Violence is a cinematic pendulum in America. It swings to the side of glory, an all too common tactic in American blockbusters, or anachronistically, it swings back in our face, illuminating our social transgressions and the despondency of our culture. In "Elephant," a voyeuristic film loosely based on the Columbine shootings in Littleton, Colo., director Gus Van Sant addresses violence in America and human desires for perspective, explanation and closure. Van Sant chose to interview high school students from his hometown of Portland, Ore., resulting in a cast that is poignantly real, emotively credible, and almost 30-years-old.

The cinematography and quiet power are the film's strongest elements. The shots are simple and understated, but are empowered with the help of aesthetic elements such as the music - such as "Moonlight Sonata" - that plays softly in the background.

With minimalistic dialogue and chronologically scattered progression, Van Sant's film moves much like the winds before a dangerous summer storm: eerie and foreboding, yet calm. In this sense, the film achieves perhaps its ultimate end to lend poignancy and verisimilitude to an atmosphere laden with controversy and misinterpretations. Van Sant is a master of atmosphere; exemplified in some of his other films such as "To Die For," "Drugstore Cowboy," "My Own Private Idaho" and "Good Will Hunting." "Elephant" joins rank with these films but loses momentum during its second half. In the end, Van Sant's ultimate objective gets lost somewhere between his hypocritical portrayal and the elusiveness of our own human condition.

But the film does falter. The leading action and building mood result in some unexpected disappointments. It plays oddly on vague and cliched social assumptions that don't quite gel with its innovative style. The video game references collide with the violent camera angles Van Sant chooses to utilize. In addition, Hitler references and Internet gun sales are the "easy way out" in dealing with adolescent violence in modern America. A vague and unexplored reference to potential homosexual liaisons between the killers and high school girls resorting to bulimia, appear anachronistic to the seemingly cohesive atmosphere Van Sant has so impressively recreated.

We are struck by how real everything feels. Some of these kids could never be cast in any other role, they so wholly capture it Van Sant plays us to every cliche in the book.

Various non-sequiturs give the illusion of a circumscribing plot that never quite comes full circle. Cafeteria workers, not elemental to the plot, spark a joint mid-lunch time rush, and the introduction of characters who are never characterized. It could be argued that herein lies the meat of Van Sant's artistic endeavors - that life is inconsequential, and tragedy even more so. But even in this sense his vision falls short. His stylistic approach seems inadequate in relation to the heavy subject matter. A film of this magnitude begs some social commentary, for without it, the amazing character portrayals lose any sense of depth; the plot seems unfinished and the story untold.

On the whole, Van Sant deserves kudos. He attempted no easy feat and cast the tragedy in a light that is both new and interesting. The film is undeniably worth viewing. It makes you think, which in itself is not a bad accomplishment for American entertainment. In the end, Van Sant has painted a landscape of American tragedy that is perhaps as inexplicable as America itself.