My report: now this was a realistic movie. I’ll just spoil the end and say that everyone dies at the end. None of that heroic crap on this one. The whole movie was in black and white and I just hope there isn’t a game out there like the one they showed on this movie.

Rating:

About it: An aimless 20-year-old with a penchant for following the rules receives a mysterious set of instructions that lead him down a path from which he may never return in director Géla Babluani’s tense tale of death and chance. Sébastien has come into possession of a train ticket and a mysterious set of instructions. Though he is unsure of exactly what fate awaits him when he arrives at his destination, one thing is certain: these items were most certainly not meant for him. Bored by his uneventful existence and hungering for something new, Sébastien boards the outbound train and takes his first bold steps into an unknown future. But the world can be a cruel and unforgiving place filled with unfeeling men to whom human life means little more than a lost wager, and if Sébastien is to make it through his harrowing journey alive he must keep his wits about him and pray that luck is on his side. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide

Part of the homework I was working on today for my Spanish class was reading an article by Cristina Peri Rossi and she believes that men love women that are superior to them and women also love men that they see as superior. It got me to thinking about it ’cause it just doesn’t sound right. No one with enough self esteem will actually admit that the reason she is with his or her partner is because they are superior. In fact, I think we all prefer to believe that we fall in love with people we see as our equal.

It’s not that we look at someone and feel they are superior, what we see is a person that can bring something to the table. Nobody likes having a partner they feel they are carrying or babysitting. We all want someone we can depend on and will have some qualities we either lack or are not as strong. This is the reason why men and women with money and fame prefer to marry someone like them. It is also the reason why men who have money, but are not very handsome will most likely marry a trophy wife and good looking women with no money are looking for men with deep pockets.

Like I said, it’s not superiority that makes a person fall in love. It’s that feeling of completion the other person brings. I think Cristina has some issues she might need to work on… she never used any names in her story, but she was way off about my feelings as a man.

I’ve always thought that we can all learn a lot from just looking at animals and how they behave. It makes me wonder about things like marriage. So far, I haven’t heard of one single animal, besides humans, that spend more than half their lives with the same companion. On one hand we end up frustrating ourselves, at times we want to “kill” that other person because they get on our nerves and it is expensive. On the other hand, if things to workout then life can get a little easier, having kids is a lot easier and better for the children and hopefully when we get old we’ll still have someone to share memories and good times with. OK that’s the whole concept of marriage and monogamy which is not very popular in the animal kingdom, but right now I was thinking more about courtship.

Look at the way lions court females. Usually the male has to try more than once to get the female. The same concept applies to humans, but when is enough trying enough? When are males supposed to say: “OK, this one doesn’t want me and I better move on”? Right now my thinking is that the decision is completely up to the male. It’s something that I’m still thinking about so I may change my opinion

There’s this girl that likes this guy. The guy is interested in her, but he thinks it’s too early to think about marriage but that’s all she really has in mind. “Let’s take it easy” is what he says. “Let’s get to know each other before we start making long term plans… in the meanwhile let’s just have some fun o.k… do what couples do.” He’s talking about sex and that’s really it, because remembering her birthday and the romantic dinners are just a means to the end and that’s his plan of attack.

Her tactic is simple: she won’t give him what he wants because she believes that as soon as he gets it he will bail out and leave her with nothing but shame and frustration. As a matter of fact, she’s been trough it before and it’s time for her to take charge. So she promises him she will give him sex, but first he must make her dreams come trough: she wants the big ring, the big wedding with expensive roses from South America, and a house with at least three bedrooms: one for them, one for the baby which she wants soon and the last one for the baby sitter because she won’t be able to do everything herself. He tells his best friend “man, I love this woman! Nobody has ever made me beg for sex like she does. She’s pretty and classy! This will be our last trip to Vegas and after this I’m getting on my knees.”

So they get married and the honeymoon was great. He thinks this is the best sex he’s ever had and all she’s thinking is this is the right time for her to get pregnant, but all thoughts aside, anyone that would have looked at them through a screen would have wanted the same thing. First class seats on flight 357 and a limo ride bring them home to nothing less than a pimped out shack in a nice new neighborhood. She couldn’t be happier. She’s got the man of her dreams and her time of the month hasn’t come yet. He’s thinking differently now. As soon as the plane left Caribbean grounds he’s been thinking money, money, money: the monthly payment on that big ass ring, the wedding expenses her parents helped payed but couldn’t afford to cover all, the hotel accommodations and flight he put on his credit cards and yes, of course, that new 30 year mortgage he just got on a flexible interest rate.

Five years later they’ve both stopped looking at the future. Now they talk about the past and how good it used to be. She wonders why she settled for him and he wants to know what made him marry her in the first place. Their baby daughter is 3 years old and produces the only smiles in their lives. Prince charming turned out to be a broke-ass good for nothing that put her to work as an Assistant Manager for an insurance company and as it turned out for him… he doesn’t even get what he married for in the first place: sex.

I am watching a documentary on the attempted assassination of U.S. President Ronald Reagan. An interview with the wife of one of the secret agents in charge of protecting the president has caught my attention. In thinking her husband was wounded, or worst yet, killed in the attempted assassination, her first impulse was to scream: “my husband, my husband!”

Why do so many women scream more often than men? Could it be because their first instinct is to cry out for help so they scream to call attention the way babies do? A man is not expected to scream, in fact, he would be looked awkward if he does. A man is expected to address the situation. Society dictates how men and women should act and we all follow the rules. Some of us break those rules and either receive glory or shame for it. It’s the way things work.

Women scream when they fear the worst, when they are scared, when they want to call out for attention. Imagine if we could all play on both sides of the court? If we all, men and women, were not afraid to ask for help but at the same time were strong enough to handle many situations ourselves?

Breaking out of what society tells us to do is perhaps the best thing we can do with our lives. We go nowhere special if we can’t do that first. Setting ourselves apart is how our names get remembered. Don’t be afraid to handle your business, and don’t be afraid to scream.

My report: I was excited to see this movie because I have been thinking about Muslim women and how much free will they actually have, but this film didn’t help much. What happened here? This movie had a beginning, but no end. Cual fue la moraleja? It moved very slow. It seemed like all the scenes were dragging. As if the producers tried to make a movie out of something that should have been a 30 minute documentary at the most. I think there was a budget problem on this film. Everything took place in basically two places: a bus and a space next to a stadium about 20′ x 10′ long. At the end of the movie I was left wondering what happened to every single character in the movie. Really, what happened here?

Rating:

About it: A handful of girls struggle to make their way into the man’s world of an Iranian soccer stadium in this comedy from writer and director Jafar Panahi. World Cup season is just around the corner, and Iran’s team is playing a game against Bahrain that will determine who will be competing in soccer’s greatest tournament. Nearly everyone in Tehran seems to be abuzz with excitement over the game, through officially soccer in Iran is quite literally for men only — no women are allowed inside the stadium, and women’s interest in the game is severely frowned upon. But that doesn’t stop a number of girls from all over the city from trying to crash the game dressed up as boys; while some succeed, others are unable to fool security, and are sent to a holding bullpen in the stadium where they can hear the cheers of the crowd but can’t see the game. One of the policemen watching over the girls (who range from rowdy tomboys to quiet and bookish types) is sympathetic and keeps them updated on the score and key plays, while another is a petty bureaucrat who suffers the mockery of his “prisoners.” Offside received its North American premiere at the 2006 Toronto Film Festival. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide

My report: Diddy can’t act that good, but I can tell he tried hard and I’m sure he’ll get better at it. It made me wonder how I would approach an acting career if I was already famous in another industry. Probably take very small roles so I can get used to it and grow from there… I wish the movie would have been more about succeeding in a business and becoming a doctor rather than just getting a house. I would have extended the story to include those successes and change the buying of the house to just a big defeat. Then the movie would have been about been knocked down and getting up again, and not becoming a raisin in the sun.

Rating:

About it: Sean Combs, Phylicia Rashad, Audra McDonald, Sanaa Lathan, and John Stamos all return to reprise the roles they originally played on Broadway in this made for television take on Lorraine Hansbury’s timeless play about a 1950s-era Chicago family longing for a better life. Walter Lee has died, and now his widow Lena Younger (Rashad) is about to receive a $10,000 check from her late-husband’s insurance company. Everyone in the family dreams about the ways their lives will be changed with the arrival of the money, family matriarch Lena - who longs to retire from her job as a domestic servant for a wealthy white family - in particular. Having lived in a one room tenement apartment ever since she and her late husband originally married, Lena is eager to purchase a house of her own and provide her family with a real home. Lena’s son Walter Lee, Jr. (Combs), currently employed as a chauffer, and has recently become taken with the idea of purchasing a liquor store as a means of solving his family’s financial woes. Like her mother-in-law, Walter’s wife Ruth (McDonald) is also a domestic servant for a white family, and dreams of the day she can walk away from her job. While Walter’s sister Beneatha (Lathan) strives to become a medical professional, tuition is expensive and she is currently being pursued by two men - wealthy but superficial George Murchison (Sean Patrick Thomas) and intellectual classmate Joseph Asagai (David Oyelowo). Much to everyone’s surprise, Lena uses the lion’s share of the money to purchase a home in the all-white residential neighborhood of Cllaybourne, splitting the remainder between Walter (for his entrepreneurial endeavor) and Beneatha (for tuition). Around the same time Walter loses his share of the inheritance to a smooth talking con man who claimed he could help finance the liquor store, the Claybourne “home improvement” association makes the discovery that the Youngers are black and sends emissary Mr. Lindner (John Stamos) to try prevent their neighborhood from becoming integrated by buying the house back. Now faced with the prospect of losing it all, Walter considers making a deal with Mr. Lindner in order to recover his losses. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide

My report: I wish I could easily find more movies in Spanish like this one. Great story, I think it’s about things many of us have gone through even if it is to a lesser degree. I’ve seen this movie before, but for some reason I remember it having more nudity in it. That was something that I liked about the movie the first time I saw it. It goes to show how much my taste has changed. I’ve become very particular about what I like in a woman. I honestly feel like I can have any woman in the world and so I have upgraded my taste and become much more selective. People can make whatever they want about what I just wrote, but I demand a lot of myself. Shouldn’t I be allowed to ask my other half to try just as hard?

Rating:

About it: The romantic foibles of two young couples in Mexico — whose professional success has not led to personal satisfaction — forms the basis of this comedy with serious undertones. Carlos (Victor Hugo Martin) is a student of new age spirituality, while his wife Ana (Susana Zabaleta) is a good bit more interested in the pleasures of the flesh, leading to no small amount of conflict. Tensions increase when Tomas (Demián Bichir), an old friend of the couple and Ana’s former lover, comes to pay an extended visit. Elsewhere in the neighborhood, Andrea (Cecilia Suarez) is angry with her husband Miguel (Jorge Salinas), who doesn’t appear to put much stock in monogamy, and she’s even more annoyed when he announces that his former girlfriend Maria (Monica Dionne), who has just left her husband, will be their house guest for a while. After a great deal of arguing and soul searching, a temporary agreement is reached between the two couples and their friends — the men will stay in one apartment while the women will stay in another until cooler heads prevail. Sexo, Pudor Y Lagrimas/Sex, Shame and Tears was written and directed by Antonio Serrano, who adapted his own successful stage play. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide

My report: It was alright. The whole story was predictable from beginning to end, but it got me thinking about how careful we all need to be. In my HIV class last semester we talked about how women were rapidly getting infected with the disease because of men that go behind the backs of their girlfriends/wives and sleep with other men. This is not just a homosexual disease, it’s an everybody disease. Men and women need to always use protection. I won’t deny I’ve done some stupid shit in the past. I’ve been lucky and I’m not jeopardising my life again.

Rating:

About it: At the time of its release, Jonathan Demme’s Philadelphia was the first big-budget Hollywood film to tackle the medical, political, and social issues of AIDS. Tom Hanks, in his first Academy Award-winning performance, plays Andrew Beckett, a talented lawyer at a stodgy Philadelphia law firm. The homosexual Andrew has contracted AIDS but fears informing his firm about the disease. The firm’s senior partner, Charles Wheeler (Jason Robards), assigns Andrew a case involving their most important client. Andrew begins diligently working on the case, but soon the lesions associated with AIDS are visible on his face. Wheeler abruptly removes Andrew from the case and fires him from the firm. Andrew believes he has been fired because of his illness and plans to fight the firm in court. But because of the firm’s reputation, no lawyer in Philadelphia will risk handling his case. In desperation, Andrew hires Joe Miller (Denzel Washington), a black lawyer who advertises on television, mainly handling personal injury cases. Miller dislikes homosexuals but agrees to take the case for the money and exposure. As Miller prepares for the courtroom battle against one of the law firm’s key litigators, Belinda Conine (Mary Steenburgen), Miller begins to realize the discrimination practiced against Andrew is no different from the discrimination Miller himself has to battle against. The cast also includes Antonio Banderas as Andrew’s partner, Joanne Woodward as Andrew’s mother, and Stephanie Roth as Joe’s wife. ~ Paul Brenner, All Movie Guide

My Report: It was a good story. Many things made me think about how things are in Panama, like how all houses have steel fences to keep away strangers and intruders. It could be a true story about corruption, but not one to remember. It was missing the extra drama effect. It would have been good if the movie would have had more details on the drug business. Like how the drug packages were picked up from the seas and who picks the up in the U.S., things like that. Also include scenes with the actual bribes of politicians would have been good.

Rating:

About it: Functioning as an unofficial Spanish-language equivalent of Steven Soderbergh’s muckraker Traffic (2000), co-directors Ricardo Mendez Matta and Poli Marichal’s meller Thieves and Liars traces the web of drug money-related corruption inherent in the Puerto Rican socioeconomic climate. As in the Soderbergh ensemble picture, Marichal and Matta interweave a number of socially relevant stories on various levels of Puerto Rican society - all about the movement of drugs from the Third World to Puerto Rico to the States. In one substory, Puerto Rican man Oscar (Steven Bauer) - in an attempt to gain revenge for the death of a friend - rubs out a drug boss, and thus sinks to a level every bit as dirty and shameless as his victim. In another, two young men, Cheo and Miguel, use drug money to support their needy grandmother. In a third, single mother and airport worker Wanda Velez (Magda Rivera) attempts to navigate her way through the byzantine Puerto Rican legal system, taking on the fly-by-night company that manipulated and conned her. And in still another substory, adolescent Luisito (Carlos Paniagua) teeters on the verge of self-destruction with illegal drug use, despite the constant admonitions of his concerned mother. ~ Nathan Southern, All Movie Guide

Buddhism is a way of life that attempts to identify the causes of human suffering. In its teachings, the goal is to achieve enlightenment in order to help others attain the same state, as opposed to mere personal liberation. In the film “Little Buddha”, a group of Buddhist monks lead by their Lama (spiritual teacher), Norbu, travel the world in search of their physically deceased teacher, Lama Dorje, whom they believe has reincarnated in the body of a young American boy. Reincarnation is the belief that once a living creature dies, its soul is reborn in a new body. While the belief of reincarnation is widely spread in Asia, it is not a shared belief among many in Western countries.

The film makes a clear contrast between the cultural patterns of Tibetan Buddhists and the American culture. Illustrating the differences in norms, beliefs and social practices. The Buddhists monks lived with a sense of collectivism, encouraging conformity and interdependence. All monks dressed alike, regardless of seniority or country of residence. Their dress code consisted of a robe known as a zen and occasionally a hat.

The way of greeting included no physical contact or verbal communication. Placing both hands together and a gentle bow was the usual greet. This greeting is known as the wai and it is considered to be a sign of respect. There are three different types of wai. These were all shown in the film and depended mainly on ranks and genders.

1. A wai to Buddha is considered the highest level of respect. Males bow low while raising both hands with palms pressed together up to the face and forefingers touching the forehead while females move a foot backward and bend the knees, raising both pressing palms to the same position as men do.

2. The second level of wai happened when a woman approached Lama Norbu, a high ranked monk. She bent her knees and bowed almost to the floor. This was a sign of deep respect towards the Lama. Norbu didn’t return the greet. Usually such act might be thought as offensive, but Buddhists monks are considered the highest class in their society and as such are not required to show equal respect to others. Even kings should wai monks.

3. The third level of wai is between people of equal age and social status. Bending the head a little bit and raising both hands until the forefingers touch the tip of the nose is customary. This was the typical form of greet shown in the film and it was seen between the monks and also the American family once introduced to the cultural patterns of the Buddhist monks.
Throughout the movie, Lama Norbu presented a book, a watch and a bowl as gifts. In all three occasions the gifts were presented using both hands and the gifts were also received with both hands. This is also considered a sign of respect. Similarly the monks took off their shoes when they entered the home of the American boy, even when the homeowners didn’t.

In one of the scenes, Lama Norbu explained to the father of the American boy the purpose of Tibetan sand painting. The art consists in making beautiful images out of millions of grains of sand, laid into place on a flat platform over a period of days or weeks. As Lama Norbu explained, the paintings are made with sand to “show the impermanence of all within the universe, and when completed it will be destroyed with one gesture.”

The main difference in interpersonal communication between the Tibetan monks and the Americans was in their sense of group. While the monks always talked in terms of “we”, the Americans didn’t. Religion, of course, and death had a different level of importance between both groups. Cultural patterns affected interpersonal culture because it was hard for the American father to understand the concept of reincarnation.

REFERENCES

Little Buddha (1993). The life of Siddartha is paralleled with the story of Tibetan monks seeking his reincarnation in modern day Seattle. DVD.
The World in a Grain of Sand. www.chinaculture.org
Tibetan Buddhism. Wikipedia. www.wikipedia.com

I’m still reading “The Autobiography of Malcolm X.” I haven’t been writing because I wanted to finish reading and then get to writing, but in my readings today I came across a statement Malcolm made that got me thinking about the true nature of men and women. This is what it says:

…being that the true nature of man is to be strong, and a woman’s true nature is to be weak, and while a man must at all times respect his woman, at the same time he needs to understand that he must control her if he expects to get her respect.

I disagree with the first part of that statement. I don’t think being weak or strong has much to do with the sexes. I think it has to do with the personality of the individual. To say that this is the true nature is generalizing a bit too much. I do think that a stronger woman might prefer to have a stronger man and that has to do with a feeling of protection. Not because a woman can’t protect herself, but because she’d rather have a man that can protect her better than she can.

As for the second part, well… every person must respect and control others who try to disrespect. When a person is disrespected and fails to control the offender, things start slipping eternally out of control. It doesn’t matter if it’s a man or a woman. Of course I will put my girlfriend in place if she disrespects, and I expect her to do the same to me. I don’t want someone I can control, I want someone I consider my equal and I can respect as such.

Comparing one’s self/kind to others and feeling superior is not hard. Being strong enough to compare and praise others for their good qualities while still being able to maintain a good self esteem is what I consider dignifying.