Not enough

There seems to be a tendency in the Philippines to think that if someone has been brought to trial, then the trial itself will be  a piece of cake.  This is fairly common, particularly when the cases involve corruption of one form or another.  There have been many cases which have been dismissed because of sloppy work by the prosecution, and often, these are prosecutors employed by the government.

This seems to be the case also in the current impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona.  Yesterday, the prosecution fell on their collective faces as they basically did not have any evidence ready, nor were they prepared to present their cases for the articles of impeachment.  That is unacceptable.

Regardless of how I personally feel about the matter, this particular exercise of impeachment has been lauded by some bodies abroad, since it shows that the country is trying to exercise its democratic processes.  This would be best served if both sides did their very best to accomplish their goals.  Having to ask for a postponement because the evidence that was supposed to be presented has not been authenticated is sloppy work and the prosecution cannot hope to win their case if they proceed in this way.  It is also a disservice to the very exercise, as it makes the prosecution appear as if they weren’t serious about the whole exercise to begin with.

The defense team of Justice Corona are high-caliber (and very highly paid) lawyers and, as can be expected, they brought their “A” game with them to the trial, particularly since this is history being made.  The government side cannot do any less, regardless of payscale or perceived talent.  It would be such a waste to see this historic exercise end up with a verdict that was not due to a proper trying of the case and instead end up a game of technicality.  I think that the  Filipino people deserve to see their democracy, the same one that they’ve fought for several times already, finally work properly, regardless of the verdict.  If, in the end, Justice Coronal is indicted based on a proper application of due process, so be it.  The same should follow if he is acquitted.

The biggest injustice in my mind is if the verdict is reached not because of a real trial but because of sloppy work.  I’m pretty sure the defense is prepared.  Yesterday’s events showed that the prosecution is not.  That cannot be acceptable, not due to any bias either for or against Justice Corona but rather because the exercise itself should be respected.

Why isn’t there anything worth writing about?

I’ve run into a rut, and it has nothing to do with a lack of desire to write.  Instead, I’m running into a problem I never thought I’d run into, being a resident of the Philippines: I’m getting bored.  This country, which has been through a nearly constant string of turbulence, has suddenly gotten stable, despite what media and people love to say.

My personal gauge for how “exciting” things are have been the broadsheets, and I often grab my commentary from whatever is happening in the country.  However, of late, there really hasn’t been anything worthy of commentary.  Even the issues with President Arroyo and Chief Justice Corona aren’t really big things, or at least, they aren’t new.  Gloria running from prosecution?  That’s been going on for years.  Corona?  He’s an ancillary of the Gloria thing.  The UST dissertation thing?  It’s really UST’s prerogative how they give their degrees; heck, it’s their rules!  So, where does that leave me?

It leaves me sitting in front of the newspapers, strangely, and rather perversely, looking for something to get upset about.  Quite frankly, there isn’t much out there, which means that I need to start looking for other things to write about.

It’s a good sign, the fact that scandals and huge issues are gradually lessening in this country.  It looks like the country is finally rolling up its sleeves and getting down to tackling what has been set aside for so long: how to make life better for everyone.  I’m not just talking about the government, though I am impressed with their conduct so far.  I’m talking about people in general.  The PNP reported a nearly 50% decrease in the crimes reported to them since 2009.  I’m inclined to think that this speaks of a general trend of improvement, given that, even if the percentage of crimes reported to the PNP may not be indicative of actual crime, I also think that there would not be a sudden distrust of the PNP causing people to stop reporting crimes to them.

There are also the positive stories that come in from communities, the small things, the tiny improvements that happen quietly, every day.  What do these things mean to me?  They mean that this nation may be moving away from turbulence, at least for the time being, and might just enjoy some serious progress.  That’s a great thing, except for those who capitalize of the negatives in this country.  The recent campaign of the Department of Tourism, It’s More Fun in the Philippines, resonates with me, partially because I know that it’s true.  The mundane can become exciting here, partially because of our own outlook on things.  The rest of the world seems to be catching on.  Tourism figures are rising, and even Hollywood is getting in on the action, with the latest Bourne film currently being shot in Manila.  (I shudder to think of the traffic.)  Maybe it’s time for our writers and commentators, whether in media or in the arts, to start shifting focus, and start seeing what these people are seeing.

So, what is there worth writing about?  I’m not sure.  But I’m going to be looking.

Mission Impossible Ghost Protocol: Exciting? Yes. Compelling? Um, not quite.

There is absolutely no doubt that Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol is the loudest, most action-packed film I have seen this year.  It is overflowing with over the top stunts, fight scenes, gadgets, and, well, Tom Cruise.  I am actually a fan of the franchise from it’s very intriguing first film, which introduced us to agent Ethan Hunt.  M.I. 4  is also noteworthy as the first live action film of another person who I am a fan of: director Brad Bird (of The Incredibles and Ratatouille, both done by Bird with Pixar).

Tom Cruise’s newest installment of the franchise is definitely the biggest of the films so far, with the action ramping up from the very start of the film.  The scenes are set-piece after set-piece, with very little breaks in between.  Which is my problem with it.  It brings the viewer to a high from the get-go and never lets go, which is exciting… for a while, then it becomes tiring.  Literally.  There were moments where I felt the need to get up and just get air, just to take a break from the sensory bombardment.  The other problem that this approach has is that the story basically becomes a rack from which to hang all these set-piece action sequences from, which is fun if you’re looking for a ride, not as much if you’re in it for a movie.

Which is actually too bad, because there are the bones of an interesting story there (well, except for the villain, who’s just plain silly).  I would have loved to see more development of Ethan’s team, composed of Simon Pegg (as the stereotypical, but effective, funny techie), Paula Patton (as the femme fatale, but this time with her own demons to deal with,), and Jeremy Renner (as the analyst with his own secrets).  Each character was potentially very interesting, but they remained mostly potential and the film really could have taken more time just to build the relationships and rapport between the team, which felt very stilted.  Even the conflicts between them felt forced.

I don’t blame Bird for this, however, I blame a weak script.  The dialogue was, and I hate using this word, corny.  The attempts at Bond-ish spyspeak was annoying and some one-liners fell really flat.  M.I. never really needed those and I didn’t see why this time they had to resort to it this time.  Also, why resurrect the whole Russia/US nuclear war scenario?  The conflict, while supposedly suspenseful, also felt old, which was in odd contradiction to the cutting edge image being pushed by the film.  What I did like, however, was the fact that here, the tech consistently failed the agents, forcing them to improvise and use their skills, rather than rely on gadgetry.  It was also at these moments where the interaction between the characters felt smoother, such as the argument between Ethan and his team about climbing the Burj Khalifa tower in Dubai.

There was also a clearer attempt at humor in this film, which was absent in the previous one.  It was a welcome adjustment and was nice, when it worked.  I just wish they were able to use the characters better than they did.

One thing I did like was the inclusion of Jeremy Renner to the cast.  He brings and edginess that, sadly, Tom Cruise just has problems mustering, no matter what his hair style is. Renner can bring  a darker personality to the franchise, which has made numerous attempts at being dark in the past, with results being, well, mixed at best.  Also, he’s a good replacement for Cruise, if Cruise ever decides to take a break from the series, since he’s able to be physical while also being a really good actor.

One thing that let me down in the film was the ending, which tied up a loose end, but in a way that left me really unhappy about it.  It reminded me of what annoyed me about the third film, and, while it’s an attempt to give Ethan Hunt some pathos, for me all it did was water down an edge that seemed to be there at the start of the film. (I’m sorry that’s so cryptic, but I’m trying to avoid spoiling things.)

What I did find, when I left the theater, was I felt jacked, like my adrenaline was up, but I also didn’t feel excited, which was very strange.  It reflects my experience of the movie: really thrilling, but not as satisfying.  Is it a watch?  Sure it is.  Is it a great movie?  Well, let me put it this way: between M.I.4  and The Incredibles?  The Incredibles wins.

Take 2 minutes and enjoy a movie!

I’m taking a break from my usual long posts and am instead sharing a couple of brilliant films I’ve recently seen.  They’re just 2 minutes long but, arguably, showcase some really good storytelling and film making.  They’re called Side Films by Rani Naamani, who’s day job is working for Dreamworks; this is his, well, side project.  But these films can spell a bright future for him later on.  Just don’t go the route of a Certain Director Whose Name is related to a Time Of Day.

You can view their other films at Vimeo.com, look for Side Films.

Click below and enjoy!

 

 

 

Happy Feet 2: Propaganda with Penguins?

I just watched Happy Feet 2 and was preparing to write my review when I googled it and found a column by NY Post columnist Kyle Smith accusing the film of being part of a leftist agenda.  It’s hilarious.  Too bad he wasn’t kidding.  You can read it here.  In it, he accuses the film of espousing, among other things: vegetarianism, same-sex marriage, collectivism, international bailouts, and Occupy Wall Street.  Wow.

I thought it was a film about singing and dancing penguins.

To be fair, though, the film does have an environmental issue at its heart, as did the first one.  If anything, the environmental problem the penguins face is even more central to the plot of the movie than the first one, and the mythology of the singing, dancing, penguins take a back seat to this.  The film is less comprehensively written than its predecessor, with a plot that is both simpler and thinner than the first.  It feels like a smaller film, and for me, it’s better for it.  There were times in the first movie where the movie had an epic scope, which was fine, but it was also tiring.  This one is, arguably, much lighter fare.

Visually, the penguins remain as cute as ever, though I found it disturbing that Mumble, the hero of the first movie, still had his “baby” fur.  Though this kept him cute, and probably easier to animate with expressions, it was disturbing to have the hero of the film physically immature even after having his own child.  It was also telling that even if the elder penguin remains, Mumble’s parents aren’t around anymore.  The animation does not really make any huge progress here, given how groundbreakingly beautiful the first film was.  And even then, the film seemed smaller, with angles and vistas curiously unimpressive.  Of course, this may be the fault of being bombarded with so many epic visuals of late that the film simply becomes one of many, and thus, is unimpressive.

The music, which was so much a part of the first film, also becomes a smaller affair here, with fewer songs, and fewer numbers.  Interestingly, the most surprising number here belongs to the smallest member of the cast, and it is an aria, no less.  It is as funny as it is fascinating to listen to, but it feels like novelty.  Pink deserves special credit for her taking over the role of Gloria, that the late Brittany Murphy played in the original.  Her voice is perfect for the character, and given her natural talent, it works really well in the film.  Elijah Wood and Robin Williams do their fair share of the work too, carrying plenty of the emotional weight on the film with their performances.

The really new thing in the film was the addition of Will and Bill Krill, who pretty much steal the show simply by providing a twisted existential debate throughout the movie.  It helps that Matt Damon and Brad Pitt play the two characters, and its immediately obvious that they really enjoyed their roles.  They pushed the movie to an odd, and oddly poignant direction, and their relevance to the main plot reveals itself at the film’s end.

However, back to the question of it being leftist propaganda:  if working together despite your differences is leftist, then I really do worry for those who consider themselves part of the right.  Oh, and Mr. Smith, the Krill are red because they’re harder to see underwater that way, it isn’t a political stand, just so you know.

So, is it worth a watch?  Yes, especially if you’re fond of watching singing and dancing penguins, which I am.  Though personally, I’d watch it just to see Brad Pitt and Matt Damon take two of the most insignificant characters in the food chain, and then turn them into scene-stealers.

The Walking Dead: Zombies and Zeitgeist

The Walking Dead is the kind of show that people watch for the wrong reasons.  After all, it’s a zombie show, so it should be all about the shambling, moaning monsters that try to eat brains.  It’s a zombie show, so the zombies should be front and center, right?

Well, no.  Actually, zombies are interesting in that, despite the fact that there is just so much going on with them currently in our popular culture (there are books, movies, video games, comic books, and even stuffed toys of them), they are never in the spotlight.  Instead, it’s how the human beings react to them that generates the horror in the stories.  One excellent example of this is Max Brooks’ novel World War Z, which is, a little spoiler alert for those who didn’t read it, actually set after the “zombie apocalypse” took place.  The zombies are almost an afterthought in most of the stories, or are merely a specter, a memory, or a rumor.  The most horrifying sections of the novel dealt with what people would resort to during desperate times.

Another excellent example of this is the comic book and TV show The Walking Dead.  It is, undoubtedly, a very tense, often nail-biting show where one often finds oneself riveted and unable to predict what would happen next.  The first season was  intense and shocking, and more often than not, it was due to the choices that the group of survivors have to make.  The second season, which is currently ongoing, is on a slow boil, something that I can’t expect to end well for the group.  There’s a lot going on, and the show takes pains to introduce the lives of these characters.  It’s a trap, of course.  Eventually, these characters will die, one way or the other, and to have the audience emotionally invested with the characters will make each death just that much more painful.

These are real products. Makes you wonder why else you'd need all of these in one "kit".

What I find interesting with the fascination with zombies is how it seems to be something that people imagine to be plausible.  How else to explain the marketing of “apocalypse kits” by some manufacturers of knives and tools?  There seems to be something that people find believable with the whole zombie apocalypse idea, never mind that the zombie was actually based on Haitian Voodoo, and that this “Hollywood” version was invented by B-movie director George Romero in the 1960′s.   It also highlights a fear that we seem to all have: that somehow, we will be betrayed by our own selves.  After all, the reason these shambling corpses become so ghoulish isn’t their differences with us, it’s their similarities that make them terrifying.

Is the show worth a watch?  Definitely, actually, it’s a good time to jump on, with the survivors currently in a holding pattern of a sort.  It gives everyone  a chance to see a little more of the characters before the story begins to ramp up again.

On another note, I’d sure like one of those Walking Dead bolos.  You never know…

 

It isn’t over.

Courtesy of the Philippine Daily Inquirer

It is a genuine achievement to have the Philippine Supreme Court rule on the redistribution of land of Hacienda Luisita to its farmers.  It is seen, and rightfully so, as a landmark decision, especially since the owners of the plantation happens to be related to the president.  It is a step, not a big one, but definitely a step towards possibly correcting a land system that has been skewed since the time of the Spaniards.  But while the farmers celebrate and everyone pats themselves on the back at how this is a victory for the farmers and that it can set a precedent that will allow more farmers to actually own the land that they till, we should realize that giving the land over to the farmers, and the farmers actually succeeding in their ownership of the land are two vastly different things.

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) has been in existence since the time of President Aquino’s mother, who spearheaded the measure.  She also, quite famously, allowed Hacienda Luisita to use a shareholding option, where the farmers were given shares of stock in the plantation rather than actual land.  This arrangement failed, and led to the unrest that led to several unfortunate deaths, as rallies for land became more and more adversarial through the years.  During the early years of CARP implementation, thousands of farmers received land under the program.  Sadly, most of these farmers are now laborers under landowners once more.  The problem with CARP was that the support system to guide the new landowners to success was not as comprehensively established as the mechanism to give away the land was.  Thus, new farmers, who were also new landowners, were not equipped to handle concerns that before were actually handled by the former landowners.  Most crucially, most farmers were not educated in managing their funds, which led to the failure of a lot of these newly minted landowners.

These new farmers should be seen as new entrepreneurs, and should thus be given everything that any entrepreneur needs to succeed: business skills, access to funding, and an ability to market their goods to their trade.  Unfortunately, CARP had very little on the way of assisting these farmers with these.  Thus, while farmers did have their own land, they often had nothing else, which led not only to a difficulty for the farmers to actually make a profit, it also led to lower productivity for the land itself.  There were some programs provided by DAR and Landbank, but these were not utilized by the farmers themselves.  One possible reason was that the farmers were perhaps unaware of the importance of being able to use these support programs, were not interested and thus, did not avail of them.  The result was that those who did receive land would eventually end up selling it, and instead become laborer-farmers once more.  These can be looked up, if one is inclined to do a little research.

Courtesy of the Agrarian Reform for Food Sovereignty Campaign

Thus, these farmers, if they are to truly become successful, independent landowners, must transition from laborer to entrepreneur and recognize that, like any businessman, there is much much more involved than just tilling their own land.  For them to truly become productive, they need to know how to become successful.  Sadly, leftist groups tend to simplify the issue by concentrating on just the aspect of ownership.  But, for the farmers to truly be successful, the aspect of their being businessmen must be addressed in terms of training and support, whether from government or from interested groups.

So yes, applaud the farmers for their new gains.  But, more importantly, support them so that they become successful landowners.

Pacquiao vs. Marquez III. Well, at least it happened. – updated

It’s pretty obvious from the reactions from the much-touted fight between Manny Pacquiao and Juan Manuel Marquez that it didn’t end anything.  Instead, it looks like the beginning of another rematch between the two.  Pacquiao won by a majority decision, which was just a hair better than a split decision.  In either case, the claims of a knock-out of Marquez never happened and, instead, people were treated to an exhibition of just how good a counter-puncher Marquez was.

Was Marquez  robbed?  I actually, and this is said without bias, don’t think so.  While Marquez did the smart thing and played defense, that won’t win a title.  He needed to push a little more on the aggression to be able to score points.  Also, he was losing steam fast in the final rounds, which Pacquiao capitalized on by upping his own pace.  That was enough to, I think, give Pacquiao enough points to scratch out a victory from this match.  That said, and even if a win is a win, I don’t think Pacquiao was happy with that performance.  He certainly didn’t look happy when the bell rang in the 12th.  It was Marquez who was celebrating, Pacquiao looked almost as if he were brooding, which wasn’t typical of the boxer.

Was it a good fight?  Maybe for people who love to watch technical, tactical fights.  It was full of punch and counter-punch, of careful positioning and single shots.  The flurries, when they came, mostly missed, and was thus disappointing. Pacquiao’s speed didn’t seem to be much of a factor in this fight, I guess because Marquez would be someone who could keep up.  What was surprising was the lack of confidence Pacquiao had in some rounds.  It seemed like he couldn’t figure Marquez out and couldn’t find the range to connect with Marquez.  It certainly was not like the pummel-fests of the past; I still can’t forget the sheer beating Pacquiao gave Antonio Margarito.  I mean, the dude’s face was broken.

In a recent development, the recent release of a video showing that Marquez stepped on Pacquiao’s feet at least six times (some have counted up to 17) during the fight points to what could be dirty boxing on the part of Marquez.  Boxing analysts have said that this isn’t unusual, given that it’s a left-hander boxing a right-hander, but the sheer frequency of the occurrences make for some suspicious behavior on Marquez’ part.  Were the steps intentional?  Some accounts say yes, others say no.  It isn’t a very important point; after all, Pacquiao won, and even he didn’t complain about the foot stepping.

A rematch between the two will almost certainly happen.  After all, this was the closest any fighter has gotten to actually beating Pacquiao and, given the frustration already built up among Marquez and his Mexican fans, it would be silly not to get the two together again to see if, at last, there would be a definitive victory between them.

An interesting side note here would be Floyd Mayweather.  Much like Marquez, Mayweather is a tactical boxer who specializes in counter-punching.  Did the fight expose a possible weakness in Pacquiao that Mayweather could exploit, should they finally fight?  More importantly, could it inspire enough confidence in Mayweather to finally agree to a fight with Pacquiao?  What was clear was that Pacquiao was not, and is not, invincible.

I can, I think, safely predict a Pacquiao-Marquez 4.  Now, will there finally be a Pacquiao-Mayweather and will Pacquiao actually survive this?

I don’t know, and I’m glad for it.

New Look

Awh mah gawd! Wathapend?

I decided to finally change the look of the blog after a good few years. You can now see the pages, and their subpages, on the header, which cleans up the look, and makes the pages easier to notice.  I think it adds a little more edge to the blog, and hopefully keeps it fresh looking.

A Cat to watch.

 

I always do my evaluations of a movie by paying attention to how I am when I step out of the theater.  How I feel when I exit often is a reflection of how I found the movie.  For example, the fact that right after The Tourist, I felt like getting seriously drunk, was a reflection on how horrible I found the movie to be.

With Puss in Boots, I found myself going “oohhh”  for about half an hour after, watching my son and his cousin do the same, over and over.  It was a film that delivered on what it promised, and for someone who was never a fan of the Shrek films (I only really enjoyed the first one.), I was pleasantly surprised that the movie hooked me, and hooked me good.  It was, as advertised, the adventures of Puss in Boots, a character of one of my favorite fairy tales, done Latino style.  It isn’t the best film out there, but it is a lot of fun and worth the money.

This was Puss’ backstory, how he became the legendary outlaw/hero that he would be by the time he hooked up with Shrek and Donkey.  That said, however, the world of Puss seems just a little less silly and just a tiny bit more, for lack of a better term, believable.  It is, however, solidly ludicrous, where talking eggs and fighting cats are commonplace.  Maybe it’s that added layer of sincerity that made it more fun to watch.  The story was also one which went in unexpected directions, and that was a welcome change from the more commonplace plots of other films.  The foreshadowing and the little hints dropped that there was more happening helped keep things interesting.  The story, thankfully, made sense.

The performances in the film were actually better than the ones in Shrek, perhaps because they decided to play it a little “straighter” than in Mike Myers’ franchise.  Antonio Banderas was, of course, pitch perfect as Puss, and he was obviously enjoying delivering the lines.  Salma Hayek actually sounded sexier as a cat, which was something I didn’t think was possible.  The two obviously had a chemistry that worked, perhaps also because they’ve worked with each other before. The familiarity was something that carried through their performances, and strengthened the ties between their characters.  Zach Galifianakis, who I originally thought was a miscast, was likewise an excellent Humpty Dumpty and was a convincing tortured soul/villain.  He also showed more than just an ability to be funny with this film, and its a surprising amount of depth.  Perhaps it’s good for him to not be seen, his Hangover persona just reappears whenever one sees him; it makes one take him a little more seriously.

The visuals of the film were, as expected in a CGI film, wonderful to watch.  That said, however, the current craze to make every film 3d friendly can get annoying, especially when some shots seemed set up just to take advantage of 3d.  Better storytelling wins over nice renderings, every time.  I hope people finally realize that.

The film wasn’t perfect.  There were sequences that just felt too long, and some gags that didn’t seem to work right or didn’t deliver the excitement it should have.  I am also suffering from too many desert movies of late, thanks to Rango, mostly, but  I didn’t enjoy the sequences which were set there.  Also, because of the farcical nature of the series, Puss couldn’t get to the same emotional depth as other films, though I’m not sure that’s necessarily a bad thing.

However, the fun to be had in the film is plenty, and it was very well done, even if it wasn’t perfect.  It’s definitely worth the money.

Oh, and OOOHHHH!