I know that amongst The Hobbit, Pacific Rim, and Thor 2, The Attack is perhaps not really the right fit. Nevertheless, it is added to this list of 'favouritEs' because of the way that it tells the story and profoundly affected my thoughts. Throughout the movie, there was only one moment where I detected a jump in the story that felt like a short-cut, a phone call that didn't make sense. The rest was the story of a man thoroughly impacted by the violent passing of his wife, labeled a terrorist by his resident country, Israel, and a martyr by his country of origin, Palestine. This movie was entirely spoken in Hebrew and Arabic, so in all likelihood will not be seen by the masses, many of which will also avoid it because of its subject matter. To the latter, I say that it is presented mostly in a human way, rather than through the lens of a bloody massacre. We see the aftermath mostly and there was only one scene where I turned away, even though even there it was shown in a mostly tasteful way.
It's a very difficult story to tell, because of the contrarian emotions felt by both sides. It appears to paint the Palestinian sentiment in a more favourable light, however the only sign we see of the violence that Israel inflicted on Palestine is in the way Palestinians react to the tragedy and a dust-covered piece of ruble, called 'Ground Zero.' Perhaps, I am not up to date on my history of that part of the world, and Ground Zero should mean more than it did to me.
We are introduced to familiar, human situations on both sides. Jewish and Palestinian friends and family sharing their pain over a meal, all seen through the eyes of the protagonist, who is forced to see his personal tragedy through the eyes of the victims, that of the perpetrators, and that of opinionated bystanders. On the Israeli side, we see the reactions in the aftermath, most of which are angry and hurt, directed at the protagonist and his terrorist deceased wife. On the Palestinian side, we see her elevated to martyrdom, posters of her hanging on every street. We also see friends and colleagues remaining loyal to him, even through 17 Israelis died, some of which he attempted to save on the operating table. And we see his family pushing him out in order to escape prosecution from the Israelis, as they suspect he is being followed as their only lead to understanding this crime.
The worst part is to hear her, his beloved wife, being referred to as a tool of war, or a weapon. As someone that helped her country, but otherwise was not important. Equally so, the unbearable idea that his acceptance into Israeli society as a prominent surgeon, was in fact a betrayal to all the Palestinians living in poverty and suppression, and that this betrayal may have been the cause of it all.
There are books and movies that I am grateful to have been exposed to. They increased my appreciation of the complexities of a situation; they painted it in a nuanced way, the way that most things really are. The White Band (Das Weisse Band) showed the roots of evil that lead to the rise of Hitler. The Road to Freedom showed the harshness of South African life in the early 20th century that lead to the new wave that was Nelson Mandela (I will miss him). The Attack shows, to a degree, that there is a price to pay for the mess that surrounds that area of the world, a price paid by not only both sides, but by bystanders as well. It shows us perhaps that in the end, perhaps not taking a side is the worst crime of all.
Wednesday, December 25, 2013
Friday, December 20, 2013
In People: 'Nelson Mandella' on The New Yorker Cover December 16th 2013
 |
| All Rights To This Picture Owned by Conde Nast / The New Yorker / Contributors |
Thursday, December 19, 2013
In Movies: High Definition 3D in The Hobbit
Let me start by saying that this will not be a review of The Hobbit 2, Desolation of Smaug. I didn't like the first one, nor the second one, and while I wasn't able to pinpoint why at first, HD 3D made it possible for me to tell you why: the script kind of sucks. I never understood how they could make 3 relatively good movies out of 3 fat books of The Lord of the Rings and now expect to do the same out of a tiny little book.
Anyway, this is about HD 3D, which is worth mentioning because it felt like seeing color for the very 1st time. I was glued to the screen because it felt like I wasn't watching a movie, but instead saw a live play.
Now there's a problem with that, because acting for a play is different from acting for a movie. In a movie, action flows and it's not just about human interaction (depending on the movie). In a play, the humans carry the plot and subsequently their acting is, how should I say, exaggerated.
The Hobbit features many "meetings" of characters, the dwarves mostly, and it looked so real that it was easy to spot bad acting. I know that's a strange comment to give on better than HD technology, but it was immediately apparent. Now, I can see plenty of positive things: the detail of the computer generated surroundings was tremendous, the dragon looked awesome, as did any orc or monster, and I really felt like I was there (the screen was not IMAX size though, sadly). But I just didn't like that movie and while I'll watch the third, because I am a huge Tolkien fan, I'll be glad when this trilogy is complete.
Anyway, this is about HD 3D, which is worth mentioning because it felt like seeing color for the very 1st time. I was glued to the screen because it felt like I wasn't watching a movie, but instead saw a live play.
Now there's a problem with that, because acting for a play is different from acting for a movie. In a movie, action flows and it's not just about human interaction (depending on the movie). In a play, the humans carry the plot and subsequently their acting is, how should I say, exaggerated.
The Hobbit features many "meetings" of characters, the dwarves mostly, and it looked so real that it was easy to spot bad acting. I know that's a strange comment to give on better than HD technology, but it was immediately apparent. Now, I can see plenty of positive things: the detail of the computer generated surroundings was tremendous, the dragon looked awesome, as did any orc or monster, and I really felt like I was there (the screen was not IMAX size though, sadly). But I just didn't like that movie and while I'll watch the third, because I am a huge Tolkien fan, I'll be glad when this trilogy is complete.
Thursday, December 5, 2013
Link-up In Music: Jay-Z's favourite albums ranked by ... Jay-Z
Arguably, Jay-Z is the smartest dude on the planet, a close second being Arnold Schwarzenegger, before he reached too high too early, but that's another story. So Kottke linked to this, hence I just re-link to him with some other comments.
Jay-Z's book, Decoded, is not the greatest ever written. It's no "Road to Freedom," but I read it because I do believe it's a smart dude. So, in his works, you could argue it's a piece of long-form poetry, I would rank that maybe around Blueprint 3.
I came across him during Blueprint 1 & 2, as well as the Black Album, all of which were great and continue to be re-listens. I'm also, for some reason, a great fan of American Gangster (movie & soundtrack), which is kind of like a fairy tale of a gangster movie, where you root for the bad guy, even though you know the man's eventually going to get him.
Do I really think he's smart? Yes, absolutely. The smartest? It depends on context, but I do think he's got an empire state of mind (much like Arnold) and moves the chess pieces accordingly. So he deserves my respect for that.
OK, I'm out.
Jay-Z's book, Decoded, is not the greatest ever written. It's no "Road to Freedom," but I read it because I do believe it's a smart dude. So, in his works, you could argue it's a piece of long-form poetry, I would rank that maybe around Blueprint 3.
I came across him during Blueprint 1 & 2, as well as the Black Album, all of which were great and continue to be re-listens. I'm also, for some reason, a great fan of American Gangster (movie & soundtrack), which is kind of like a fairy tale of a gangster movie, where you root for the bad guy, even though you know the man's eventually going to get him.
Do I really think he's smart? Yes, absolutely. The smartest? It depends on context, but I do think he's got an empire state of mind (much like Arnold) and moves the chess pieces accordingly. So he deserves my respect for that.
OK, I'm out.
Wednesday, November 27, 2013
In Sports: The Impossible Training for Climbing
I think that I tend to make choices on the basis of past learned behaviour. Perhaps many people do, perhaps only a few, I do not know, but I do know that this behaviour limits the scope. In my case, I've started my exercise trajectory with lifting weights and I generally tend to come back to it when I train for other sports. After weights, I did kickboxing, salsa, and competitive running for significant amounts of time. And since 2007, I discovered climbing. It's a sport that I love and hate for a multitude of mental, social, physical, and emotional reasons.
The mental...
Climbing is about planning ahead, it's about looking at a route (a series of grips and steps) and imagining yourself climbing through those, after which you hopefully manage to. The way it has transformed my life is that I have learned to see plenty through a similar lens. If you envision the steps that you take to reach a goal, you will reach it or get closer to it than if you don't. And (hopefully) nothing is impossible.
The social...
I've made tremendous friends since I started climbing, but I tend to make tremendous friends during many activities. The difference here is that you are literarily entrusting your life onto others, which is a bond that is as strong as family nearly. Because of this, I've also lost some friends, because the trust was not earned. But you tend to look at people in the same way in other areas of life as well. Is this a person that will hang on to me if I fall?
The physical...
I am not typically built for climbing, but I can say the same for running as well. Then again, every sport has sub-sports. In running, I was always better at sprinting because of the explosive nature of it and the way my body works. In climbing, your greatest advantage is not just strength or endurance, but also weight. And I tend to be a tall, rather heavy person. This is a battle I fight with every time I climb, particularly in areas where upper body strength (which is equally affected by body weight and technique) is required. Therefore my route of choice tends to be flatter, though there I like to do difficult flat ones as well, because they are more about puzzling and technique.
The emotional...
The hardest saved for last. What does it do to a man or woman to not win? What does it do to get older and see all the young ones passing you by? What does it do to be too thin & frail, too fat, too injured, or in some way incompatible, at least in your mind? And, what does it do to be afraid of heights or to do something that you never succeeded at before? It's a tremendous experience, climbing, and mainly because you have to face demons every time you do it. If you look at beginners or pros, there is always that new challenge, that unclumb route, that move that your body just doesn't seem designed for. You learn, tremendously, by experiencing, step by step, how to accomplish something. Your fingers hurt, your feet and knees can hurt, your core, your back... a lot of pain is the natural companion of sport, but the learning that you do is what keeps you going.
In my case, I mentioned my physical ability and how it affects my actions. But there is also the emotional part, the mental endurance and the fear of heights, both of which seem nearly impossible to train, but in fact just require trying and trying again in different ways.
The Impossible Training
Sometimes it seems like there is no way to train for climbing except by climbing. Here are the focal points:
The mental...
Climbing is about planning ahead, it's about looking at a route (a series of grips and steps) and imagining yourself climbing through those, after which you hopefully manage to. The way it has transformed my life is that I have learned to see plenty through a similar lens. If you envision the steps that you take to reach a goal, you will reach it or get closer to it than if you don't. And (hopefully) nothing is impossible.
The social...
I've made tremendous friends since I started climbing, but I tend to make tremendous friends during many activities. The difference here is that you are literarily entrusting your life onto others, which is a bond that is as strong as family nearly. Because of this, I've also lost some friends, because the trust was not earned. But you tend to look at people in the same way in other areas of life as well. Is this a person that will hang on to me if I fall?
The physical...
I am not typically built for climbing, but I can say the same for running as well. Then again, every sport has sub-sports. In running, I was always better at sprinting because of the explosive nature of it and the way my body works. In climbing, your greatest advantage is not just strength or endurance, but also weight. And I tend to be a tall, rather heavy person. This is a battle I fight with every time I climb, particularly in areas where upper body strength (which is equally affected by body weight and technique) is required. Therefore my route of choice tends to be flatter, though there I like to do difficult flat ones as well, because they are more about puzzling and technique.
The emotional...
The hardest saved for last. What does it do to a man or woman to not win? What does it do to get older and see all the young ones passing you by? What does it do to be too thin & frail, too fat, too injured, or in some way incompatible, at least in your mind? And, what does it do to be afraid of heights or to do something that you never succeeded at before? It's a tremendous experience, climbing, and mainly because you have to face demons every time you do it. If you look at beginners or pros, there is always that new challenge, that unclumb route, that move that your body just doesn't seem designed for. You learn, tremendously, by experiencing, step by step, how to accomplish something. Your fingers hurt, your feet and knees can hurt, your core, your back... a lot of pain is the natural companion of sport, but the learning that you do is what keeps you going.
In my case, I mentioned my physical ability and how it affects my actions. But there is also the emotional part, the mental endurance and the fear of heights, both of which seem nearly impossible to train, but in fact just require trying and trying again in different ways.
The Impossible Training
Sometimes it seems like there is no way to train for climbing except by climbing. Here are the focal points:
- Get your strength to weight ratio right, meaning you need to have strength but keeping your weight low. The top-performers have lower than 5% body fat (source), but that's certainly not for the food lovers amongst us... In my view then, the only option is aerobic exercise to compensate for the increased caloric intake.
- The type of strength is hard(er) to train for: grip strength, static (isometric) strength, core strength, and other muscles contribute to performance, but typically the more you train outside of a climbing environment, the more you build unnecessary bulk.
- The mental and emotional strength is nearly impossible to train for outside of a climbing environment, just because much of it depends on exposing yourself to difficult conditions, that are not easy to replicate elsewhere. But you do need to train these, as much as everything else.
So here a brief insight of what I spend much of my free time with. Hope to see you on the rocks soon :)
Thursday, November 21, 2013
In Movies: Blade Runner - The Aquarelle Edition
Mesmerising. "This animation consists of 12 597 handmade aquarelle paintings, each painting is approximately 1,5*3cm in size. Together they form my [Anders Ramsell's] 35 minute long paraphrase on the motion picture Blade Runner (1982) by Ridley Scott."
Via Coudal Partners.
Via Coudal Partners.
Friday, November 8, 2013
In Movies: 'Cool Runnings' and the celebration of Failure
AVClub.com, one of my regular reads for mostly TV reviews, has an interesting article on 'Cool Running,' which was, incidentally, John Candy's last movie and one of Disney's most successful at that time (1993). From the article, what makes the movie so unique:
Cool Runnings employs failure not as a plot device, but as an ethos. The main character is Derice Bannock (Leon), a sprinter whose dreams of Olympic gold are shattered during the qualifying race when another competitor, Junior Bevil (Rawle D. Lewis), falls off the starting block, tripping Bannock and a third runner, the inexplicably named Yul Brenner (Malik Yoba). That’s right: Cool Runnings literally opens with the protagonist falling on his face. And the moment is played completely straight, not for laughs.I imagine that most people have seen this by now, but if you want a feelgood movie that doesn't feel empty in point either, check out Cool Runnings!
Thursday, November 7, 2013
In Web: Beforethey.com (pass away)
Takes pictures of tribes that are sure not to be around if you believe in history believing itself. Currently, you can see galleries of tribe members in Ethiopia, Indonesia + Papua New Guinea, Kenya + Tanzania, New Zealand, Mongolia, Siberia - Yamal, Nepal, China, Vanuatu, Argentina + Ecuador, Namibia, India, and Siberia - Chukotka.
Click on the title or the link to see the site.
Click on the title or the link to see the site.
In Movies: Thor 2 - The Dark World, light-weight fantasy scifi 3D bashfest
Prior to continuing, I should mention that I "typed" the first draft of this using the dictation feature on my new iPhone 5s. Very, very impressed!
Movies are funny, because when you're in the moment or perhaps just out of it, you can feel drastically different to after a few hours later or after a rewatch. Thor 2 - The Dark World is that kind of movie. I loved watching it and was excited after watching it too. But after reflection, I don't actually like it because I felt cheated somewhat.
What are the basic observations? The action flow does really well. The script felt quite light. The acting was okay in parts. It was an interesting mix between Science Fiction (space ships and lasers) and Fantasy (Lord of the Rings elves and magic), which didn't really work, but isn't advanced technology like a kind of magic? There were also plenty of humorous parts, which carries a lot of the Marvel franchise.
So how did it cheat? Primarily, by making impossible or hard to explain things just work. Thor has impossible feelings for an earthling, but that pain is not really explored (thank god, millions of comic book movies sigh). Thor fights on a planet that looks like Dune and falls into a wormhole that allows him to continue the fight on Earth, with more stakes. Those kind of 'short-cuts' allow for the action to move fast and for the viewer to feel like they're on the Thor-ride.
The whole movie was a trade-off between depth and flow, constantly balancing on the edge of story logic. It was logical only to the extent needed to make us believe that up was up and down was down, and in many cases why down was up and vice versa. I know that sounds annoyingly cryptic, but the laws of physics are constantly defied in this movie and I just don't want to say how.
Bottom line: if you want non-stop action this movie is for you. And I imagine that's why most people went. If you want more mythology and depth, you'll be disappointed, though the movie compensates for that plenty with comedy.
Movies are funny, because when you're in the moment or perhaps just out of it, you can feel drastically different to after a few hours later or after a rewatch. Thor 2 - The Dark World is that kind of movie. I loved watching it and was excited after watching it too. But after reflection, I don't actually like it because I felt cheated somewhat.
What are the basic observations? The action flow does really well. The script felt quite light. The acting was okay in parts. It was an interesting mix between Science Fiction (space ships and lasers) and Fantasy (Lord of the Rings elves and magic), which didn't really work, but isn't advanced technology like a kind of magic? There were also plenty of humorous parts, which carries a lot of the Marvel franchise.
So how did it cheat? Primarily, by making impossible or hard to explain things just work. Thor has impossible feelings for an earthling, but that pain is not really explored (thank god, millions of comic book movies sigh). Thor fights on a planet that looks like Dune and falls into a wormhole that allows him to continue the fight on Earth, with more stakes. Those kind of 'short-cuts' allow for the action to move fast and for the viewer to feel like they're on the Thor-ride.
The whole movie was a trade-off between depth and flow, constantly balancing on the edge of story logic. It was logical only to the extent needed to make us believe that up was up and down was down, and in many cases why down was up and vice versa. I know that sounds annoyingly cryptic, but the laws of physics are constantly defied in this movie and I just don't want to say how.
Bottom line: if you want non-stop action this movie is for you. And I imagine that's why most people went. If you want more mythology and depth, you'll be disappointed, though the movie compensates for that plenty with comedy.
In Hardware: the iPhone 5s, a future-proof computer and camera in my pocket
First, some bullet-point format observations:
CONCLUSION
The frustrating and good thing about Apple devices is that they are of such good build quality that if you already have an iPhone (4 in my case) and were already able to put iOS 7 on it, the iPhone 5s does not feel that new. My old phone is 3 years old. About 3 months ago, the mute switch and top volume button stopped functioning (I did drop it a lot), but other than being slower, which you get used to, the only reason I needed to upgrade was because it made financial sense with my provider. I'll probably get the iPhone 8 and 11 for that reason as well, because I'm actually buying something that works durably. With other brands, I never know if the build quality is good, if the software continues to work well, and if the apps are available. So, it's a pragmatic choice.
It's frustrating to no longer have that pink cloud feeling about Apple gadgets, but at the same time there are so many easter eggs contained within the software and features that I'm sure to enjoy discovering over the next 3-6 months, after which it will become a good companion.
If you care to support this Website, feel free to order an iPhone 5s on Amazon and give us a kick back!
Why not choose an iPhone 5c?
The simple answer is future-proofing. The iPhone 5 was a perfectly good phone (apart from some battery life issues on 3G) and the iPhone 5c is essentially the same one, with some improvements in the camera and elsewhere. Another reason for not upgrading to it is the plastic, which I feel is a bit of a downgrade from the Braun-inspired design quality of the iPhone 4.
The iPhone 5s feels more like it's designed for, well, a lot of interesting things to come. Apart from the camera, which is state of the art for a mobile phone (see a comparison with the new Nokia Lumia 1020 here), the fingerprint sensor seems like a step towards a lot of opportunity, and I'm really excited about the M7 sensor, as I exercise a lot and care about having good performance data.
P.S. I do believe something is wrong with both software and hardware aspects right now (particularly the battery life), which I will try to fix with their help over the coming weeks.
Finger print sensor: I like it, primarily because it saves time over the code I would usually enter to unlock it, not to mention my Apple ID in the App Store. During the unlocking, I don't like that it immediately requires the fingerprint when I lock the phone, because I had it previously set for a few minutes after closing, which is not an option now. I do hope that changes, because it's still slower to unlock the phone then.
The camera: haven't tested it extensively, but like the nighttime performance, the intelligent flash function, the launch speed of the photo apps I use, the picture burst mode, and the slo-mo, although filming is definitely not my métier. It's clearly better than the iPhone 4 camera, which is what I wanted.
The M7 sensor: I'm excited about it, but haven't used it in an app yet. I hope Moves, which I recommended before, integrates it soon, providing that Nike Move doesn't sue it out of the water.
The look & feel: it doesn't feel oversized and it's super light, but I found the iPhone 4 light enough. I did notice that the White iPhone collects dirt at the bottom edge, which annoys me to no end.
The battery life: Houston do we have a problem? This battery does not last long, maybe 10 hours on light use, and I'm wondering if it's to do with that I'm still on 3G (T-mobile NL is supposedly switching to 4G in a few weeks) or because of the battery bug that I hear about. Or, because of some kind of software or background process problem. Frustrated about it.
The apps: I started using Pages for writing, because it syncs so easily with my Mac and with Pages in iCloud (useful for Windows PCs). Not really using other apps, or not noticing big changes. I do enjoy making bad music with Garage Band though...
Other: light sensor is much better and I really enjoy using the phone in inverted colour mode (the contrast is much better now!). Siri works well for me, as does dictation (typed a blog post with it yesterday).
CONCLUSION
The frustrating and good thing about Apple devices is that they are of such good build quality that if you already have an iPhone (4 in my case) and were already able to put iOS 7 on it, the iPhone 5s does not feel that new. My old phone is 3 years old. About 3 months ago, the mute switch and top volume button stopped functioning (I did drop it a lot), but other than being slower, which you get used to, the only reason I needed to upgrade was because it made financial sense with my provider. I'll probably get the iPhone 8 and 11 for that reason as well, because I'm actually buying something that works durably. With other brands, I never know if the build quality is good, if the software continues to work well, and if the apps are available. So, it's a pragmatic choice.
It's frustrating to no longer have that pink cloud feeling about Apple gadgets, but at the same time there are so many easter eggs contained within the software and features that I'm sure to enjoy discovering over the next 3-6 months, after which it will become a good companion.
If you care to support this Website, feel free to order an iPhone 5s on Amazon and give us a kick back!
Why not choose an iPhone 5c?
The simple answer is future-proofing. The iPhone 5 was a perfectly good phone (apart from some battery life issues on 3G) and the iPhone 5c is essentially the same one, with some improvements in the camera and elsewhere. Another reason for not upgrading to it is the plastic, which I feel is a bit of a downgrade from the Braun-inspired design quality of the iPhone 4.
The iPhone 5s feels more like it's designed for, well, a lot of interesting things to come. Apart from the camera, which is state of the art for a mobile phone (see a comparison with the new Nokia Lumia 1020 here), the fingerprint sensor seems like a step towards a lot of opportunity, and I'm really excited about the M7 sensor, as I exercise a lot and care about having good performance data.
P.S. I do believe something is wrong with both software and hardware aspects right now (particularly the battery life), which I will try to fix with their help over the coming weeks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
