Galing At Peugeot

.:Galing At Peugeot:.

So I was supposed to talk about the French Film Festival, because, you know, film. Awesome. But here's the funny thing: I didn't get to catch a single movie from the festival, and instead hung out with the fine people from Peugeot, because they were talking to me about the Festival so much, it almost felt like I was there. Almost. But with more cars and fun anecdotes. And less of the plodding navel-gazing most French films are known and loved for. You don't criticize a French film for being plodding and navel-gazing and all thinkpiece-y: you applaud them for it.

Pictured: more excitement than most French films. Again, not a knock against French films.

The funny thing is, I don't even drive. If I did, I'd have been doing it while by now. And I always had a soft spot for European cars. The problem with European cars I was mostly aware of, though, was that maintenance would be a bit more difficult than the usual Japanese cars whose parts and spare parts are readily available, and boy, do European cars cost a world more money than their Japanese and even American counterparts.

And then next thing I knew, I was introduced to Peugeot by my relatively new friend, Nikki. And what I discovered about this French brand floored me, because while I'm not a gear freak and I can't tell you the first thing about cars, I definitely share a lot in common with the average pedestrian who can't help but gawk when a beautiful car drives past them, because chances are, I am that average pedestrian gawking when a beautiful car drives past me.

So beautiful, I insisted on holding the camera at all times, so no, you won't see me by the car.

For starters, a trip to their showroom immediately killed the impression that European cars were all super pricey and hard to maintain, with price ranges that are shockingly competitive with the popular Japanese and American brands here, Peugeot not only boasts of the same kind of quality we've come to expect from European cars, but even the touted best diesel engine in the world. So not only do you get great quality, but the gas and mileage are pretty high up there, too.

I was really enamored by their sports car, although given that I don't drive, it would probably look awkward if I hired a driver to drive me around in it. Not that there's anything wrong with it, but I'm inclined to guess people would assume we're dating, because that's normally how it works when you're driving around in a sports car with two people in it.

"Pare, open-minded ka ba?" Meet the Peugeot RCZ.

The fact that they discontinued the RCZ and what I saw in the showroom was perhaps the last of its kind just made me realize that this was indeed a collector's item, and one of the sleekest, most elegant cars I have ever seen. I know what I like when I see it, and the experts have told me enough about what goes on under that hood for me to appreciate that indeed, this is definitely a fine specimen of automotive technology.

Overall, I've been amazed and impressed, and while I'm no gearhead, I knew what the right questions to ask were when it came to what I needed in the event I ever needed to purchase a car. After all, with all other things being equal, including price, apparently, why wouldn't I go for arguably the number 1 diesel engine in the world, and all the prestige that comes with the name of Peugeot?

And that's really the main selling point of Peugeot to me: you are buying into an honored French automobile tradition, and you are doing it at a downright steal for what that brand means to the general public. And as if that weren't enough, they're currently offering promotions if you act now and get one of their rides, so don't tell me I didn't warn you that there are tickets to Valuetown to be had.

Speaking of "value," Nikki swears she fits into the trunk of this car, and another person like her! Mmmmmm! Okay, maybe we shouldn't give John Wayne Gacy's fans any ideas.

Again, I don't drive yet, and I'm anything but an opinion leader when it comes to cars. What people who know me can attest to, though, is that I have a huge love affair with European cars, and Peugeot may be currently the apple of my eye with its sleek style, multiple offerings for all walks of life, prestigious name, and unbeatable price point, considering said prestigious name. To me, that's more than good enough, and once I inevitably purchase my first car (by then, I hope I know how to drive because I would, as I earlier stated, hate to ride in the passenger seat of an RCZ), I'm inclined to make it a Peugeot.

And if you are, too, feel free to get in touch with Ms. Nikki Cheng Peugeot's Business Development Officer, via her mobile, 09175646119. You just might get a special discount if you act now and drop this blog's name! 

I don't really do this much, so yeah, I find it a big deal to be writing about a particular brand, and no, I definitely wasn't paid for this. I wish I were, but that's not really how I've worked as a blogger these past 14 years, so why change now?

And, oh, here's one more thing: the piece de resistance - the Expert Tepee, which is a 9-seater MPV, and the very ride that Ms. Jaclyn Jose experienced as she cruised her win to a Cannes Best Actress plum recently. It's a thing of beauty - as long as John Wayne Gacy's fans stay far, far away from it.

Squint hard enough, and you'll see my reflection there.

So yeah, that was how I spent my time a couple of weeks ago: enjoying cars like a normal male person, which isn't typical of me. The thing is, though, with how crazy life has been for me these past few months, what constitutes "normal" at this point for me, really? I might never know, but as far as I'm concerned, I can keep going as long as I have faith in myself. Much in the same way Peugeot has faith in its time-honored tradition of excellence.

Project 52 2014 (23/52): I'll Never Go

.:Project 52 2014 (23/52): I'll Never Go:.

You always ask me those words I say, and telling me what it means to me...

There's so much left unsaid, but after last week's great series of shows and my hosting for Mr. Rex Navarrete and Mike Unson on two separate nights, I can't help but feel rather accomplished, and raring to go for more. So now, I try to focus my mind on stuff outside of work and performances. And I realize that so many of the things I say and talk about run the gamut of significance based on who I'm talking to, and when I'm saying it. It's not really something you just get to determine in one go.

Having said that, what else is there to think about, really? I've been running myself ragged the past week, but it's been all worth it.

Every single day, you always act this way...

So I do get questioned from time to time. I do end up having to defend myself and defend my integrity because that seems to be the most appropriate thing to do when questions come your way, and after everything's been said and done, I stand. Proven.

For how many times I've told you, I love you, but this is all I know...

If I didn't love what I do, I wouldn't be here any longer. Sometimes, that's all I have to go on, really. It's the "fumes" when I'm "running on fumes." It's the "what" in "what keeps me going." Passion. Love. For what I do, and in the pride I take in doing what I do as best as I can, and finding myself unparalleled in it. I begin to understand what they mean when a great man once said: "I'm the best at what I do..."

"... bub." Snikt, snikt.

And speaking of Wolverine and all that stuff, I realize I should review X-Men: Days of Future Past when I find the time. I'm just so occupied with all the stuff I have to do, I don't know if I'd ever manage. But whatever.

I'll never go far away from you...

In the end, all I have is my steadfastness to go by. That no matter what happens, regardless of the tempest, I will remain. I will survive.

Even the skies will tell you...

And many have questioned that. So many, indeed. But that doesn't affect me much, insofar as I concern myself more with vindicating myself through actions and through accomplishments, not through empty rhetoric and shifting blame.

That I need you so...

I need you so because I realize that this passion is what drives me. And it's good to realize that this passion isn't directed towards an all-consuming desire for a person, whether or not it is reciprocated. I've finally broken free of that. It's passion that I need, but it also emanates from within me, rather than something I need to be inspired into. And no matter the uncertainty, one thing is for certain...

But this is all I know, I'll never go far away from you...

Film Review: The Amazing Spider-Man 2

.:Film Review: The Amazing Spider-Man 2:.

Sorry, Black Lightning! Beat ya to it.

The Amazing Spider-Man 2

Predictably heart-breaking.

I'll try my best not to spoil the key elements of the film, but any comic book reader would know what to expect when you put the Green Goblin together with Gwen Stacy.

The sequel picks up from where the original left off, with Gwen and Peter happily in love, and Gwen predictably graduating as class valedictorian, where she promptly launched into a graduation speech that talked about mortality faster than you can say "foreshadowing!" Of course, it helps that the topic would be very much in her head, since her father recently died, but that didn't stop Dennis Leary from still showing up all over the film, as if to remind Peter that he broke his promise to Captain Stacy to stay away from Gwen.

Wish it didn't stop this guy, either.

So as Spider-Man goes about heroing his way through New York, he wonders from time to time about his parents more, and ends up meeting Max Dillon: an employee of Oscorp who idolized Spider-Man, all the more when he met his favorite hero, who gave him the time of day. It was a recipe for disaster waiting to happen.

As Peter waffles back and forth about Gwen, he ends up hanging out with his old best friend, Harry Osborn, and a bromance is born. As the mysteries about his family and Harry's desire for Spider-Man's blood to save his life come together as plot points, Max Dillon's transformation into Electro, a villain with electricity powers, will put Spider-Man to the test like no other.

So what worked in this film? Well, Andrew Garfield may not seem as sympathetic as Tobey Maguire, but I prefer the more assertive, less sad sack Garfield interpretation, even if he does get a bit too dramatic sometimes. He's supposed to be a teenager, after all, and that's teenagers are supposed to act. The action was pretty good, and very creative with how Spider-Man moves about, although he seems to like swinging stuff with his webs a lot in this installment. I'm also still hoping to see J. Jonah Jameson in this franchise at some point, seeing how amazing J.K. Simmons was as him in the original trilogy.

There's a lot of ground to be covered plot-wise, but it feels a little ridiculously convenient how everything about Peter's life is tied into Oscorp way too neatly. His girlfriend works for Oscorp, his best friend is the son of Norman Osborn, he gets his powers from a trip to Oscorp, Electro works in Oscorp, his parents worked in Oscorp, and so forth. I just feel that as opposed to how cohesive the first Amazing Spider-Man was except for the part where he randomly stopped trying to find his uncle's killer in the middle of the first flick, this film felt a lot more disjointed, almost as if it were trying to set up yet another film (Which is exactly what it's actually setting out to do.)

"Sup, guys? Couldn't you wait until Avengers 2 is out first before 

you start  making cameos all over the damned place?!?"

I like how fun Peter is as Spider-Man. I like his chemistry with Gwen. But the elements of the movie just felt so disconnected from each other, and it didn't really manage to tell a story, so much as it just said a few things, but not really form a cohesive sentence. 

I really don't expect much from my superhero flicks, though, so what I got from here is perfectly workable. It's just mildly frustrating to see so much wasted potential, and so much needless contrivances in a film franchise where you already have to suspend your disbelief that every single person who gets into a horrible accident involving Oscorp property ends up gaining super powers of some sort.

Overall, this film could have stood on its own better if it decided to scale back on planting the seeds for the Sinister Six so much. I get how important it is to get the buzz going about it long before it's even a reality, but when it hurts your overall narrative and diminishes a very credible performance from Jamie Foxx in favor of what seemed to be a tacked-on aftermath just to add drama, well, it just doesn't really work.

Heck, based on one moment in the film, I would even argue that Spider-Man seems far less heroic than Superman did in Man of Steel.  (You know the one, if you remember what happened immediately before the Goblin shows up.)

That moment right there? That's the moment where I wondered to myself if this Spider-Man was truly the hero I deserved. Or wanted. Or needed. Sadly, the answer seems to hover around "no."

Fun Rating: A (Great cast, great chemistry, great action, albeit not as iconic as the first Amazing Spider-Man!)
Critical Rating: B- (Convoluted plot, unnecessary drama, too many contrivances, and a particularly unheroic Spider-Man, as far as I'm concerned.)

Project 52 2014 (11/52): Starting Over Again

.:Project 52 2014 (11/52):Starting Over Again:.

Starting Over Again
Hey, look! A Project 52 entry and a film review!

Need I say it? SPOILERS AHEAD!!!

And when I hold you in my arms, I promise you...

So I asked a new friend to catch a movie, seeing as I haven't been to the cinemas in ages, and lo and behold, she suggested that we watch "Starting Over Again," despite the fact that she's already seen it thrice before.

I can see why she caught it thrice.

"Starting Over Again" is a tale of love lost and a chance to regain it, initially framed around the conceit of a fictional website, LetterLater.com, which is based on a real one. With LetterLater, you get to send an email to someone at a scheduled time. Five years after their breakup, Ginny (Toni Gonzaga) receives an email from Marco (Piolo Pascual), asking if there's still room for a second chance.

The problem was, in the five years that have elapsed, Ginny and Marco have been as far apart as can be. Ginny starts hoping, and even reminiscing about the past that they had.

You're gonna feel a love that's beautiful and new...

Next thing she knew, Marco came back into her life, asking her to convert his ancestral home into a restaurant. Marco, from being her teacher in college, ended up becoming a chef: a dream he pursued and finally succeeded in, after so many failures. Was this the sign she was looking for? It seemed to be that way, until in came Patty (Iza Calzado), Marco's fiancee.

As the days went by, it was clear that Ginny saw things that simply weren't there. She deluded herself into finding signs that didn't exist, all brought about by a letter written five years before, working her way back into her life, just as Marco himself did the same. Where was this headed?

This time I'll love you even better than I ever did before...

As her hare-brained scheme to get back with Marco got crazier and crazier, Ginny started being completely disconnected with the reality: Patty was still in the picture. And at her most brazen and most selfish, she ended up almost stealing Marco right back, and even begged Patty to let him go. It was rather uncharacteristic of a Star Cinema film to make their protagonist almost downright unsympathetic, but they went there.

After a mishap, things come to a head. Why did they part ways five years before, to begin with? Why did Ginny choose to turn her back on Marco? Why did Marco move on? The reasons, piece by piece, slowly fell into place.

And you'll be in my heart, forevermore...

In what was the most satisfying ending after what was nearly a moral horizon crossing for Ginny, she realized that "starting over again" doesn't necessarily mean they have to be lovers again. Neither do they need to ever unlove each other.

That's how real life works, really. Patty said it best: their love may be boring and quiet, but it is sure. Sometimes, it isn't the whiz-bang gestures in life, but simply the fact that true love is there. Quiet. Strong. Constant. Not even the biggest gestures could sway what is real, and Ginny had to learn that. There was a reason Marco came back into her life: she needed to learn how to love and let go at the same time. For her own sake.

And now we're starting over again it's not the easiest thing to do...

I loved this movie, and I have to admit that I hold it in about as high regard as I hold "One More Chance," which is high praise. Piolo and Toni had an amazing kind of chemistry, and Iza Calzado more than held her own as a solid foil to Toni, making you see that no matter how much you might want to root for Ginny and Marco to get their second chance, Patty deserved her first just as much.

It's a movie about losing love and regaining it, only to realize that it doesn't mean the same thing anymore. And that? That's not a bad thing at all.

I'm feeling inside again, 'cause every time I looked at you...

If there's one thing I can't help but appreciate about the film, it's the fact that it takes the concept of the "one great love" and makes you understand that this one great love, no matter how powerful and all-encompassing, is never a guarantee. Sometimes, we tarry and look for the big gestures and the amazing grand moments that we end up completely forgetting that life isn't made up of one big gesture after another.

The plateaus of life make up far, far more than the highs and the lows. If you can't see that, and if you end up feeling compelled to always chase after the highs, then you really can never know for sure if that can keep going forever. It probably won't.

I know we're starting over again, this time we'll leave all the pain away...

Moving on doesn't mean leaving each other. Moving on doesn't mean forgetting everything. And starting over again sure as Hades doesn't mean going back to the same old story, as if neither of you learned the lessons from the past. In real life, there is no true redo, because we learned something. Thankfully, that is one advantage we have that Joel and Clem in "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" never had: now we know better. Now we know not to make the same mistakes again.

After all, isn't it true that we can never keep laughing at the same joke, no matter how good it is? So why should we keep crying over the same tragedy, no matter how horrible it is?

Welcome home, my lover and friend. We are starting over, over again.

"Fun" Evaluation: A+ (Fun, heartwarming, and even tear-inducing. This movie had it all.)
"Critical" Evaluation: A+ (Stellar acting, stellar cast, and a storyline that cuts so close to home it hurts - in a good kind of way.)

A Rational Response To "A Rational Response To Lourd De Veyra's Close-Minded (Sic) Open Letter To Vic And 'My Little Bossings'"

.:A Rational Response To "A Rational Response To Lourd De Veyra's Close-Minded (Sic) Open Letter To Vic And 'My Little Bossings'":.

Hi, Sherwin!

First of all, congratulations! Your blog post has baited thousands of people, and they are now proudly paying attention to you until the next cute cat video shows up. I won't begrudge you that. With everything you had to say about Lourd De Veyra's open letter, and your apparent infatuation with Bossing Vic's comedic stylings, you've earned that much, at least.

                                                 from jaysonlo.com 

You have fifteen minutes. Use 'em well, son.

But there's a small matter I have to address in your response to Lourd, in all honesty. It's a matter that really sticks out like a sore thumb as you went on your diatribe against him, and even his music, as if that had anything to do with his ability to critique a film.

Nothing about your response remotely fit the description of "rational." At all.

Shocking, I know.

You see, the word "rational" is defined by the dictionary this way:

ra·tion·al [rash-uh-nl, rash-nl]adjective

1. agreeable to reason; reasonable; sensible: a rational plan for economic development.

2. having or exercising reason, sound judgment, or good sense: a calm and rational negotiator.

3. being in or characterized by full possession of one's reason; sane; lucid: The patient appeared perfectly rational.

4. endowed with the faculty of reason: rational beings.

5. of, pertaining to, or constituting reasoning powers: the rational faculty.

         

So if that's what it means to be "rational," dear Sherwin, then I need to politely inform you that calling Lourd's music out when you're discussing his critique of Vic Sotto, and demanding he make his own blockbuster movie before he has any right to criticize "My Little Bossings," are anything but rational ways to argue your point. These are inconsequential to your arguments: non sequitur, if you will. 

Think about it, Sherwin: not only do you have zero blockbuster movies to your name to properly evaluate "My Little Bossings" on the kind of footing you wish to place Lourd on, you don't even have a single hit song to justify your ability to critique his music, either. Worse, neither do you own any literary credentials to affirm your right to writer an essay. See where your "logic" takes you? It leads nowhere.

                                               from failblog.org

Photo unrelated.

You see, an argument, to be deemed as "rational," needs to be free of glaring logical fallacies, especially arguments based on tu quoque and other forms of ad hominem. To debate effectively, you need to argue against Lourd's points, instead of criticizing Lourd himself, while letting all his actual points stand. Which was exactly what you did.

Really shocking.

It's funny, because I recently saw another scathing response to Lourd that came off a lot better. Her critique hinged around a concept I'm sure Lourd himself would be very familiar with: walang basagan ng trip. After all, what harm is there in Vic's movie being out there for people to watch, especially if they freely choose to go and watch his movie, to begin with? Nobody forced anyone to go to the cinemas to watch "My Little Bossings." Everyone was free to stay home and just not watch - or at least, in theory, they are.

In reality, the week of December 25 is often a peak season for movie-watching for families, given that these are the holidays we are talking about. And if there's one thing you need to know about the Metro Manila Film Festival, that's precisely why it's held around that time. It's a protectioneering racket that originally was meant to give Philippine movies a chance to take bigger risks because they have a captive audience, but with time, it became just another cash-grab. With a captive audience, why bother making the next great Filipino film when you can instead make the next great Filipino blockbuster? True, both these things need not be mutually exclusive, but it's clear which among the two is prioritized come December by film producers.

Gee, I wonder which?

This is why my interest in the MMFF has waned over the years: quality films take a backseat to predictable cash-grabs. Yes, law of supply and demand and all that holds true, but this goes against the original intent of the festival: the MMFF today is no longer a showcase of the finest in Philippine cinema. Now, it's a police lineup of flicks that want nothing more than to take your money - and a few poor souls who foolishly thought this was still a showcase of the finest in Philippine cinema. Those few poor souls end up being booted out of the cinemas long before the week is even over.

Thankfully, it's a *film* festival, not a *poster* festival.

All Lourd has been saying is that with all the money Bossing has been making, is it too much to ask for him to offer something that isn't a shameless extended commercial, for a change? Sherwin, you were quick to say that Lourd can have his 220 bucks back, but you don't speak for Vic Sotto now, do you? After all, they never offered Lourd his money back, which only goes to show that "take the money and run" definitely takes precedence over something as esoteric as "principles."

I would like to reiterate: "tu quoque" is not a valid counterargument.

Besides, if Lourd didn't watch "My Little Bossings" and instead wrote his open letter in a vacuum, I'm willing to bet people would call him out for whining about something he knows nothing about. He paid 220 bucks to be tortured by this putrid excuse for a movie, so if he didn't like it, then by jove, he has every right to say so.

Let me remind you about the Oscar season in Hollywood, and how many of the strong films in Oscar contention generally take a financial risk as opposed to just making the next Transformers or Twilight flick. A deeper message? Not all the time. Sometimes, you just need a good message, which is by no means out of reach for the average Filipino film.

So shocking, you guys!

Tell me: in the face of boundless greed and capitalism as exemplified by the countless product placements snuck into "My Little Bossings" that have little to no bearing on the plot, how can anyone say with a straight face that "family values" and "forgiveness" is the overarching message of the film? Is that not an inherent conflict of values? What parts of "family values" and "forgiveness" is exemplified by Solmux? By Tide? By Ariel? By Lucky Me Pancit Canton?!? You will find none, because there are none. 

The fact that this unfortunate hypocrisy leaves its mark all over the film is the height of laziness. Was it so hard to script product placement seamlessly without it feeling like it was shoved down everyone's throats? Don't we pay ridiculous amounts of money to watch movies in the theatres partially because we supposedly get to skip commercial breaks when we're in the cinema?

                                           from sportsframe.co.uk

Pictured: para sa bayan!

To say that the film promotes good values is just reaching. The "moral of the story" was merely a trite, patronizing afterthought. I have seen Vic Sotto perform in FAMAS-worthy outings during Eat Bulaga's Holy Week specials. I know what he can do when he works hard to achieve something. So please don't tell me with a straight face that "pinaghirapan nila" ang "My Little Bossings." I don't get a promotion at work for telling my boss I tried really hard. I get a promotion for getting results.

Sadly, the Metro Manila Filmfest's barometer for "results" has gone from imparting strong messages to a captive Pinoy audience to just making as much money as obscenely possible.

In sum, dear Sherwin, here are 8 reasons why I find your "rational response" hilariously irrational (See what I did there?):

8. You used a slew of logical fallacies to undermine Lourd, but not once did you attempt to address his actual arguments.

7. You mistakenly believe that effort is sacrosanct and similarly, success should be immune from criticism. I don't care how many times Vic and Kris claimed "pinaghirapan namin ito." I don't make over a hundred million pesos on the back of "effort" alone, so why should they? Just because people gave Vic Sotto all of the money does not mean his film is above scrutiny. In fact, the more people to have watched Vic's film, the more people would be perfectly entitled to critique what they have watched.

6. You dismiss deal-breaking issues such as inane scripting and plot, robotic acting (Hi, Bimby!), relentless product placement, all because "there were punchlines." You can get even funnier punchlines for free by watching "Eat Bulaga" and "Bubble Gang," so where is the elevation one should reasonably expect from something called a "proud entry" of some "film festival?"

5. You think "can you come up with something better?" is a valid argument. No, it's not. I don't need to be an expert on eating sh*t to know that something is sh*t when it looks and smells just like it. 

4. You likened Radioactive Sago Project's music to being a "Bohemian Rhapsody wannabe," which betrays your lack of knowledge about music, let alone grammar, but we'll let both of that slide. The reason I bring it up is that even if you somehow proved that Lourd was a terrible musician, that does not invalidate his opinion about the movie. What you are doing here is shooting the guy who tossed the grenade, while doing absolutely nothing about the grenade that still lands right at your feet.

3. You excuse "My Little Bossings" for its flaws mainly because of two things: that there were other films that were just as bad (Thankfully, you passed over the casual homophobia by offering up Vice Ganda as this year's worst offender.), and the fact that the film donated some of its proceeds to Yolanda. I can make a movie of my cat licking himself for ten minutes and donate all of its proceeds to Yolanda. Will you and ten of your friends pay 220 each to see my movie, then? Would you consider my "movie" even remotely good, all because I'm donating the proceeds to charity?

2. You confuse "good movies" with "Hollywood." You think special effects and the bankroll are the most important ingredients in making a "good movie," while completely missing the part where Pinoy indie films on shoestring budgets have been tearing it up in the awards scene for years. You conflate flash with substance, and worst of all, fall prey to colonial mentality by thinking that because we're a developing country, we can't make "good movies." People like you are the reason why a movie as excellent as "On The Job" needed a dancing Gerald Anderson at mall tours just to promote it and make it a moderate success.

1. You completely missed the point of a film festival. A film festival's primary aim is to showcase first, and to make money later. The MMFF has been doing the complete opposite for a long time already, especially since until recently, box office returns were a part of the criteria for "best film" during the awards night. What? Wasn't the money they made enough recognition already?

Dear Sherwin, at no point do I call into question your attitude, your grammar, or your qualifications as a writer, and pass that off as a deconstruction of your "rational response." Instead, I took the few arguments you actually had, and proceeded to debunk them, then reiterated why I believe that "My Little Bossings" was a terrible disappointment, based on its merits, or lack thereof.

That, my friend, is a "rational" response. You keep on using that word. I do not think it means what you think it does.

Yours,
Kel

You need me like a hole in the head.

A Strange Postscript To "On The Job"

.:A Strange Postscript To "On The Job":.
So even before it showed in cinemas, I already had an inkling that "On The Job" was gonna be awesome, thanks to a friend showing me the trailer for the film. But this isn't a tale about me being all hipster about my love for the movie and telling people that I liked it before it was cool, but of the very odd way the film ended up getting promoted shortly before it actually screened locally.

I think it was the week I watched "Ekstra," actually. There I was, going up the escalator in Trinoma, when I noticed that a crowd had gathered around what turned out to be a leg for the promotional tour of OTJ, and guess what? Gerald Anderson was there.

And he was singing and dancing to One Direction's "One Thing."

OTJ was an awesome movie. I reviewed it just recently, and definitely would be happy to see it a third or even fourth time. It was that good. And while I don't necessarily shun the uniquely Pinoy quirks that we often dismiss as "bakya," it never ceases to amaze me that the only way to promote a movie of this magnitude, no matter how gripping and good, is to have one of your lead stars do a song and dance routine for everyone.

Not that there's anything wrong with doing a song and dance routine in and by itself. I just find it strange that they have to. Every single time. I don't remember Brad Pitt or Angelina Jolie singing and dancing to promote Mr. & Mrs. Smith, and I definitely wished Russel Crowe never sang to promote Les Miserables, let alone actually try to "sing" in the movie. It just isn't done in Hollywood. Maybe in Bollywood, but not Hollywood, to be sure.

And it does make me wonder why the Filipino movie-going public is perceived by people as an audience that needs to be pandered to in this way. Would the movie have not appealed to the masses as much? Somehow, I don't think so. I genuinely feel that they could have done away with that entire bit of promotion, and the movie would still be every bit as strong as it is right now.

It's funny, really. Before sitting to write this, I thought I was going to complain about the practice, and then I realized that there isn't anything genuinely objectionable about the practice, at all. It's just something that honestly puzzled me, and something that made me think of how different our ideas of promoting film locally happen to be no matter how much we try to ape the sensibilities of our American counterparts. And there's nothing wrong with that. It just really threw me for a loop that no matter how respected you may be as a performer, if you can't sing and dance and your name isn't Joel Torre, there's little hope for you to be a box-office success in this country.

Film Reviews: On The Job and Ekstra

.:Film Review: On The Job:.

In this movie, Joey Marquez demonstrates how "putang ina" can be used in 200 different ways.

On The Job
Finally, Pinoy action done right.

Unlike most of my film reviews, I will try my best to keep this review spoiler-free, perhaps even more so than I tried to with my 8List about this film. True, this movie wasn't the reflection of perfection, but you know what? I'm glad it was made. Did it make some deep commentary about the disturbing realities facing a crime-infested country? No. But did it keep you on the edge of your seat with each twist and turn, never quite knowing what to expect? Absolutely.

OTJ is a noir-inspired crime thriller by Erik Matti, focusing on two hired killers, Tatang (Joel Torre) and Daniel (Gerald Anderson), as they try to earn a living, while hotshot NBI agent Atty. Francis Coronel, Jr. (Piolo Pascual) and well-meaning but underachieving cop SPO1 Joaquin Acosta (Joey Marquez) try to stop them from doing just that. With a lurid and engaging tale of betrayal, deception, and subterfuge, can our investigators figure out what has been going on right under their noses?

It's an amazing byplay in methods, personalities, and even ideologies, as the two hired killers attempt to elude detection and capture, all while already remaining as prisoners who are snuck in and out of their cells on day passes to accomplish their work.

But let's not discuss the plot. Everyone knows it if they've seen it, and I'd only be doing it a disservice to those who didn't if I gave it all away here. Let's talk about the fact that this film was a revelation to anyone who had little faith in the acting prowess of Gerald Anderson and Piolo Pascual, and anyone who may have not given Joey Marquez a second look solely because he's better known for comedic roles.

What really impressed me the most about this film is how tight the film was, all around. There was rhyme and reason to pretty much everything they did, and though many people would say it's flawed, very few would be capable of pointing these out, much less suggesting ways it could have been handled better. In fact, the notion about how flawed OTJ was as a Pinoy action film could be summed up in this image...

Also, why was there no pancit in a brown paper bag? Or someone giving a three-minute monologue while dying in someone else's arms?

OTJ breaks the mold for Pinoy action films, and it is through this that the film succeeds where Manila Kingpin: The Asiong Salonga failed miserably. Not to say that the latest take on Asiong Salonga was a bad film by any means, but this was simply superior, and shows us a direction that Philippine cinema can and should take, rather than to simply rehash another Enteng Kabisote mashup with some other franchise this December. It's noir, so if you know how that works, you know the one trope it will always follow for the ending, but it isn't nearly as Debbie Downer or as completely anticlimactic as a lot of Pinoy indie flicks happen to be (Which, again, does not mean they're bad films.).

I would daresay that in my book, except for one jarring instance of bad editing (the first time you see Joey Marquez running around), this film was perfect on pretty much every level that mattered to me. I didn't need deep commentary about corruption. The fact that it's touched upon merely pays homage to its noir influences. I didn't expect there to be a very clean way to wrap the whole film up. That's not what the director was trying to do, clearly. Ultimately, all I expected from the film was to be entertained by fine performances from the cast, see some very good pacing for buildup and action, and hey, they absolutely delivered on that count.

This film is worth watching, and if the rumors that they plan to adapt this to Hollywood happen to be true, I will definitely want to go and see it, much in the same way I appreciated comparing Infernal Affairs to The Departed back in the day.

This is definitely a great film that shows Pinoy flicks can generate amazing output in action, to complement all our likewise excellent films in poverty porn, Asian horror, and romantic comedies. To me, this wasn't just a great Pinoy flick: this was a great movie, period, and something I will always cite as a counterpoint to anyone who believes Philippine cinema is dead.

Fun Rating: A+ (I hate to sound like those stupid blurbs you see on movie posters, but I was on the edge of my seat the whole time!)
Critical Rating: A+ (We Filipinos deserve to have films  as good as this. Your move, Ang Tanging Ina Part 33.)


.:Film Review: Ekstra:.

You know you're watching a Pinoy Indie film, when...

Ekstra
Read all about it!

An entry for this year's Cinemalaya, I watched Ekstra without really knowing what to expect. It was definitely a different Vilma Santos I saw in this flick, and you can't say a single thing about her acting prowess, but I have to admit that the entire film left me feeling deflated because the ending just came at a point too anticlimactic for me to appreciate. I understand people would feel differently about this, but I guess that's why I prefer mainstream films more, in general. This ending just left me cold.

Ekstra follows the tale of Loida Malabanan (Vilma Santos), a bit player in television shows, making a living as a single parent. It pretty much follows a day in her life, showing in loving detail every little thing she has to do just to make the money she needs for her daughter's tuition while scrounging up what she can through her work. On top of that, she experiences a brush with greatness, and just when things are looking up for her, things come crashing back right down - with surprisingly mundane results.

Again, I won't belabor to spoil the film here, but I would be very quick to point out that this film definitely has indie written all over it, and I don't mean that derogatorily. The lingering shots where nothing really happens, the banality of poverty and hardship for the average person trying to strike out in the world, all of these things are too real, and too close to home for many of us, but the plain-as-day presentation, stripped of most of the bombast and pomp and circumstance, definitely makes the relatively minor twists and turns in the story hit us just that harder when they do come. It's as slice-of-life as can be, and if you watched it without actually knowing who Vilma Santos is, you might even argue that it was a documentary of sorts, given how the movie progressed. It was natural. It was the epitome of no-acting acting, and while that definitely works for people, I suppose I was hoping for something a little less banal to wrap things up, as sort of a nice "reward" for following Loida's story until the very end.

Alack and alas, I didn't quite get that.

Fun Rating: B+ (Comedic moments here and there, a lot of insight into the industry of the bit player, but definitely revels in its being mundane a little too much.)
Critical Rating: A+ (Great acting, great script, definitely a strong sense of realism, but I come to movies to be entertained, not to be lectured, so for once, this takes a bit of a backseat to my "fun" rating.)

Ooooh. Delinquent.

.:Well, wow.:.

It’s been weeks, and I haven’t realized how delinquent I’ve been with my blogging. It hasn’t been easy, really. Balancing writing for The 8List, dropping in on WAVE, where the one and only King DJ Logan now finds himself, and a host of other things, but most important of them all, finding time to spend with My Beloved, whether I be reading The Kite Runner to her ‘til she falls asleep, or just doing a drive-by hug for all of five minutes.

It’s been difficult, and it has made me reconsider if it’s time to finally call it a day with my blog. It’s not like I’m setting the world on fire with my blogging anyways, and unsurprisingly, I’m too busy living my life to spend an inordinate amount of time writing about it. By now, I’d have written about, say, coral reefs, or Ricky Lo’s interview, or Les Miserables itself, or even the fact that a year from now, we’re likely sending a Filipino to space, courtesy of Axe. Or the funny coincidences involving my old friend, Christine.

And yes, given that the office sponsored Les Mis for all of us and we all pretty much got to watch the same movie, it almost seemed like a sure bet that I was going to a barricaded office the next day, with my co-workers singing "Do You Hear The People Sing" while setting up the barricade. Alack and alas, this did not come to pass. 

Yes! This means I should've taken pictures with my co-workers last night! I was so negligent, and I apologize for that.

Despite all that, despite the see saw of life getting the best of me sometimes, I am happy. Immeasurably so. And that is enough to go by for now. Blogging will follow. There’s always Twitter and Facebook to put my thoughts in for now, I guess?

And yes, I’m enjoying the little gadgets I’ve purchased over the past couple of months. They have definitely served me well. Heh.

My wallet is complaining, though.

Film Reviews: Kimmy Dora 2, Prometheus, Rock Of Ages

Three film reviews in one go. I wanted to try and do a stylized "thumbs up" rating system, but I don't think I've figured it out just yet.

So maybe I will do that in the future when I've fully revamped how I rank films, but for now? Let's stick to the letter grade system, I guess?

.:Film Review: Kimmy Dora 2:.

Absurd doesn't even begin to cover it.

Kimmy Dora 2
Barely disproving how some things should be left well enough alone.

So. More than two years ago, I raved briefly about Kimmy Dora 1, which, to me, was a crowning achievement for comedy. Eugene Domingo showed why she was A-List level, and proved that her comedic chops have gone so underappreciated for so long.

Today, we hear people complain that she is overrated. How fickle the arrows of fate, indeed!

I don't really feel the need to focus on talking about the storyline, because Kimmy Dora isn't really a movie that was supposed to make sense. Sadly, the more they tried to make it have a semblance of structure, the worse the film suffered for it.

This isn't to say that Kimmy Dora 2 is a bad film, by any stretch of imagination. It's just that it had the enormity of the first film weighing on its shoulders, and it ended up tripping all over itself.

Given that I knew Alodia personally, it actually felt a bit weird seeing her try to be scary. I'm sure it terrified a few moviegoers, but with me, it just felt surreal, much in the same way it felt when I saw Trixie while I was watching the Temptation Island remake.

In any case, I enjoyed the movie, until it get to the really protracted fight scene, with Mura, a lot of stupid choreography, and a missed joke of sealing off the book using the packing tape they had a running joke on for a notable chunk of the film. I don't really feel like getting into the details too much, but the fight left me cold, especially when I heard the words "sl**" and "whore" about ten thousand times too many. Not exactly a very feel-good part there for feminists and their allies, I'm guessing.

Here's hoping they don't try to milk this franchise to the ground the way Enteng Kabisote has been doing, but hey, people need to eat, I guess.

On a personal note, I'm very proud of Alodia. A fairly good first outing, definitely!

Fun Rating: B (It could have been at least an A-, but the dragging finale ruined the flow of the film for me.)
Critical Rating: C+ (I think it was a little too self-aware for its own good, and started taking itself seriously at the same time. A weird, disastrous combination.)

.:Film Review: Prometheus:.

To think I'm squeamish...

Prometheus
A prequel to a franchise I never really followed.

This was the second straight film I ended up watching with Ms. NKOTB, and I just absolutely freaked out. Not knowing what to expect other than "this is a prequel to the Aliens film series," I really was unsure what the film was actually about.

It was a pretty start-studded cast, what with Michael Fassbender and Charlize Theron, at the very least. Depicting the journey of the ship called Prometheus, they embark on a quest to find perhaps the people who created humankind, and gain answers from them. Except this encounter only leads to more questions, because now, we find out that our supposed creators want all of us dead. Why? What's going on?

I'd say much more about it, but I think I closed my eyes halfway through it. Still, it was a pretty good film, and the buildup to the payoff was pretty well-crafted.

Fun Rating: A- (Thrills, chills, and spills. Hard to go wrong with that.)
Critical Rating: A- (Excellent pacing, beautiful cinematography, top-notch cast. I'm sure I'd rate this higher if I were a fan of the Alien franchise, though.)

.:Film Review: Rock Of Ages:.

Beautiful! And the movie was cool, too.

Rock Of Ages
Musicals rock!

I am a sucker for musicals. This was awesome. Go watch it.

Okay, if that wasn't enough to convince you, then allow me to explain: Rock Of Ages is a musical set in the 80's Glam Rock era, where you have Los Angeles playing as the land of opportunity for wannabe singers hoping to make something of themselves, and perhaps doing a dance or two for the sake of a Paul Heyman analog.

With Tom Cruise playing Stacee Jax, the beleaguered artist who oozes amazing sex appeal and cracktastic insanity, the casting has been inspired, to say the least. Who knew that Tom could actually sing and sing very well? I mean, doing his own stunts in Mission Impossible 4 (Including that crazy building climb he did without using CGI or a special made-up set.)? That was scary enough. But actually singing his own songs? Possibly even scarier.

With a very engaging storyline that I don't feel like getting on, I was just happily singing along to the songs playing throughout the whole film. It was a great trek, and Alec Baldwin + Russel Brand was a thing of beauty, and my absolute favorite bit in that film.

Overall, if you like singing along to musicals, this is a perfect film for you to do it in. I understand some liberties were taken with the original script from the theater version, but whatever. Rock Of Ages was beautiful, and I don't care what the naysayers had to say. This felt like an episode of Glee done right, and that deserves a whole lot of props.

Fun Rating: A+ (I was singing along! That's the mark of a great musical, in my book.)
Critical Rating: B+ (It isn't really avant garde storytelling, but who cares?)

Energizer And Nuffnang Power My Life Through My TV Remote (And It Just Keeps Going...)

.:... And Going, And Going, And Going... :.

Energizer and Nuffnang power my life through my TV Remote. And it just keeps going, and going, and going.

How long, do you ask? First of all, you have to know that we use our TV's quite a bit at home, mostly for gaming purposes. Here. Let me show you it:

I didn't eat for three months to get this TV...

You have to understand that regardless of how much or how little one uses a remote control for a television, it's expected that these remote controls will last quite a while. Maybe three months or so. Well, given how the pair of batteries we use on the LG TV were the same pair of batteries from our older TV that we sold to make room for the new one, this means that we've been using the same pair of batteries to power the TV remote for two years and counting.

And yes, it still works without missing a beat. No need to slap the remote or any of those silly rituals you have to do just to get your remote working when using other batteries.

That's why it's pretty obvious: they are the makers of the world's longest lasting batteries. Energizer locks in the power in ways other batteries can only dream of, and it's amazing that with such great power, they also come with such great responsibility. It kinda reminds me of someone I know...

Looks familiar, eh?

So yeah, Energizer has got it going with their batteries, and they, along with Nuffnang, have a premiere for The Amazing Spider-Man happening on June 29, in Rockwell. I'd love to go, if they're willing to have me.

Indeed, Energizer has powered my life through my TV remote. But there's one other half to the story... how has Nuffnang powered my life, having been a former part of the crazy Nuffnang family for the past three years?

I think it's easy to say how Nuffnang has powered my life then, and how it powers my life to this very day.

That's how.

No matter what happened, I keep going and going, and going. It's easy to see who I have to thank for making that huge a difference in my life. Need I say more?

Once a Nuffie, always a Nuffie.

Wow, Another Randomicity Post, After Ages!

.:Focusing On What Comes Next:.

I wasn't jobless for very long, and am starting work again on Monday.

I know, I've been a bit delinquent with the blogging lately, but can you blame me? I've been preparing for my next job, and I must say, it's gonna be a blast.

There's just so much to do and so much to get prepared for. I'm pretty stoked.

.:Brock Lesnar Needs To See A Doctor...:.

I don't know about you, but Brock Lesnar's return to the WWE is something I was pretty excited about. It's just that... I don't think he's ready to go yet, unless he has himself checked out with a doctor soon...

That's pretty severe, Brock.

I know a lot of people feel that he's just doing this for the paycheck and he has no love for the business. Far as I'm concerned, so long as he's a true professional while he's at it, it doesn't matter what his motivations for going back to the WWE are. Not everyone needs to be some guy bleeding heart and soul for the wrestling business, and with Brock, what you see is what you get. You either like him or hate him, and he's not out to change anyone's opinions on that.

.:Still On An Avengers High:.

Despite the fact that it felt like such a whimper of a last day at Nuffnang (For my well-being, I will just gloss over the multiple instances I felt very unappreciated and worse that night.), there is no question that The Avengers was, without a doubt, an amazing film, from top to bottom.

While I would normally want to write a film review about it, I think I can put doing that off until I watch it a second time first.

For now, let me just say that this is an action film that hits all the right notes properly: excellent pacing (The Dark Knight had issues with this.), characterization, plot, and thematic consistency. For an ensemble cast, everyone involved had ample crowning moments of awesome, and character arcs. Even the normals like Black Widow, Hawkeye, and Captain America were given opportunities to prove how badass they happen to be, not just physically, but in Black Widow's case, even cerebrally.

Also, this interview on Russian TV just needs to be shared:

I want to just keep watching this movie again and again. It was brilliant, funny, and quite an experience.

Also, Agent Coulson being just the best at what he does in this bonus scene from the Captain America Blu-Ray:

Project 52 2012 (13/52): On Whether Hunger Games Was A Rip-Off Of Battle Royale (Even If I Like Them Both)

.:Project 52 2012 (13/52): On Whether Hunger Games Was A Rip-Off Of Battle Royale (Even If I Like Them Both):.

In an alternate timeline, the totalitarian government has enacted policies for an annual tournament for children to fight each other to the death. This is done as a means to establish control by the government, and... waiiit. Which franchise were we talking about again?

THERE WILL BE SPOILERS AHEAD!

This discussion will focus mainly on the film versions of Battle Royale and the Hunger Games. If any other medium or version would be used for comparison, it will be specified as such. Otherwise, assume I am referring to the movies.

It was inevitable for this discussion to crop up. Since the year 2000, when the controversial novel by Koushun Takami was turned into a film by the late Kinji Fukusaku, the controversy surrounding the film's violent and mature themes as portrayed by 15-year old kids shocked anyone who has heard of it, read of it, or seen it. Whether it was Japan or America, whether it was the novel, the film, or the manga, controversy hounded it. The premise of children fighting each other to the death, sanctioned by the government (As opposed to due to sheer savagery due to anarchy, as categorized by "Lord Of The Flies."), was an upsetting notion that gave people pause.

I've always been a fan of the film and the manga. I'm still in the process of reading through the novel, but I honestly feel that the loss in translation is keeping me from appreciating it as much as I did the film and the manga. I loathed the sequel of both the film and the manga and in my headcanon, neither of these things ever happened. In fact, I've watched something Battle Royale-related as recently as a few weeks ago.

As for the Hunger Games, I watched the film last Friday, and even gave it a very glowing review. On its own merits, the film stood strong and had more than its share of great moments, exciting action, and great character arcs. The lavish budget the film obviously had only aided in making the experience all the better.

And true, netizens far and wide were castigating The Hunger Games the minute the first book came out as being a ripoff of "Battle Royale." What? Because every single film with the same premise is now a ripoff, even if the execution is pretty much worlds apart?

Totally different, see? Only one of them didn't suck.

I was mostly insulated from this because I haven't read Young Adult material since Encyclopedia Brown (Harry Potter doesn't count.). I have heard of The Hunger Games, but I was by no means a fan, since I never even read it. Despite that, as a huge fan of the BR franchise, I definitely felt protective of anyone who would dare rip off and bastardize the premise. Few things are as masterfully terrifying as putting kids in life or death situations where they need to kill other kids to survive.

Although of course, this ripoff was much scarier because 
"Stone Cold" Steve Austin was trying to act. Oh, synapse!

I walked into the movie with certain expectations, and a keen eye on the story themes, eager to jump in on the "how dare you rip off Battle Royale?!?" bandwagon when the unthinkable happened...

... don't take this the wrong way, but could it be that somebody on the internet was actually wrong, and The Hunger Games isn't a ripoff of Battle Royale? Like, at all?

Gasp! How dare you, xkcd?

If you can't look past the themes of totalitarian government, kids as the victims, and wholesale murder as themes, then of course you'd think one was a ripoff of the other. It's when you actually look at the directions either franchise decided to take with these notions where you see the meat of contention and just how absolutely far apart the two films are.

In the tradition of Cracked, here are three reasons why Battle Royale wasn't really ripped off by Hunger Games. And, for the sake of argument, even if it were, I feel that the two works are vastly different enough to each stand on their own merits.

1. Battle Royale is a Program. The Hunger Games is a Game.

First of all, Battle Royale's premise didn't take it in the direction of the BR program being a game, but an actual control mechanism. While there is media coverage and whatnot, and while the manga translation turned it into a reality show concept, the film version did not turn it into a matter of entertainment. It wasn't a top ratings bonanza, or else the kids in the Program would have been very much aware about it.

In contrast, the Hunger Games made it very clear that this annual competition was a highly-anticipated spectacle by the people in Capitol, while even the 12 sectors participate as spectators as well to the Games, reluctantly or otherwise. As I pointed out, being satirical in nature, the Hunger Games were a matter of course and a matter of fact, and for the most part, looked wrong only to us and to the ones who didn't want to be in the Games.

2. Battle Royale is a Morality Play. Hunger Games is Deadpan Satire.

Which leads us to the second point: I would show Battle Royale to an ethics class as part of their course work, but not the Hunger Games. Battle Royale is clearly framed as a morality play, what with the tagline "Would you kill your best friend?" The theme of right and wrong is very big throughout the film, while it is downplayed at best in The Hunger Games. I'm aware that at some point, how wrong the Games are would become more emphasized in the succeeding books, but if we started including the sequels in this discussion, then yeah, Battle Royale wouldn't have a leg to stand on at all, I'm guessing.

The reason Battle Royale appealed so much to 2003-2004 me was because it was a genuine moral quandary that they posed, and one that really made me think. When you saw each character death excluding arguably Kiriyama's, you felt compelled to know about their story and what brought them to that point. Even the clear villains, such as Takeshi Sensei, were sympathetic, and the psycho femme fatale, Mitsuko, was even more so. While I was taking up ethics then, it made me think about themes that really felt appropriate.

The Hunger Games regarded the killings with a certain resignation and banality. The lead character was clearly willing to play the game, and the entrenchment of the Hunger Games as part and parcel of the Treaty of Treason has made it virtually unquestionable and more of a backdrop to a riveting adventure where we root for Katniss and maybe even Peeta and Rue to survive against all odds as the ultimate victor. Battle Royale makes no such attempt and instead makes us wish all 42 students didn't have to die.

3. Battle Royale is a tale of one class. The Hunger Games is a tale of one Tribute.

And that's the third biggest distinction between Battle Royale and The Hunger Games: BR is the tale of 42 kids sent to a deserted island to kill each other off. HG is a tale of Katniss Everdeen outplaying 23 other competitors to win. The fact that there is a focal character where everything happens through her point of view changes how we view the story as a whole. Even in the film, except for the bits involving the Gamemasters, the film was told nigh-exclusively within the sphere of Katniss's presence.

This changes the whole dynamic of the way the films play out, and who we root for throughout the movie. In Battle Royale, the movie wants us to root for the class as a whole .

Except for this guy. He tried to rape Gogo Yubari, so screw this dude. 

This was why Mimura was one of the favorite characters in the franchise to begin with, as he wasn't playing the game: he was trying to break the game. He had the right plan, and quite frankly, if it weren't for Kiriyama, he would've succeeded at it, too. There's just something really admirable about that.

Or how about Sugimura? How his quest to find Kotohiki could've been a movie in itself, and how his character arc was just nothing short of beautiful until the predictably grim and hopeless ending? Maybe even the girls at the lighthouse? These characters were sympathetic independently of Shuya and Noriko. You knew the kids in Battle Royale as a class, and wanted them to survive the games collectively. By the end of it, you didn't want to see Shuya playing the game, and when he ended up shooting Takeshi-sensei, that was the only time he actively tried to kill anyone, and certainly not a classmate.

In contrast, in The Hunger Games, it's clear that they want you to root for characters only in relation to Katniss. Heymitch, Cinna, Peeta, Rue, even Thresh. The arcs are centered around Katniss, so you aren't led to feel sympathetic to anyone who is antagonistic of Katniss, and it's also great how they managed to avoid turning Katniss into a Mary Sue just because she got an 11 in the Gamemaker evaluations. At the end of it all, you only cared about Katniss, and you wanted her to win the game, all the other kids (Excluding maybe Thresh, Peeta, and Rue.) be damned. You didn't get to know the other players the way you got to know Katniss and Peeta.

True, there is no question that I like Battle Royale more than Hunger Games. Despite that, there's no reason for me to hate on the Hunger Games on the basis of its originality or the lack of it. Not only does it not feel derivative of BR when you watch them side by side (Which I did.), but it isn't like the themes BR and HG share in common, totalitarian rule (1984, V for Vendetta, Brave New World), children in dire situations (Lord Of The Flies), or life or death struggles (Bloodsport, The Running Man) are particularly original and never-before touched upon, to begin with.

Yeah, they took the same initial premise, but they ran in parallel and starkly different directions, the least of them being the fact that while Battle Royale was clearly an adult-oriented film, Hunger Games was aimed at a young adult market. After everything has been said and done, I believe there is room in the world for both franchises.

And thank goodness for that.