will.

As a true fan of the Harry Potter series, I attended the midnight release of the latest installment in the HP movie franchise, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. Costumed in a full length black dress, flaunting teased hair, and carrying a curved, crude wand, I was the semi-spitting image of Bellatrix Lestrange. Upon arriving at the theatre, I was greeted by other fans who were dedicated enough to also dress up, including: several Harrys, a Hermione, a few Dumbledores, a couple Hagrids, and one, rather creative, golden snitch. To my dismay, there were also two other Bellatrixes that shared my auditorium. They were promptly Crucio'd from behind.

*Please note that from this point on, there are spoilers. So if you have not seen the movie yet, stop reading and promptly apparate to your local movie theatre.*

And now, I will recapitulate my sentiments on the movie. Because many of my fellow HP fans have proceeded to tear this movie apart, I would like to start by counterattacking each of the main criticisms that have been repeatedly brought up by the purists of the wizarding world. Then, I will express my own opinions on the movie's strengths and weaknesses.

Criticism #1 (taken from a Rotten Tomatoes review): "Too much teen romance and not enough wizardry; this installment is the dullest 'Harry' yet"

Why You Are Wrong #1: Yes, the Half-Blood Prince movie was chock full of teen romance and even teen angst, but HELLO! Did you even read the 6th book? I remember HBP as the first book where love and teen romance was a central subject! I do not think that the movie exaggerated this at all! The relationship subplots in the book were perhaps, dare I say it, even stronger in the book than in the movie! For example, in the book, we also got the romantic subplot from lovesick Tonks and Lupin, who insisted he was unworthy of her love. The closest we came to this subplot in the movie was when Tonks called Lupin "sweetheart." And as for the "dullest 'Harry' yet" comment, I ask you, what made you think this movie was dull? Was it because Lord Voldemort never appeared? Or perhaps because the movie had little action? I hate repeating myself, but HELLO! Did you even read the 6th book? In the book, only Tom Riddle appeared, not Lord Voldemort himself. Additionally, the 6th book is known for its lack of action until the final pages of the novel. Lack of action does not mean dull. This movie, and book for that matter, focused strongly on the emotions of a changing world in which evil is starting to take the upper hand. You do not need action to show this metamorphosis. And it is far from dull.

Criticism #2 (taken from a Movies Online review): "For some reason a scene out of the blue in placed in the movie which has Bellatrix accompanied by Fenrir Greyback burn down the Weasley's house, The Burrow."

Why You Are Wrong #2: Yes, this scene was a director's ad-in that was not featured in the novel. Now, I may be going out on a limb here but...IT WAS A GOOD SCENE. Cinematographically, this scene was darkly beautiful! And I am always for sneaking Bellatrix Lestrange into a few extra scenes. If the scene had in some way significantly changed the plot of the Half-Blood Prince story, then I would probably be mad. But it didn't...at all. The scene simply intensified the growing turmoil faced by the wizarding world. It was intense and aesthetically pleasing, definitely NOT out of the blue.

Criticism #3 (taken from a Movies Online review): "The movie made it very obvious that Malfoy's mission for the year was to kill Dumbledore..."

Why You Are Wrong #3: Hmmm...maybe that would be because YOU READ THE BOOK AND ALREADY KNEW IT WAS HIS MISSION. Yes, to those of us who had already read the book, it was very obvious that Malfoy was trying to kill Dumbledore and even that Snape was working as a double agent. But since we already knew this information going in, it would be pretty impossible to try to conceal it from us without using anything short of the Memory Charm. There were two persons in my group at the movies who have not read any of the books (heathens!) and both confirmed that they had no idea what Draco was up to throughout the movie and were thoroughly shocked by the movie's ending.

Criticisms #4-∞ (taken from all over the internet): I don't know where this whole "Death Eaters can fly around as black smoke" bit came from; Hermione doesn't try to trick Borgin into telling her what Malfoy is reserving; Luna discovers Harry beneath his invisibility cloak on the Hogwarts Express, rather than Tonks; Hagrid never mentions Aragog is sick and doesn't invite Harry to the funeral; Harry doesn't talk about his mum and dad's death to Slughorn to the extent that he does in the book; Narcissa's hair is a mix of blonde and dark brown stripes, rather than being completely flaxen blonde...BLAH BLAH BLAH.

Why You Are all INSANE #4-∞: Excuse me, would you like some cheese with that WHINE? Seriously...I mean Siriusly, it is OK to point these things out to prove that you are the ultimate keeper of all Harry Potter knowledge. It is even OK to point these things out in a scholarly compare and contrast between the book and movie. But to use these points in order to condemn a good movie is not only ridiculous, but also rather annoying. You can not make a case against this movie by compiling a list of ways it is different from the book...it is just impractical. Any adaptation is bound to vary from its original. Even if JK Rowling wrote the screenplay herself, it would vary from her novel's manuscript. Picking at these small deviations is a waste of your time. And Dumbledore would likely suggest you pursue a new hobby.

Now enough with these trivial counterattacks. Here are some of my direct opinions of the movie:

This movie, by far, exhibited the highest level of acting across the board when compared to the other Harry Potter film adaptations. Yes, the early movies were wonderful, but let's be honest...those kids were young...and cheesy. Now they have grown up and their acting has grown as well. Even the most nitpicky of critics have agreed that Emma Watson, Daniel Radcliffe, and Rupert Grint have delivered their most endearing performances yet. For the first time, we got a range of emotions that went beyond just fear and excitement. This brings me back to the necessity of the love triangles formed in this movie. Without them, we would not have been able to see these added layers of emotion to our beloved characters. And of course, the acting greats that make up the Harry Potter cast, Alan Rickman, Michael Gambon, David Thewlis, Maggie Smith, Helena Bonham Carter, etcetera, also delivered brilliant performances. The new additions to the cast, Helen McCrory, Dave Legeno, and Jim Broadbent, were also well suited for their roles. And Frank Dillane, the young actor who portrayed a 16-year-old Tom Riddle, delivered a chilling and haunting performance. Tom Felton also delivered his darkest performance yet. As Draco Malfoy, he was eerie enough to force me to mutter the word "creeper" under my breath almost every time he appeared.

Now, what many movie reviews tend to overlook is the value of the cinematography featured in Half-Blood Prince. The cinematographer, Bruno Delbonnel, created a beautiful, magical world in HBP. Even the darker scenes such as the Burrow burning down and the parts in the cave were stunning spectacles. Even Harry Potter is not immune to the beauty of Hogwarts, as he comments on its radiant appearance at the close of the film. Oh and to address one of the complaints in the long list of Criticisms four through infinity, the whole Death Eaters flying around in smoke thing is a cinematography ad-in. In short, it may have not been in the books, but it looks freaking sweet.

OK, now I am going to list the complaints that I have. I am not a hypocrite! I do have a few things that I would like to have seen in the movie that were not there. These are the few agreements I have with the purists out there.

I would have liked to see more of Tom Riddle's past. There were many Pensieve memories that were excluded from the movie. We did not see the Gaunts or see anything about how Dumbledore came to posses the Horcrux ring. The orphanage scene also seemed short and not satisfying.

I would have liked to see Dumbledore's funeral. We all would have. It would have made for a more satisfying ending than we were left with. The funeral would have been an excellent piece of cinematography to work with as well...with the centaurs, the white tomb, etcetera. Oh and rewind for a second, I did find it kind of strange that Harry was just listening to the whole Snape killing Dumbledore debacle from under the floorboards. As we know, in the book he was under his invisibility cloak and Dumbledore had cast the Full Body-Bind Curse upon him. I find it highly unbelievable that Harry would just stand under the floorboards and not do anything when it was quite obvious that something bad was about to happen to Dumbledore. We did get to see Faukes flying overhead and mourning, but a proper funeral would have been better. The end of the movie did not leave us with much. Harry really had no clue where to start with this Horcrux business and we didn't have the emotional split between Harry and Ginny where Harry insists that he has to pursue his mission and cannot be with her until that mission is complete. Again, this is not enough of a discrepancy for me to condemn the entire movie, but it just bothered me slightly.

The one major element that was missing from this movie was the The Battle of the Astronomy Tower/Battle of the Lightning Struck Tower, a mini-battle between members of the order and the Death Eaters in Hogwarts at the end of the Half-Blood Prince novel. In the movie, it was kind of anti-climatic when the Death Eaters came. They came, they burned some stuff, and they left. Bill Weasley was not bitten by Grayback (in fact, Bill did not appear in the film at all) and the Order and the Death Eaters did not duke it out. I was waiting for the whole movie for this moment to occur! Interestingly enough, not many people are complaining about the lack of a battle. More people are complaining about the minor details that I listed before. I have also heard people complain about how Bellatrix was in the final scenes even though she doesn't appear in the battle in the book. HELLO. I think that the fact that the battle was taken out is a little more important than the fact that Bellatrix was not supposed to be there. And as I said before, I am all for extra Bellatrix scenes. Sure, we all hate her for killing Sirius, but you have to admit...she is the coolest Death Eater.

Fortunately, the tussle between Snape and Harry at the end of the movie was quite intense. Did it make up for the lack of the battle? No. But I must admit that I felt a little shiver when Snape shouted "You dare try and use my spells against me?" I also wanted to scream at Harry that Severus was only doing what he had to do...but that probably would have attracted some unwanted attention to our row in the movie theatre.

Now, this is getting pretty long...but there are a few more things I want to say...I suppose I will just list them in quick, summarized spurts (I might also summarize a couple of the points I made above in case lazy people scrolled all the way down to this section):
Luna Lovegood's Lion Hat was RAD.
Draco Malfoy is a creeper.
Bellatrix Lestrange = my favorite death eater...ever.
Severus Snape is a fox...especially when his black cape billows behind him.
Rupert Grint is bloody hilarious.
I would have liked to see more Neville Longbottom.
The biggest upset was the lack of battling at the end.
Bruno Delbonnel is a fabulous director of photography.
The Inferi were freaking creepy!
And I jumped a foot when they first appeared in the cave...even though I expected it.
Characters like Tonks, Lupin, Bill, Fleur, etcetera needed to appear more...or just appear period.
I want to go to Hogwarts.
I can not wait for Deathly Hallows Part 1, which comes out November 19, 2010!!!

Overall? A fabulous, exciting, dramatic, emotion, beautiful movie that made some acceptable deviations from the book and some not so acceptable deviations from the book. But those few unacceptable deviations were not enough to negate all of the powerful adjectives I used above.

I am always up for a challenge. Have a criticism I did not address? Submit it to me and I will tell you why you are wrong. Or, if you are lucky, and I mean REALLY lucky...like you just downed a whole chalice of Felix Felicis lucky, I will agree with you.

Why did I write this insanely long review? No, not because I am an overachiever like Hermione Granger. I wrote it because my friend and I were sick of hearing all of the trash talk from the mediocre, overly-fastidious critics infesting the discussion boards, reviewing websites, etcetera. I wrote this as a way to tell the whiney purists to suck it and just go Avada Kedavra themselves.

If you read this whole thing, I owe you a Butterbeer.

WOAH...I'm famous! Not really, but being in print excites me.

I found two published articles in two different periodicals outlining my recent successful campaign for Lt. Governor at VA Girls State. Feel free to check them out and leave scandalous comments.

Richmond Times Dispatch:
http://www.timesdispatch.com/rtd/news/local/education/article/C-GIRL02_20090702-123801/277655/

Midlothian Exchange:
http://www.midlothianexchange.com/index.php/news/article/midlothian-student-elected-lieutenant-governor-of-virginia-girls-state/19760/

Philosophy Experiment Part Three: Why?

Here comes the part that everyone has been waiting for. You finally get to explain why you answered the way you did in parts one and two. If you have not yet completed the first two parts, please do so before proceeding.

This is not supposed to be a debate as to why you are right and everyone else is wrong. There is not right or wrong answer to these hypothetical situations. Just simply walk us through your thought process so we can see how you arrived at your answers. If you are not entirely sure of your reason, then just say that. Your explanation may be short or it may be in depth. It all depends on how your thought process works.

Be sure to compare your answers. If you said kill the one for Part One and then you said let the five die for Part Two, address why these answers were different. If your answers stayed consistent, address this. Remember, you are not allowed to change your answers. Just explain the answers you initially gave.

Oh and it would help if you asked some of your friends to start with Part One and go through this process because I need more people to do this in order to thoroughly analyze this information.

No fighting. Just give your reasoning. Remember, your reasoning even be: "I don't know." As long as that is the honest truth.

Do not reply to anyone else's reasoning. Stay tuned for Part Four.

Philosophy Experiment Part Two [finally]: The Surgeon Situation

I am sorry that it took me so long to post this sequel to part one (The Trolley Problem). Time got the best of me.

If you have not completed part one, please find the previous post entitled "Philosophy Experiment Part One: The Trolley Problem" and complete that before moving on to part two. Thank you.

For those of you who have already completed part one, I will just quickly remind you of the rules:
Here is how this experiment will work. I am about to present you with a situation. Your job is to then select one of two actions you would take if faced by the situation. You can keep your choice to yourself or post it in a comment. You may not give an explanation, ask questions, or think about your answer for too long. I want your intuitive decision. This first part is purely for you to state your decision. I will ask for the reasoning in a later part.

Now, here is the situation:
You are a doctor in a hospital. You have five patients who are all dying. Their only chance to live is to get organ transplants, but they are too far down on the list. You have two options. You can kill one of the hospital nurses and use their healthy organs to cure the five patients. Or you can let the five patients die.

Let the five die or kill the one?

For the sake of this experiment, go with your intuition. In the actual situation, you would only have moments to decide anyways.
Don't ask questions.
Don't explain your reasons [yet].
Just answer.

Kayla's Second Blog (Don't worry, I'm not cheating on Revolutionary Thoughts).

I recently requested to become a part of a new project some schoolmates of mine just started. They have launched their very own pop culture blog called Brain Problem Situations (BPS). The original BPS team consisted of BPS John-Charles, BPSstephen, and BPS John Mincks. JC reviews video games, Stephen does music, and John does movies. All three are quite knowledgeable in their fields and know enough to write about it and have good enough senses of humor to write well about it. I requested to become BPS Kayla, ye fair maiden of the television world. Basically, I review and analyze television for the team. Anyways, I will be posting things on the BPS blog that might not make it to the RT blog, so everyone should promptly keep up on both blogs. Right now, we are featuring a riveting 90s theme on BPS, so you really should check it out.
http://brainproblemsituations.blogspot.com/

Watchmen Movie Review.

*There are spoilers in this review if you are not familiar with the graphic novel. If you have read it, then there is nothing really in here that you should not know already.*

My original plan was to see this movie at midnight on the 6th, dressed in a full on Silk Spectre II costume. That did not exactly happen. I made the plans back in July when I first found out about the Watchmen movie at the midnight release of Dark Knight. But they still fell through. The flu barred me from attending the midnight showing and the lack of tasteful Silk Spectre II costumes led to the lack of a black and yellow spandex suit. So I saw the movie last night, dressed normally. Despite the relatively low ratings in the reviews, my expectations never lowered. And of course, I disagree with all of the critics, as usual.

I decided to read the graphic novel again a couple of weeks ago so the story would be fresh in my mind. And first thing's first, Zack Snyder pulled off an excellent adaptation. His big screen version of possibly the best graphic novel of all time was faithful and exact to the tee...almost. In general terms, it was perfect. But there were a few discrepancies. The most noticeable of these was the ending. Instead of the giant squid-like alien being attacking major cities, Veidt attacked the cities with a Dr. Manhattan-like power and framed the invincible man for the crimes. While this is quite a major difference, I liked it. I hate to say it, but I may have liked it more as an ending than Alan Moore's elaborate alien attack. It made more sense. And while graphic novels are not exactly known for making sense, I tend to like sensical plotlines. Most of the minor discrepancies that I noticed revolved around Rorschach's story. For example, in the movie, he did not cuff the kidnapper to the radiator, give him an saw, and burn the house as an intense ultimatum. Instead he just kind of hacked the guys head repeatedly with a butcher's knife. In this case, I liked the graphic novel version better. It portrayed Rorschach's mind in a better way in my opinion. Also, in the graphic novel, young Rorschach burns a bully's eye with a cigarette. In the movie, he bites the kid's ear and pulls off a piece of flesh. This change was really too insignificant to bother me. Most of the other changes were like those, small and insignificant when the whole picture is considered. There were some semi-significant omissions from the storyline. For example, there was no comic within the comic. And there was no island. But other than that, Snyder's adaptation was the most faithful in terms of graphic novel to movie adaptations in a long time. Oh and there was one other semi-significant omission I noticed. Hollis Mason's death wasn't really made clear. In the graphic novel, he gets killed by an angry mob of people on a vendetta against masked heroes. This does kind of matter because when Dan finds out, he freaks out and his character changes pretty significantly. He finally realizes how messed up the world is and has a less optimistic view when his own hero dies.

The visual effects of Watchmen were stunning. I am a major fan of well executed stylized violence, and Watchmen was very successful in this area. There was a lot of slow motion, but I didn't mind. The opening scene when Blake gets beaten up and thrown out the window was awesome looking. Laurie and Dan beating up bad guys in the alley and then again in the jail was intense. Archie, Dr. Manhattan, the scenes in Vietnam, all looked spectacular. And a majority of the scenes looked like Zack Snyder lifted the graphic novel pages up and set them in motion. In other words, it looked exactly like the illustrations. I should also note that I saw the movie in an IMAX theatre, which was an amazing experience. I highly recommend seeing it again in IMAX if you didn't the first time. The images are even more stunning when they are 90ft wide and 60ft high. The thing that made the cinematography so awesome in this movie was the fact that even gruesome and disturbing scenes were aesthetically spectacular. Sillouhette's murder scene, the Comedian burning a man alive, Dr. Manhattan blowing a couple of thugs into pieces and blood splattering all over a bystander, Jon Osterman disentegrating into a million little pieces, the same happening to Laurie and Dan in Dan's dream, all of these scenes were rather disturbing and yet, they were absolutely visually stunning. I love when dark things are made twistedly beautiful. Dark Knight was another movie to do this rather excellently.

Jackie Earle Haley was a perfect Rorschach. He embodied the twisted, brutal, complex character very well. Rorschach is such an unconventional hero who is so tough on crime that it is almost sickening. Haley was particularly good at the end of the movie. The crazy thing about Rorschach as a character is that he is so obsessed with order. He sacrificed himself because he just could not stand to live in a world that was being fueled by Veidt's lie. He couldn't handle it. So he literally begged for Dr. Manhattan to kill him. The only moment better than this was perhaps when Haley delivered his "I'm not locked in here with you, you're locked in here with me" line. That was probably the best line delivered in the whole movie.

Jeffrey Dean Morgan was an excellent Eddie Blake/Comedian. Aside from looking exactly like the illustrations of Blake, Morgan captured his twisted and yet accurate perception of society to a tee. He was just malicious enough to make you hate him and yet you would still feel terrible when he died. His American dream lines is one of my favorites. The interesting thing about the Comedian is that he understands the fact that life is just one big joke. He sees how messed up the world is and chooses to attack violence with violence. And it works, for him at least.

The only casting decision I did not exactly agree with was Malin Akerman as Laurie/Silk Spectre II. She just seemed kind of random and she was definitely the weakest link acting wise. She just wasn't all that likeable. Billy Crudup was an excellent Dr. Manhattan. Every word that came out of his mouth sounded beautiful and made me want to quote him constantly. Matthew Goode was a good Veidt, a somewhat complicated character to portray (although I suppose all of the Watchmen characters are pretty complex). He was charming enough to pull off being the "world's smartest man", aloof enough to make you think something was wrong with him, and powerful enough to pull off the complicated feat of being a bad good guy. Carla Gugino was a good Sally Jupiter. They did a good job making her look older. Patrick Wilson made an adorable Dan. He was awkward and cute enough to make you fall in love with him. Pretty much everyone looked like their illustrated counterparts and like I said, Akerman was the only weak spot.

The soundtrack and score for Watchmen were also amazing. The songs for the soundtrack were chosen rather excellently in my opinion. The opening scene was made even better with Nat King Cole's Unforgettable playing in the background. The serene song juxtaposed with Veidt beating Blake to a pulp made the scene very powerful. The Simon and Garfunkel song was also awesome. I mean, we all knew the soundtrack would be great when The Beginning is the End is the Beginning by the Smashing Pumpkins was featured in the first trailer. I went home and bought that song on iTunes after seeing the trailer for the first time. I will definitely be purchasing this soundtrack. The score was also very nicely composed. It was written by Tyler Bates who also did 300, Grindhouse, The Day the Earth Stood Still, Slither, Dawn of the Dead, as well as a bunch of other action movies. This was definitely his best work though.

Even the opening credits montage for Watchmen was awesome. Set to the twangy folk sound of Dylan's The Times They Are A-Changin, it features clips that sum up the world of Watchmen. Nixon's third term, the end of World War II, the war in Vietnam, peace protests, and of course, masked heroes. The montage familiarized us with some of the early masked heroes, Hooded Justice, Silk Spectre I, Nite Owl I, Dollar Bill, Sillouhette, the Comedian, and the others. Then it introduced us to the new kids, Silk Spectre II, Nite Owl II, Rorschach, Ozymandias, and the others. And finally it ended with the post Keene Act world, where masked vigilantes have been outlawed and crime and the the threat of nuclear war have swallowed America.

The script for Watchmen was also great. They pretty much stuck to the text from the graphic novel. Some of my favorite quotes include:

Rorschach: Rorschach's Journal: October 12th 1985. Dog carcass in alley this morning, tire tread on burst stomach. This city is afraid of me. I have seen its true face. The streets are extended gutters and the gutters are full of blood and when the drains finally scab over, all the vermin will drown. The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the whores and politicians will look up and shout 'Save us!' And I'll whisper 'no'.

Rorschach: You people don't understand. I'm not locked in here with you, you're locked in here with me!

Nite Owl II: What happened to the American Dream?
Comedian: It came true. You're looking at it.

The Comedian: Our days are numbered. Till then, it's like you always say: we're society's only protection.
Nite Owl II: From what?
The Comedian: You kidding me? From themselves.

I think there were other ones I liked, but I can't remember them now. I was just so impressed with how textually accurate the script was. Another sign of a brilliant adaptation.

I am going to write a review of the graphic novel soon. In that I will address more of the conceptual and philosophical ideas of Watchmen. Alan Moore is a freaking genius. This review was written mainly to judge the movie as an adaptation and as a film. The good stuff will come in my graphic novel review.

So here is my concensus. As an adaptation, Watchmen deserves an A-. It would be higher, but they get docked a couple of points for some minor discrepancies and the rather large change at the end (even though I liked the film ending better...gasp!). Here is my breakdown:
Cinematography: A
Script: A
Acting: B+
Plot: A+
Directing: B+
Score/Soundtrack: A+
Costumes/Makeup: A
Casting: A
Film Editing: A-
Special Effects: A
Visual Effects: A+
Overall as an adptation: A-
Overall as a film: B-

I would like to address the fact that my review does appear much more generous than some of the other professional reviews. I think the reason the movie is getting a lot of criticism is due to the fact that the movie would not be nearly as enjoyable if you didn't read the graphic novel. The nature of the film did not allow for a lot of explanation, so I understand that the plot would appear jumbled and the jumping around in time would make it seem fragmented, but if you read the graphic novel then it would not be confusing at all. That is why my grade for the movie as a film without considering the graphic novel is significantly lower than the adaptation grade. For those critics who are saying the movie is a bad adaptation, well they are just crazy. Like I said, I hate to admit it, but the ending was better than the contrived alien attack. The purists might be upset, but I liked the movie's ending. This is definitely in my top favorite superhero movies of all time. It might even be number one. Hard to tell. Dark Knight, Iron Man, V for Vendetta, and this movie are all pretty close in my ratings. V and Watchmen are definitely the best conceptually. Dark Knight and Watchmen are the best visually. Iron Man is one of the most entertaining. They are all pretty well rounded. Watchmen holds true to the graphic novel the best. And it features the most complex characters.

Philosophy Experiment Part One: The Trolley Problem

Here is how this experiment will work. I am about to present you with a situation. Your job is to then select one of two actions you would take if faced by the situation. You can keep your choice to yourself or post it in a comment. You may not give an explanation, ask questions, or think about your answer for too long. I want your intuitive decision. This first part is purely for you to state your decision. I will ask for the reasoning in a later part.
Here is the situation:

You are the operator of a trolley. Suddenly, your trolley's breaking mechanism fails and you are unable to stop. A little ways down the track there are five people trapped, unable to get out of the way. You have no way to stop them, so their death seems inevitable. However, you DO have the ability to divert your trolley onto a second track to save their lives. There is a catch. One person is trapped on the second trap.* Here are your options:
You can not do anything and let the five people die.
Or you can divert the trolley and kill the one person to save the others' lives.

Let the five die or kill the one?

For the sake of this experiment, go with your intuition. In the actual situation, you would only have seconds to decide anyways.
Don't ask questions.
Don't explain your reasons [yet].
Just answer.

Stand by for Part Two.

*Modified version of Philippa Foot's Trolley Problem