Idealistic Love is Not Ideal

Women think romance is all that there is about love. Getting swept off their feet, finding their knight in shining armor, finding their one true love – a soulmate even. Candlelit dinners, moonlit walks on the beach, a slow, rhythmic dance to a trippy love song…

You ask any woman what her idea of perfect love is and nine times out of ten, they’ll be able to describe it perfectly to you, with matching lists and a number of requirements to boot. It’s crazy! To think that love can be encompassed and be limited to a number of requirements on a woman’s bucket list. And mind you, men do it too. In a much simpler, barbaric way. They just look for a girl version of themselves, who will both be a mother and a whore to them. Kind of simple, if the man is simple. But find a fucking, complicated man more complicated than a motherfucking labyrinth and you get a bucket list longer than a fucking novel rivaling Madeleine’s Artamene.

We’re all reduced to looking for perfect loves and perfect matches, when in reality, no one is perfect, and no one (human) loves perfectly. So why look for something that does not exist? We’re all made with deficiencies – flaws that make us deliciously human and vibrantly more alive. So why look for perfect love when we’re all imperfect beings loving imperfectly?

Love shouldn’t be reduced to a list. Or a process of do’s and don’ts. Love just simply is. Without you knowing it or making a list, it’ll creep up to you from deep down your gut up to your heart, into deep, deep inside your mind. That’s how you know you’re in love. When you can’t find a reason for why you’re in love, and you just say, “I don’t know why, I just am.”

Love isn’t a formula, or a recipe. So go into it blindly, and come out of it with your eyes wide open – to the world.

Advertisements

Wanking, Writing, and Provoking Thought

A film review is supposed to do the following job: critique a film, and give possible audiences a preview of a film’s quality in order to help them decide whether to see a film or not. It’s also sometimes written for two audiences: industry insiders and moviegoers. As such, the writing of a critique depends heavily on who the audience is, and what the purpose of the writer is. If its purpose is simply to rate a film and give moviegoers a preview, then the writer has the responsibility to be objective in his review of the technical aspect of the film, to be honest of his opinion of the film, and to write his review in a manner that his readers can easily understand. Depending on the publication a critic writes for, his review can be as highfalutin or as ghetto as the audience expects it to be.

A film review can also be written to spur discussion, or influence industry insiders in some way. Again, it’s just a matter of writing for a different audience.

One thing however I think film reviewers should never do is spoil the film for others. I consider it a cardinal sin for reviewers to post spoilers of a film. In some instances, if the reviewer really wants to post a spoiler, spoiler tags must precede the post, giving readers a chance to avoid being spoiled.

I find it idiotic when reviewers, instead of actually reviewing a film, summarizes it. Nothing can be more enraging than for me to find a film summary instead of a film review. It’s okay to write what the film is about in vague terms as long as you don’t reveal the entire plot to the reader.

I also find it funny when people attack critics for their reviews. All our lives would be better if we just realize that reviews are nothing more than just opinions. You can let yourself be bothered by it, or ignore it completely. After all, it’s just one man’s opinion. Will it lessen your enjoyment of the film if others disparage it? If others like or dislike a film, why should it bother you? Be firm in your own opinion and be happy in the fact that you at least have one. Nothing good can come out of trying to change the opinion of others.

I’ve always considered film critics to be wankers. They with their uppity noses and their snobby little circles, trashing films left and right because it makes them feel good about themselves. To me, it was intellectual masturbation pure and simple. And it was utter bullshit. Who cares whether a film elevated art as long it was entertaining?

To me, as a moviegoer, the whole point of watching a film is to be entertained. The film being thought-provoking is just a bonus. I do however, expect a film to have a story, a coherent and entertaining one. Failing to have that will have me ripping the film to shreds much worse than a dog ripping your balls out.

As a filmmaker however, I see no point in making a film that will not promote change for the good. (I come from the Surf Reyes school of thought of filmmaking being an agent of social change for the good).

To the critic however, praise becomes ever more rare as they become inundated with the same tired stuff everyday. When you’ve watched as many films as these sons of a bitches have, you begin to become more and more unpleasable in your views. Because you have seen so much, little surprises you. And because you have seen the best, nothing can impress you again except more of the best. Your job in effect, makes you lose touch of the pulse of the ordinary audience. To you it is a boring tripe, overdone to death, but to others, it’s a refreshing film, mindblowing and totally unique. The job then becomes a challenge. To view a film, not with the tired eyes of a critic, but with the eyes of a child hungry for a story.

I’ve always thought that a film review shouldn’t be as simple as labeling a film good or bad but should be more about presenting the film as a taste. Different people like different tastes and a film review should take that into account.

This is also one of the main reasons why I find it idiotic when people attack film critics for their reviews. If you don’t agree with their views, then find some other critic that matches yours. Then you’ll have a much more reliable source of review for movies you’re planning to watch, or not watch.

Money CAN buy happiness. You just need to be a smart buyer.

Buy a ticket not a plane.
Get a bike, not a fucking jaguar.
Get an education, not a diploma.
Buy a rest house, not a fucking mansion.
Buy experiences, not products.
Get a life, not life insurance.

Everyday of your life, you make choices. Money is not the end, it’s simply the means to an end. After a certain threshold, money stops being a source of happiness. Above the line of poverty, everyone is equal when it comes to securing happiness. Once our basic needs have been met, the truly happy are separated from the pathetically miserable by how wisely (or unwisely) they spend their money.

If you try to fill that void in your life with material things, chances are, you’ll fail miserably at being happy.

Choose memories over photos.
Choose trips over cruises.
Choose backyard barbecues over catered parties.
Choose a dress instead of an outfit.

Buy for others instead of yourself.

Life really isn’t all that hard to figure out. If you consider yourself belonging to the middle class, then you have in your hands the power to be happy. All you need to do is choose wisely.

We don’t need to be filthy rich. We just need to be a little less greedy.

We work to live, we don’t live to work. How much is enough for you?

For me, only as much as is needed to see my son smile and see him healthy.

Simple joys, simple toys.