I just went over to the cafeteria to get some snack from Dunkin Donuts. A strawberry filled donut and a pineapple filled donut, together worth twenty pesos. I gave a 50-peso bill to pay for the donuts, and the lady gave me two 20s and a 10 as change. I took three steps away before realizing her mistake, and then in a knee-jerk reaction I turned back and returned the extra 20-peso bill. I heard the lady make a positive comment about honesty as I left.
Hey, there is still goodness in humanity's instincts! Or at least, in mine. :->
Thursday, December 7, 2006
Wednesday, December 6, 2006
Casino Royale
I've never been a big fan of James Bond movies, but I've always felt an obligation to watch them since they are part of such a well-known and established franchise. And so I headed to Ayala to watch Casino Royale. Besides, I had been hearing that this one is different.
There's been a lot of negative talk in the past year about the casting of Daniel Craig as Bond ("more liek james blonde! har har!"). Goldeneye was the first Bond movie I ever saw so Pierce Brosnan is practically the only Bond I've ever known. I've long wondered what it would be like at the changing of the guard when some new face finally takes over the part, and Daniel Craig seems to fit into the role just perfectly. This fits my hypothesis that when a respected company does something that seems completely crazy, they just might know what they're doing.
Casino Royale is to the James Bond series what Batman Begins was to the Batman series. Less focus on the girls and gadgets and special effects, more focus on the character and the starkly realistic action. James Bond is a real character this time, not just a caricature. This is a real movie, not just another episode in a long-running high-budget TV series.
Star Movies seems to have gone Bond crazy these past few days, so after watching Casino Royale I've been able to watch some of Goldeneye, Tomorrow Never Dies, and Die Another Day. I never thought there was anything particularly wrong with the movies before, but watching them again made me realize how cartoony they are in comparison. In Die Another Day, Bond has an invisible car and windsurfs on huge CGI waves in the arctic without getting wet. In sharp contrast to Die Another Day's relatively sanitized torture scene, Casino Royale's villain strips Bond butt naked and goes straight for the balls. :/ It's a painful scene to watch, but the grittiness is appreciated.
There's been a lot of negative talk in the past year about the casting of Daniel Craig as Bond ("more liek james blonde! har har!"). Goldeneye was the first Bond movie I ever saw so Pierce Brosnan is practically the only Bond I've ever known. I've long wondered what it would be like at the changing of the guard when some new face finally takes over the part, and Daniel Craig seems to fit into the role just perfectly. This fits my hypothesis that when a respected company does something that seems completely crazy, they just might know what they're doing.
Casino Royale is to the James Bond series what Batman Begins was to the Batman series. Less focus on the girls and gadgets and special effects, more focus on the character and the starkly realistic action. James Bond is a real character this time, not just a caricature. This is a real movie, not just another episode in a long-running high-budget TV series.
Star Movies seems to have gone Bond crazy these past few days, so after watching Casino Royale I've been able to watch some of Goldeneye, Tomorrow Never Dies, and Die Another Day. I never thought there was anything particularly wrong with the movies before, but watching them again made me realize how cartoony they are in comparison. In Die Another Day, Bond has an invisible car and windsurfs on huge CGI waves in the arctic without getting wet. In sharp contrast to Die Another Day's relatively sanitized torture scene, Casino Royale's villain strips Bond butt naked and goes straight for the balls. :/ It's a painful scene to watch, but the grittiness is appreciated.
Monday, December 4, 2006
Happy Feet
Now here's a movie that depends on technical achievement and cuteness to win over audiences. Take that as both compliment and criticism-- altough this is one of the prettiest movies ever made, it's clear that they didn't put nearly as much effort into the plot as they did with the animation. Case in point: The movie's climactic ending relies on the premise that the cuteness of a million tapdancing penguins can charm the human race into stopping Antarctic fishing. If you think I just spoiled the ending for you, don't worry, you won't watch Happy Feet for its story anyway.
You will want to watch it because it's beautiful and adorable. It's fun watching penguins sliding down icy slopes, diving off enormous cliffs, zooming through the water. A better story could have made Happy Feet memorable, but the charm and eye candy is enough for me to consider it enjoyable. :)
It seems not everyone was captivated by the movie's charms though. Some wacky American conservatives are calling Happy Feet "far left" liberal propaganda. Perhaps they see an echo of themselves in the humans that were exploiting and destroying the environment, and in the stubborn elder penguins that were distrustful of foreigners and afraid of change.
You will want to watch it because it's beautiful and adorable. It's fun watching penguins sliding down icy slopes, diving off enormous cliffs, zooming through the water. A better story could have made Happy Feet memorable, but the charm and eye candy is enough for me to consider it enjoyable. :)
It seems not everyone was captivated by the movie's charms though. Some wacky American conservatives are calling Happy Feet "far left" liberal propaganda. Perhaps they see an echo of themselves in the humans that were exploiting and destroying the environment, and in the stubborn elder penguins that were distrustful of foreigners and afraid of change.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)