A Hybrid - A thrilling romantic?

The Secret in their Eyes (El secreto de sus ojos, Argentina; 2009)
What happens when the director of 'House' and 'Law & Order' decides to do a joint venture film between Argentina and Spain? This movie - a thriller with a gruesome murder whilst the legal eagles involved in the cases see love in each others' eyes materialises!

It is a lovey dovey movie for the mature, narrating the members involved in the investigation of a senseless rape and murder of a pretty young wife. They thought they had nailed the assailant down. 25 years later, after the assistant counselor (Benjamin Esposito) retires and plans to write a novel about the murder, he discovers that there is more to it than what meets the eye.

A scene at railways when they depart ways - Esposito
being transferred and the boss soon to be tied the knot!

His immediate boss, a young Cornell trained judge 25 years previously, had the hots for him then and the feeling was mutual. Neither party made any attempts to express their inner feelings as she was engaged to be married, and he, engrossed in his work and having had gone through broken marriages.

With her proof reading his script, whilst the film reenacts the sequel of events, she discovers his inner feelings and we, the audience enjoy a 2-hour saga of police work, restrained love feelings, the emotional hangings of a widower, the unscrupulous government machinery which favours well-being of the nation rather than punishing the wrong doers. Did I mention that they were some poetic dialogues, though they were translated ones, via subtitles? eg. "We are left with so many memories, just choose the good ones!"

TE MO = I fear
TEAMO = Love!
(the case of typewriter with
faulty letter A)

Two fascinating aspects of the movie are the excellent work of cinematography where the cuts appear like one of investigative journalism and the excellent work of makeup. Many of the angles taken were different, like how the film maker zooms in to football stadium where the murderer is apprehended. Quite revolutionary. As the story flip flops between two eras of 25 years apart, the actors are the same but the makeup alters them quite significantly without giving the impression of being painted upon!
Interesting, interesting....

Every now and then comes a man....

Malcolm X (1992)

All through history, we have seen again and again this scenario. There will come a man who will try to change and improve mankind for the better. Unfortunately, the roads to this endeavour will always be paved with obstacles set by doubters with doubtful intentions and by perhaps detractors who want to steal the spotlight. And finally, this man's quest would meet a premature demise and mankind would be left in the lurch again. 

In essence, this is the summary of the story of Malcolm Short who changed his surname to X, the unknown surname of his ancestors from Africa and refusing the surname given to him by the slave-masters of his great grandparents.

He started life in the ghettos of Harlem after his preacher father's young family went through a harrowing experience in the hands of the KKK. His father was killed by them but it was written off as suicide.

The Real McCoy

Malcolm lived in the fast lane with booze, theft, racketeering and pleasures of the flesh as his forte until he was apprehended. During incarceration, a fellow prisoner introduces him to the teachings of an Islamic evangelist, Elijah Muhammad. Elijah promotes self-realisation and self-improvement which would uplift society in general. After his release from prison, Malcolm X becomes a fiery spokesperson/ preacher from Elijah's movement, Nation of Islam. As a loyal worker with undying loyalty to his boss, Malcolm's rise in the movement causes a lot of discomfort amongst its member and Elijah himself. Then comes a rumour, which turned out to be true, of Elijah and his affair with his secretary. Disillusioned with the callous admission of his guilt, a disappointed Malcolm leaves the Nation of Islam to start his own movement, Mosque Inc. 

Some of his strong-worded statements of current events of the day made many hot under their collars. His speech that implied the Kennedy assassination was due to its foreign policy - chicken coming to the roost- drew attention from the FBI.

Soon after starting a lecture, he was shot in cold blood by his enemies. 

During the short stint he was doing his divine duties, in his small way, he managed to straighten out the lives of many wayward going individuals, giving them self appreciation and self-respect and to follow the path of less self-destruction. Both Malcolm X and Dr Martin Luther King II fought for freedom for the Afro-Americans, albeit in their different ways. Dr King believed in passive resistance and walks. Malcolm X believed that people should free themselves from within and should fight for their rights even with violence!

This 3-hour movie created controversy even before production. The choice of director was debated and finally was decided upon a black director - Spike Lee. Then the idiosyncratic director exceeded its budget and had to be bailed out by successful black stars in Hollywood as a public service as the movie was about a black 'hero'. This movie also boasts of being the only Hollywood film to have obtained permission in the vicinity of the Holy Land.

A sterling performance by Denzel Washington as the main character.

His time in the spotlight

What is success? How high do you want to go before you say enough is enough? How much do you want to be in the limelight? How high is high enough? Have you reached the zenith? Have you found what you are looking for? Will you ever?
It is all a matter of perspective, whether your life is half empty or partially filled.
If you sit down and analyse, you must have a tale to tell. It could be small or it could be big. If you dig deep enough, even if your life is not even half complete, you must have achieved something, anything, if you look hard enough!
This I discovered during my last meeting with long lost childhood friends.
On the outward, they may not look as glamorous or flamboyant as our typical mindset depict, they indeed have something to brag about. A small footstep for the rest of mankind but giant one indeed for him and from where he came from.
Everyone will have something nice to be mentioned in their eulogies!
Or may be you are still looking for the elusive pot of gold or the mythical Prince Charming to saunter along and sweep you off the feet to ride into the sunset. Dream on.... When you get up, you can see things much more clearly then!

We can talk talk!

Coming from a background of science where things are more objective, where a spade is called a spade, I am slowly trying to build the right side of the brain with reasoning and creativity. Culture and logic, I found out of late, is very subjective and can be argued all through the country side till the cows come home.
My quest to acquire knowledge landed me in the company of intellectuals and those who thought of themselves as one on a Sunday noon in the heart of town.
Yes, BFM Night School had their first live show! In a hall in Annex Gallery in the vicinity of Central Market, 5 intellectuals gathered to lead a discussion to theorise the troubles that are slowly brewing in Malaysia. I was particularly impressed with how the panel members approached the title. At one look, it looks all Greek to me but they managed to dissect the troubles simmering in the country from a few angles. Ahmad Fuad Rahmat (of Islamic Renaissance Front) and Sharrad Kuttan (of BFM) acted as moderators.
Boon Kia Meng, the renowned documentary maker whose recent flick on the housing problems faced by the younger generation which had won international accolades, started the ball rolling talking about inequalities in society especially the widening gap between the haves and have nots. Even though his arguments may suggest that he may be a communist, he categorically denied that he is a Marxist. But then Karl Marx himself was also quoted as saying that he was not a Marxist! The level of corruption and the bludgeoning cost of living seem like a perfect recipe for a crisis in Malaysia.
The second speaker, Shahril Sufian Hamdan, highlighted on race relation in the country. He gave hope that the newer generation seem to on the right track to be colour blind to different races in the country. He was optimistic that unlike their predecessors, the youngsters do not compartmentalize people by race. Personally, I think it is just wishful thinking. The scene on the ground is far from this. Daily frustrations of discrimination of government policies felt by the younger generations are only brewing more trouble despite what the leaders want us to believe.
The third speaker, albeit being controversial, was interesting, to say the least. He managed to argue his case of the romanticising the region's philosophical past to justify the acceptance of the Malay Language as the lingua franca of the region and revamping the education system to attain national unity. Muhiyuddin Al-attas, reiterated that South East Asia (especially the Malay Archipelago) was a peaceful region with a highly developed education system which included philosophy, theology and higher studies. With the invasion of Western cultures and way of thinking, our original education had lost out and took a back seat. His outlook is that, we the Western educated, failed to see the superiority of the old holistic education system.
More interesting discussions took place as questions were opened to the floor. Only then did I realise that looks can be deceptive. Despite their simple appearances and non-fancy attires, I was in the company very learned, cultured and articulate individuals. They seem to have been around the world and could put forth their ideas in a well constructed sentences and excellent choices of words.
One interesting topic that came about is the topic of unity of a nation through uncommon binding factors. Our struggle to unify the nation via a common language appears like we are barking up the wrong tree when we see the Swiss unite strongly despite having 3 national languages. Another audience, rebutted that the common denominator in the Swiss experience is religion.
In another discussion, the floor was made to realise that most countries around the world are guilty of prosecuting their minorities in spite of their seemingly homogeneously peaceful acceptance of all citizens.
I gather that history should be learnt and left as it is. We should try to re-live or reenact the 'glorious'past. History has shown again and again that treading along these lines can be dangerous. Hitler tried to romanticize his superior race and met a devastating end, creating a mayhem along the way. The Hindus in India were unanswerable to the meaningless blood shed arising from the destruction of rival house of worship as that spot was their holy spot earlier! Changes on earth are layered just like the magma of volcanic spill that is laid over time. We should be able to accept it.
The hall swelled up with audience as the forum progressed and arguments heated up. The intellect of the audience really showed when questions deemed sensitive by Malaysian standards were discussed in a level headed critical fashion, not by emotion or blind obedience.
As in all intellectual talks, the audience yearned for more, knowing well that all these were talk. Change must come and will come from the masses. Unfortunately, human emotions and loyalty played by leaders determines the path of the nation. Logic and justice has nothing to do with it!

THEORISING TROUBLE: Understanding Malaysia in an Era of Crisis (BFM Night School)
Sunday, September 29 at 12:00pm

Figment of fiction

Anonymous (2011)
One thing laudable about a mature society is the acceptance of alternative versions to the widely accepted version. This is the stark contrast to what is seen in an infantile society where people go up in arms if a little creativity or critical thinking is given to the official version. With things neither black or white in the modern world, they forget that the truth is almost always hidden somewhere between 'the truth' and 'the rumour'. For the longest time, we have been shoved down our throats half truths and lies. Now, those days are long gone. Information is king. As the French philosopher, Jean-François Lyotard predicted, we are now at a crossroad where we have way too much information and the time has come where nations would go to war to gain control over this commodity and cow their fellow beings into submission!
There has been a famous conspiracy theory going around which suggests that it is most likely that William Shakespeare could not have written all the evergreen plays that the history books claim he had. In those days, knowledge and artistic indulgence were the privilege of the royalty and aristocrats. Shakespeare haling from the working class just could not have done himself, writing all those historical tragedies and comedies set in a different era, all written in poetic English that had stood the test of time.

Here, Shakespeare is depicted as a drunkard, a semi-illiterate and a womanizing actor who blackmails the original writer of the scripts Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford. 

The Queen and the real 'Shakespeare'

The Earl is madly indulged into writing plays that he basically wastes his whole property away. He alleges that a voice compels him to write. He keeps stacks and stacks of stories until he met a playwright, Ben Johnson, to stage his plays. You see, they were living in a time when art, stage and drama was considered unholy, the work of Satan.

The Queen at that time, however, Queen Elizabeth I was a sucker for stage performances. The other fictional part of the film is about the monarch herself. Even though, Queen Elizabeth I has always been embodied as a virtuous queen with the title 'The Virgin Queen', here she is displayed as a nymphomaniac. She has many illegitimate sons without knowledge, all covered up by her scheming minister advisor William Cecil.  

De Vere, the Earl and writer, starts an affair with the Queen after she is fascinated with his play. That union resulted in him to sire a son who is given to adoption. History says that she was the last monarch from the Tudor Dynasty who did not have a heir. In this film, Willian Cecil and his son deviously throne King James I of Scotland as the king after her. 

We are also told De Vere had an incestous relationship as the Queen is also his mother that he did not know!

The film progressed with excellent backdrop of the 16th century England with stories of deceit and vice. 

After the death of de Vere, Ben Johnson is given the remaining manuscripts. The truth of the real author remains a mystery. 

As you can see, the story is quite treacherous and putting many people of high standings in history in a very bad light. In the name of artistic license and freedom of expression, nobody really creates a ruckus. They all know it is a work of fiction.... Just like Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy!